Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/796,671

ANOMALY HANDLING METHOD AND ANOMALY HANDLING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Aug 07, 2024
Priority
Jul 27, 2018 — JP PCT/JP2018/028297 +2 more
Examiner
GOODWIN, SCHQUITA D
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Panasonic Holdings Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 6m
Est. Remaining
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allowance Rate
221 granted / 330 resolved
+7.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
351
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
91.8%
+51.8% vs TC avg
§102
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§112
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 330 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. DETAILED ACTION This communication is in response to Application No. 18/796,671 filed on 7 August 2024. This application is a CON of Application No 17/031,224 filed on 24 September 2020, claims CON of PCT/JP2019/028836 filed on 23 July 2019, and claims FOR priority to PCT/JP2018/028297 filed on 27 July 2018. Claims 1-15 are presented for examination. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,083,971 B2 to Ujiie et al. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of claims 1-15 overlap in scope with the limitation of Patent No. 12,083,971 B2. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US PGPUB 2019/0052677 A1 to Wakita discloses frame monitoring exceeding a reception threshold. US PGPUB 2017/0280472 A1 to Gupta et al discloses a transmission timer interval selection. US PGPUB 2020/0379941 A1 to Okajima discloses a communication scheme and a processing load. US PGPUB 2018/0131712 A1 to Cornelio et al discloses a given time interval for indicating an anomaly. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCHQUITA GOODWIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5477. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm EST. 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, Tonia Dollinger can be reached on (571) 272-4170. 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. /SCHQUITA D GOODWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 07, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12684415
Radio Network Node, User Equipment, and Methods Performed Therein
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12683853
COMPREHENSIVE AND INTELLIGENT COMMUNICATION TRACKING SYSTEM
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677185
DATA PACKET TRANSMISSION METHOD, COMMUNICATION DEVICE, COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12677294
TERMINAL, BASE STATION, AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12671637
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING TRAFFIC BY USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MODEL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+14.4%)
3y 6m (~1y 6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 330 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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