Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/852,287

TIME SENSITIVE COMMUNICATION ASSISTANCE INFORMATION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 27, 2024
Examiner
KIM, HEE SOO
Art Unit
2443
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
430 granted / 545 resolved
+20.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -0% lift
Without
With
+-0.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
579
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.0%
+4.0% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 545 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This action is responsive to application filed on September 27th, 2024. Claims 24~41 are examined. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/27/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 24~26, 28, 29, and 35~41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Minokuchi et al. hereinafter Minokuchi (U.S 2022/0338142). Regarding Claims 24 and 39, Minokuchi taught a method performed by a network device, the network device comprising an application function, the application function handling information units, wherein each information unit is associated to a set of packet data unit (PDU) sets, the method comprising: identifying a plurality of PDU sets associated to a first PDU set flow [¶93, multiple TSN streams of multiple TSN time domains sent in a single QoS flow; ¶97, one or more TSN streams belonging to one or more TSN time domains]; determining time sensitive information associated to the first PDU set flow [¶110, message containing a TSN stream identifier and a TSCAI parameter (e.g., Burst Arrival Time, Periodicity) for each TSN stream to which the TSCAI parameter is applied; ¶111~¶112]; and generating time sensitive assistance information (TSCAI) comprising the time sensitive information [¶96, TSCAI can be set for each QoS flow+TSN stream, and the identification information of the TSN stream can be set for the PDU Session user plan protocol; ¶97, one or more TSN streams belonging to one or more TSN time domains; ¶100, for a TSN stream, TSN AF 60 transmits a TSN time domain number to which the TSN stream belongs and a TSCAI at TSN time to SMF 40 via PCF 70], wherein the TSCAI comprises: information indicative a periodicity of the PDU set [¶89, periodicity]; or information indicative of a PDU set arrival time [¶89; burst arrival time]. Regarding Claims 25, Minokuchi taught wherein the application function handles information units associated to a least the first PDU set flow and a second PDU set flow, the first PDU set flow is associated to a first application level service, the second PDU set flow is associated to a second application level service [¶100~¶102, for a TSN stream, TSN AF 60 transmits a TSN time domain number to which the TSN stream belongs], and the network device determines for at least one of the first PDU set flow and the second PDU set flow one or more of the following time sensitive information: information indicative a periodicity of the PDU set [¶89, TSCAI includes Flow Direction, Periodicity, and Burst Arrival Time]; information indicative of a jitter of generation of the PDU set; information indicative of a time adjustment made with respect to a reference clock; and information indicative of a PDU set arrival time. [¶91]. Regarding Claim 26, Minokuchi taught wherein the network device determines the information indicative of the periodicity of the PDU sets based on a periodicity of the corresponding PDU sets [¶89; ¶90]. Regarding Claim 28, Minokuchi taught wherein the information indicative a periodicity indicates that the PDU sets of the PDU set flow are one of: periodic [¶89; ¶90]. Regarding Claim 29, Minokuchi taught where the application function indicates a reference timing from which the indicated periodicity of the PDU set is applied, wherein the reference timing may be one of: a PDU generation time of the first PDU, a PDU generation time of the last PDU [¶90; ¶91]. Regarding Claim 35, Minokuchi-Ayaz taught wherein the information indicative of the time adjustment made with respect to a reference indicate if the information is corrected or is not corrected [¶50~¶52, offset or time difference report between the 5G time and TSN time]. Regarding Claim 36, Minokuchi taught wherein [¶90; ¶91]. [¶89~ 91]. Regarding Claim 37, Minokuchi taught wherein the time sensitive information is transmitted to a radio access function for scheduling the data traffic [¶88, RAN 30 can understand the TSN traffic pattern and perform efficient scheduling by TSCAI]. Regarding Claim 38, Minokuchi taught wherein the TSCAI is transmitted to a Time Sensitive Communication and Time Synchronization Function in the core network [¶79, TSN time synchronization corresponds to “time aware system” in IEEE 802.1A]. Regarding Claim 40, Minokuchi taught wherein the network device is a user equipment [¶85, UE 10]. Regarding Claim 41, Minokuchi taught the network device is a network application node [¶80, TSN AF]. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minokuchi in view of Bonneville et al. hereinafter Bonneville (U.S 2023/0053602). Regarding Claim 27, Minokuchi-Bonneville taught wherein the periodicity of the corresponding PDU sets is determined by averaging a certain number of measurements with respect to generation times of consecutive PDU set [¶79, Fig. 8, the TSN-AF sends a QoS Query Request message in order to trigger QoS probing at the NG-RAN base station; ¶83, estimate possible resource configuration based on a deployment topology received at an initial flow configuration step and determines QoS parameters as average values]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made, to combine, Bonneville’s teaching of limitations with the teachings of Minokuchi, because the combination enables determination of a QoS parameter by interrogating a base station without impacting existing open sessions and resources at the base station [¶13]. Claims 30~34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minokuchi in view of Ayaz et al. hereinafter Ayaz (U.S 2021/0273890). Regarding Claim 30, Minokuchi-Ayaz taught wherein the information indicative of a jitter of generation of the PDU comprises one or a plurality of jitter statistic values [¶25, quality information can contain an average measured delay/jitter, a maximum delay/jitter and/or a delay/jitter measurement time series]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made, to combine, Ayaz’s teaching of limitations with the teachings of Minokuchi, because the combination provide better end-to-end QoS control of URLLC service flows [¶31]. Regarding Claim 31, Minokuchi-Ayaz taught wherein the jitter statistic values are time values indicative of: a maximum latency, a minimum latency, a type of statistical latency distribution, and/or characteristics or parameters of a statistical latency distribution [¶27, communication service quality measure values, such as end-to-end delay and/or jitter values for each received packet). The rationale to combine as discussed in claim 30, applies here as well. Regarding Claim 32, Minokuchi-Ayaz taught wherein the information indicative of a jitter comprises certain values indicating that the PDU Set Flow is affected by jitter, that the PDU Set Flow is not affected by jitter and/or that a jitter is not known for the corresponding PDU Set Flow [¶60, the threshold values (e.g., end-to-end delay per packet, jitter per packet, average end-to-end delay, average jitter, etc.) can be delivered to the UE(s) 101]. The rationale to combine as discussed in claim 30, applies here as well. Regarding Claim 33, Minokuchi-Ayaz taught wherein a first value indicates that the PDUs in the corresponding PDU Set Flow do not have jitter, a second value indicates that the PDUs have jitter [¶59; ¶60]. Regarding Claim 34, Minokuchi-Ayaz taught wherein a third value indicates that the jitter is not known [¶60, the threshold values (e.g., end-to-end delay per packet, jitter per packet, average end-to-end delay, average jitter, etc.) can be delivered to the UE(s) 101]. The rationale to combine as discussed in claim 30, applies here as well. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEE SOO KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicholas Taylor can be reached on (571) 272-3889. 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. /HEE SOO KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 27, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592968
Cloud-based deception technology with granular scoring for breach detection
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587522
DATA CLASSIFICATION LABEL MANAGEMENT AND ACCESS CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587573
REPORTING OF DELTA CHANNEL QUALITY INDICATOR (CQI)-MODULATION AND CODING SCHEME (MCS) INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579296
DATA SECURITY TRANSACTIONS USING SOFTWARE CONTAINER MACHINE READABLE CONFIGURATION DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574245
HEALTHCARE DATA MANAGEMENT METHOD AND APPARATUS USING HASH VALUES ON CLOUD SERVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (-0.1%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 545 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