Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/860,907

ADDRESS CONFIGURATION METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 28, 2024
Priority
Jul 01, 2022 — CN 202210767803.4 +1 more
Examiner
KHAN, HASSAN ABDUR-RAHMAN
Art Unit
2451
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Honor Device Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allowance Rate
228 granted / 316 resolved
+14.2% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
344
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§103
52.7%
+12.7% vs TC avg
§102
7.8%
-32.2% vs TC avg
§112
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 316 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claims 1 – 12 have been examined and are pending. Drawings 3. The applicant’s submitted drawings are acceptable for examination purposes. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/26/20924 and 04/30/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claims 1 – 12 are objected to for minor correction. Following acronyms are used IPv6, RA and RS. Their full form i.e. Internet protocol version 6 (IPv6), Router Advertisement (RA) and Router Solicitation (RS) are required to be spelled at least at their first occurrence. Appropriate correction is required. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0106795 to Hui). Regarding Claim 1, Hui discloses (¶2) an Internet protocol version 6 (Internet protocol version 6, IPv6) address configuration method and a routing device, which further includes: address configuration method (Hui discloses (¶7) IPv6 address configuration method), wherein the method comprises: obtaining, by a router, first information (Hui discloses (¶7) routing device obtaining a plurality of IPv6 prefixes (i.e. first information) from a plurality of networks) from an optical modem (Hui discloses (Figs. 1, 3, 4 and ¶40) routing device connected with the network(s) through an optical network terminal or optical modem), wherein the first information is information used to generate an IPv6 address of the router (Hui discloses (¶11) the routing device uses the first IPv6 prefix as an IPv6 prefix of the routing device and determines an IPv6 address of the routing device based on the first IPv6 prefix and a local address of the routing device) configuring, by the router, the IPv6 address of the router based on the first information (Hui discloses (¶11) the routing device uses the first IPv6 prefix as an IPv6 prefix of the routing device and determines an IPv6 address of the routing device based on the first IPv6 prefix and a local address of the routing device) obtaining, by the router, an IPv6 address prefix of a terminal device based on the first information (Hui discloses (¶45 and Fig. 1) a process in which a routing device (CPE), and a terminal device (STA) are connected to an LTE or 5G network, the STA initiates a router request (router solicitation, RS) to the CPE, where the RS requests to allocate an IPv6 prefix, and the CPE returns an IPv6 prefix of the CPE to the STA by using a router advertisement (router advertisement, RA) message) wherein an address prefix of an IPv6 address of the terminal device is the same as an address prefix of the IPv6 address of the router (Hui discloses (¶48 and ¶60) prefixes in the IPv6 addresses of the CPE or “router”, the STA 1 or “terminal”, and the STA 2 are in the IPv6 prefix 1) sending, by the router, the address prefix of the terminal device to the terminal device (Hui discloses (¶45) the CPE i.e. router, returns an IPv6 prefix to the STA i.e. terminal) and configuring, by the terminal device, the IPv6 address of the terminal device based on the address prefix of the terminal device (Hui discloses (¶45 and Fig. 1) the STA (i.e. terminal) generates an IPv6 address of the STA based on the received IPv6 prefix and a local address.) Claim 12, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 1. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 1. 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. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0106795 to Hui in view of US Patent No. 8,681,695 to Krishnan. Claim 5, Hui disclose all the elements of claim 1. Further Hui disclose: the configuring, by the router, the IPv6 address of the router based on the first information comprises: configuring, by the router, the second IPv6 address (Hui discloses (¶12) the routing device replaces the first IPv6 prefix in the first IPv6 address with the second IPv6 prefix, to obtain the second IPv6 address) Hui does not explicitly disclose sending, by the router, an RS packet to the optical modem; when the router determines that no RA packet from the optical modem is received, obtaining, by the router, the first information from the optical modem based on DHCPv6, wherein the first information comprises a second IPv6 address, and the second IPv6 address is an IPv6 address of the router. However, in an analogous art, Krishnan teaches: sending, by the router, an RS packet to the optical modem (Krishnan teaches (Fig. 2: RS 40, RA 62 and Fig. 3: 74, 76) that upon powering up, the first network device, (i.e. residential gateway 20 which can be implemented by a router), send a route solicitation RS packet, to the second network device, (i.e. edge router 12 which can be implemented by an optical modem) when the router determines that no RA packet from the optical modem is received, obtaining, by the router, the first information from the optical modem based on DHCPv6, wherein the first information comprises a second IPv6 address and the second IPv6 address is an IPv6 address of the router (Krishnan teaches (¶Col. 3, Lines 27 – 31) in response to non-response (which amounts to a denial of the ND/RA address request), the RG instead determines a default link-local IPv6 address in accordance with IPv6 and assigns this IPv6 address to the residential gateway interface facing the edge router) It would have been obvious as of the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine configuring, by the router, the IPv6 address of the router based on the first information comprises: configuring, by the router, the second IPv6 address, as disclosed by Hui, and sending, by the router, an RS packet to the optical modem; when the router determines that no RA packet from the optical modem is received, obtaining, by the router, the first information from the optical modem based on DHCPv6, wherein the first information comprises a second IPv6 address, and the second IPv6 address is an IPv6 address of the router, as taught by Krishnan, for the purpose of implementing (¶Col. 1, Line 7) allocating addresses within computer networks. Claim 7, Hui disclose all the elements of claim 1. Hui does not explicitly disclose receiving, by the router, the IPv6 address of the terminal device from the terminal device; and configuring, by the router, a second routing entry based on the IPv6 address of the terminal device, wherein the second routing entry comprises a mapping relationship between the IPv6 address of the terminal device and a network port on a local area network side of the router. However, in an analogous art, Krishnan teaches: receiving, by the router, the IPv6 address of the terminal device from the terminal device, and configuring, by the router, a second routing entry based on the IPv6 address of the terminal device, wherein the second routing entry comprises a mapping relationship between the IPv6 address of the terminal device and a network port on a local area network side of the router (Krishnan discloses (¶Col. 9, Lines 19 – 36) in response to the ND/RA message's failure to allocate a network address, residential gateway 20 determines a link-local IPv6 address and allocates this link-local IPv6 address for use by WAN interface 26. A link-local address comprises an address having link-only scope that can be used to reach neighboring nodes attached to the same link. In this instance, the line between residential gateway 20 and edge router 12 represents a link to which WAN interface 26 of residential gateway 20 couples. Assigning a link-local IPv6 address to WAN interface 26 effectively limits the scope of traffic originating from WAN interface 26 (e.g., traffic addressed with the link-local IPv6 address as the source address) to this link. This link-local traffic therefore only travels from residential gateway 20 to edge router 12, where edge router 12 is prohibited from forwarding this link-local traffic any further within service provider network 14 or on to public network 16 in accordance with IPv6.) The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 5. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2 – 3, 4, 6 and 8 – 11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rolled up and rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Applicant is encouraged to roll-up the Claims 2 – 3, 4, 6, 10 and 11 and the base claim(s) and any intervening claim(s) to the independent claim(s). Conclusion Citation of Pertinent Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0222542 to Inada (Electronic device, network relay device, and non-transitory computer readable storage medium) U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0099246 to Luo et al. (IPv6 Stateless Address Auto-Configuration) U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0099246 to Cox et al. (Method and apparatus for self-link assessing router) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASSAN KHAN whose telephone number is (313) 446-6574 and fax number is (571) 483-7559. The examiner can normally be reached on MONDAY - THURSDAY. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Christopher L. Parry can be reached on (571) 272-8328. 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:/Awww.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. 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. /H. A. K./ Examiner, Art Unit 2451 /Chris Parry/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 28, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602038
LOGGING SUPPORT APPARATUS, LOGGING SYSTEM, METHOD FOR LOGGING SUPPORT, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598142
PACKET LOAD-BALANCING
2y 6m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598112
METHOD FOR PERFORMING TRANSFER LEARNING, COMMUNICATION DEVICE, PROCESSING DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
1y 9m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585558
Remote Online Volume Cloning Method and System
2y 8m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574297
SYSTEMS AND METHODS BUDGET-CONSTRAINED SENSOR NETWORK DESIGN FOR DISTRIBUTION NETWORKS
1y 11m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
72%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+17.5%)
2y 7m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 316 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