Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/853,337

CONTROL OF REFERENCE SIGNALING FOR CALIBRATION OF A D-MIMO SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Oct 01, 2024
Examiner
ALI, SHAWKAT M
Art Unit
2633
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
569 granted / 640 resolved
+26.9% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
654
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§102
7.7%
-32.3% vs TC avg
§112
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 640 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Status of Claims 2. This communication is responsive to Application No. 18/853,337 filed on October 01, 2024. Claims 9, 14-15, 21-24 and 28-32 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 3-8, 10-11, 13, 16, 18-20 and 25-27 have been amended. Accordingly, claims 1-8, 10-13, 16-20 and 25-27 are subject to examination. Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) 3. The IDS submitted 10/04/24 has been entered and considered by the Examiner. Claim Objections 4. Following claims are objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 1, line 8 “point wherein” should be replaced with “point, wherein”; in claim 11, line 4 “relative the reference” should be replaced with “relative to the reference”; in claim 12, lines 3-4 “relative the reference” should be replaced with “relative to the reference”; in claim 16, lines 4-5 “relative the reference” should be replaced with “relative to the reference”; and in claim 25, line 11 “point wherein” should be replaced with “point, wherein”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 5. 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 1-8, 10-13, 16-20 and 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the Applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “a plurality of access points” (line 2) and “access points” (lines 3-4). It is not clear whether said “access points” is different from or the same as said “plurality of access points”. Hence, renders claim 1 and its dependent claims indefinite. Claim 3 recites “signal strength measurements” (line 3). It is not clear whether said “signal strength measurements” is different from or the same as “signal strength measurements” as recited in line 14 of claim 1. Claim 12 recites the limitation "the channel coherence time" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim (note: claim/s 1/11 recite/s “a/the respective channel coherence time”). Claim 13 recites “access points” (line 2). It is not clear whether said “access points” is different from or the same as “plurality of access points” as recited in line 2 of claim 1. In addition, claim 13 recites the limitation "the coherence condition" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 25 recites “configured to cause” (lines 4-5). It is not clear whether said “configured to cause” is referring to said “computer program”, “processing unit” or “control node”. In addition, claim 25 recites the limitation "the plurality of access points" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim (note: in line 7 of claim 25 recites “access points”). Hence, renders claim 25 indefinite. Claim 26 recites “a plurality of access points” (line 2) and “access points” (line 4). It is not clear whether said “access points” is different from or the same as said “plurality of access points”. Hence, renders claim 26 and its dependent claim indefinite. Reason for Allowance 6. Wang (US 2020/0244376 A1) teaches in Figures 3-5 over-the-air (OTA) calibration processes for a distributed multiple input-multiple output (D-MIMO) system. Kundargi (US 2018/0048361 A1) teaches in Figure 5 selecting one antenna as a reference antenna from a plurality of antennas, calculating calibration coefficients of the one antenna with respect to the reference antenna based on calibration pilot symbols and in Figure 7 channel coherence time and channel estimation. Takano (US 2012/0315891 A1) teaches in Figure 11 deciding a target base station and calculating calibration coefficient of the target base station. Hohne (US 2012/0020396 A1) teaches in Figure 3 selecting a transmitter and determining calibration coefficients. However, the prior art of record when implemented, would not produce said method as claimed in claim 1, said CRM as claimed in claim 25 and said apparatus as claimed in claim 26. Conclusion 7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to SHAWKAT M. ALI whose telephone number is (571) 270-1639. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:30AM-3:30PM ET. 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 AIR at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, SAM K. AHN can be reached on (571) 272-3044. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /SHAWKAT M ALI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 01, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603803
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR FREQUENCY MODULATION REDUCTION FOR POLAR TRANSMITTERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597985
COMMUNICATION USING A DUAL POLARIZED ANTENNA ARRAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597969
INFORMATION TRANSMISSION METHOD AND DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587180
GROUP DELAY DETERMINATION IN A COMMUNICATION CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580625
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR REPORTING CHANNEL STATE INFORMATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
89%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.3%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 640 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