Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/778,848

FEC DECODING FOR CHANNELS WITH MEMORY

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jul 19, 2024
Examiner
CHAUDRY, MUJTABA M
Art Unit
2112
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
MaxLinear, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
694 granted / 824 resolved
+29.2% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
849
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.1%
-31.9% vs TC avg
§103
24.7%
-15.3% vs TC avg
§102
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§112
40.1%
+0.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 824 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Applicants’ response filed 1/29/2026 has been considered. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-20 are pending. Prior rejections under 35 USC 112 are withdrawn in view amendments. Prior rejections under 35 UC 103 are maintained in view of amendments. Additional pertinent prior art has been cited for Applicants review which also teaches the concept of the LLR having a quantizer that reduces a resolution to reduce the size of a lookup table (i.e., Nekuii USPAP 20160085615A1 Figure 4 and paragraph 0062). Application is pending. Response to Arguments Applicants’ arguments filed 1/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. No specific arguments were presented. The remarks just state the claims have been amended to recite features not taught or suggested by the prior arts. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. For example, claim 1 recites: PNG media_image1.png 394 652 media_image1.png Greyscale The prior art rejection was based on two references. The Examiner would like to point out that the amendments for the receiving component do not significantly alter the scope of the this limitation. If a receiving component was to convert a signal to digital samples then it would apparent that the received signal would be an analog signal. The concept of converting a portion of the analog signal corresponding to one or more symbol intervals is also inherently true for the process of converting a portion of the analog signal to digital samples. Therefore this limitation does not add meaningful value to the claim. The second part of the amendment which includes the log-likelihood ratio component including at least one quantizer that reduces the resolution of the samples to reduce the size of the lookup table is substantially taught by D2. PNG media_image2.png 325 813 media_image2.png Greyscale For example, D2 substantially teaches (i.e., Figure 1 and Figure 6, above and paragraphs 0006 0052-0056) a LLR to include quantization to reduce resolution which in turn reduces the size of the lookup table. Independent claims 10 and 17 are rejected for similar reasons. Respective dependent claims 2-9, 11-16 and 18-20 further limit parent claims and are rejected at least based on dependency. Corrections are requested. It is the Examiner’s conclusion that the claims of the present application, as presented, are not patentably distinct from the prior arts. Applicants are encouraged to formulate claim language that clearly defines the novelty of the application. Pertinent prior art has been cited for Applicants review. If Applicants believe an interview with the Examiner might be useful, then they are welcome to contact the Examiner with proposed amendments for a discussion. Prior art rejections are maintained. See prior office action for details in view of remarks made herein. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUJTABA M CHAUDRY whose telephone number is (571)272-3817. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Albert DeCady can be reached at 571-272-3819. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. MUJTABA M. CHAUDRY Primary Examiner Art Unit 2112 /MUJTABA M CHAUDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 19, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 29, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603802
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR IDENTIFICATION VIA CHANNELS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596946
QUANTUM METADATA LINEAGE TRACING USING QUANTUM MULTIPART ENTANGLED TWIN TECHNOLOGY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587213
METHOD AND SYSTEM OF ERROR INJECTION FOR LOW-DENSITY PARITY-CHECK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587315
METHODS FOR ADAPTIVE ERROR AVOIDANCE TO INCREASE RE-TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY IN TIME-SLOTTED COMMUNICATION LINKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585974
QUANTUM CIRCUITS FOR MOVING A SURFACE CODE PATCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+3.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 824 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month