Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/841,715

Network optimization in cellular communication networks

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Aug 27, 2024
Examiner
SAMS, MATTHEW C
Art Unit
2646
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Elisa Oyj
OA Round
4 (Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
500 granted / 747 resolved
+4.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
785
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
§103
57.1%
+17.1% vs TC avg
§102
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
§112
8.9%
-31.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 747 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Response to Amendment This office action has been changed in response to the amendment filed on 1/30/2026. Claims 1, 16 and 23 have been amended. Claims 8 and 13-15 have been canceled. The Examiner left a voicemail on 2/18/2026 in an attempt to rectify the following rejection, but was unable to get a response within the bounds required by the PPH program. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1, 16 and 23 each recites the limitation "after configuring the first cell”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears this should read “after configuring the cause cell with the highest number of occurrences in the list” to properly refer back to the cause cell having a parameter changed. To retain “the first cell”, claim 6 would be required to be incorporated into the independent claims along with additional clarity to separate the “at least two first cells” into “at least a first cell and a second first cell”. Claims 2-7, 9-12 and 17-22 are rejected for inheriting the deficiency of independent claims 1 or 16 above and failing to correct the deficiency. Additionally, the Examiner suggest “configuring, by the apparatus, the cause cell with the highest number of occurrences to use a second cell parameter value, wherein the highest number of occurrences is at least two conflicts for the cause cell with different first cells” to clarify that the cause cell is interfering with two different cells (not just the cause cell and the interfering cell). Finally, the Examiner suggests “determining by the apparatus, after configuring the cause cell with the highest number of occurrences in the list to use the second cell parameter value, whether a second cause cell in the list needs to be configured to use a third cell parameter”. 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 MATTHEW C SAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-8099. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at (571)272-4177. 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. /Matthew C Sams/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 27, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 10, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Oct 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 30, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603924
ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING IMS-BASED CALL IN ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587868
Systems and Methods for Proxying Real Traffic for Simulation
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581455
REDUCED BEAM FOR PAGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574762
MANAGING A NETWORK SLICE PARAMETER FOR ADMISSION CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568167
System and Method of Capturing, Tracking, Composing, Analyzing and Automating Analog and Digital Interactions
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+11.9%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 747 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