Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/944,833

COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT

Non-Final OA §101§102§103
Filed
Nov 12, 2024
Examiner
DOAN, DUYEN MY
Art Unit
2459
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telia Company AB
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
545 granted / 670 resolved
+23.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
695
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§103
50.9%
+10.9% vs TC avg
§102
5.6%
-34.4% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 670 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §103
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/4/2025 and 11/12/2024. The submission 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 § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-4,10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Independent claims 1,10 recite an apparatus…configured to carry out step methods without recite any structural elements associated with the claims apparatus. Therefore, the apparatus being claimed is software per se which does not fall under any of the statutory categories defined under § 101. Software per se is not a useful process, a machine, a manufacture, or a composition of matter. Dependent claims 2-4,11 are depended on the rejected base claims 1,10 above, therefore rejected for the same rationale. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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)(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 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dudda et al (us 2021/0266786) (hereinafter Dudda). As regarding claim 10, Dudda discloses receive a data packet over a communication channel, the data packet carrying an index identifying the data packet (see Dudda 0033-0035, 0086, and also see figure.4, receive packet/s with sequence number), detect, based on data carried in the index of the received data packet, if the index received in the data packet is related to an index in a prior data packet received by the apparatus (see Dudda 0033-0035,0016-0119, the sequence number in the packet used to determine if the packet is duplicated of the previous packet), perform one of the following: generate a data packet for forwarding by removing the index from the data packet received in response to a detection that the index received in the data packet is not related to an index in a prior data packet received by the apparatus, ignore the data packet received in response to a detection that the index received in the data packet is related to an index in a prior data packet received by the apparatus (see Dudda 0033-0035 , the sequence number in the packet and determine if the packet is duplicate of the previous packet, discard the duplicate packet (Dudda 0116)). As regarding claim 11, Dudda discloses the apparatus is configured to perform a detection if the index received in the data packet is related to an index in a prior data packet received by the apparatus at least by one of: determining if a value of the index received in the data packet and a value of the index in a prior data packet are provided with a predefined common portion; determining if the value of the index received in the data packet and the value of the index in a prior data packet comply a predefined numerical scheme (see Dudda 0033-0035, the sequence number in the duplicate packets identical serial number correspond to the same packet…or predefine numerical used as sequence number/s in the packet/s). As regarding claims 12-14, the limitations of claims 12-14 are similar to limitations of rejected claims 10-11 above, therefore rejected for the same rationale. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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. Claims 1-3,5-7,9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dudda et al (us 2021/0266786) (hereinafter Dudda) in view of Huselton et al (us 2021/0328902) (hereinafter Huselton). As regarding claim 1, Dudda discloses generate a first transmittable data packet at least by: inserting a payload of the received data packet to the first transmittable data packet, defining a destination address of the first transmittable data packet to cause a delivery of the first transmittable data packet over a first communication channel, and defining an index to the first transmittable data packet for identifying the first transmittable data packet (see Dudda 0014-0020,0033-0037, generate duplicate packet/s, where the duplicate packet comprising information such as sequence number, the duplicate packet encompass of the original packet and copies of the original packet, therefore it is obvious that the duplicate packet comprises payload and the destination address of the original packet and transmit through one of multiple channels), generate a second transmittable data packet at least by: inserting a payload of the received data packet to the second transmittable data packet, defining a destination address of the second transmittable data packet to cause a delivery of the second transmittable data packet over a second communication channel, and defining an index to the second transmittable data packet for identifying the second transmittable data packet (see Dudda 0014-0020,0033-0037, generate duplicate packet/s, where the duplicate packet comprising information such as sequence number, the duplicate packet encompass of the original packet and copies of the original packet, therefore it is obvious that the duplicate packet comprises payload and the destination address of the original packet and transmit through one of multiple channels; multiple duplicate packets are generated and transmit through multiple channels, therefore the multiple duplicate packets comprises first and second duplicate packet). Dudda is silent in regard to the concept of receive a data packet from a router device, transmit the first transmittable data packet and the second transmittable data packet to the router device. Huselton discloses the concept of receive a data packet from a router device, transmit the first transmittable data packet and the second transmittable data packet to the router device (see Huselton 0022-0023, receiving packet from the router, and transmit newly generated packets back to the router). It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Huselton to Dudda because they're analogous art. A person would have been motivated to modify Dudda with Huselton’s teaching for the purpose of enable efficient, reliable network communication between devices. As regarding claim 2, Dudda-Huselton discloses generate the first index introduced to the first transmittable data packet and the second index introduced to the second transmittable data packet so that they are related to each other (see Dudda 0033-0035, the sequence numbers in the packets are the same or are related). As regarding claim 3, Dudda-Huselton discloses set a relation between the first index to the second index by at least one of: a value of the first index and a value of the second index are provided with a common portion; the value of the first index and the value of the second index comply a predefined numerical scheme (see Dudda 0033-0035, the serial numbers in the packets express in predefined number). As regarding claims 5-7,9, the limitations of claims 5-7,9 are similar to limitations of rejected claims 1-3 above, therefore rejected the same rationale. Claims 4,8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dudda-Huselton as applied to claims 1,5 above and further in view of Zhang et al (us 2021/0029766) (hereinafter Zhang). As regarding claim 4, Dudda-Huselton discloses the invention as claims in claim 1 above, but silent in regard to define the destination address of the first transmittable data packet and the destination address of the second transmittable data packet so that the first transmittable data packet is transmitted over a first radio interface and the second transmittable data packet is transmitted over a second radio interface of the communication system, the first radio interface and the second radio interface implement communication at different frequency bands. Zhang teaches the concept of define the destination address of the first transmittable data packet and the destination address of the second transmittable data packet so that the first transmittable data packet is transmitted over a first radio interface and the second transmittable data packet is transmitted over a second radio interface of the communication system, the first radio interface and the second radio interface implement communication at different frequency bands (see Zhang 0008-0010,0036,0061, transmitting first packet and second packets using different frequency bands, it is obvious that each of the packets comprise the destination address). It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Zhang to Dudda-Huselton because they're analogous art. A person would have been motivated to modify Dudda-Huselton with Zhang’s teaching for the purpose of improving transmission rate of the system (see Zhang 0004). As regarding claim 8, limitations of claim 8 is similar to limitations of rejected claim 4 above, therefore rejected for the same rationale. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUYEN MY DOAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4226. The examiner can normally be reached (571)272-4226. 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 at (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. /DUYEN M DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 12, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603860
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MANAGING SYNCHRONIZATION SOURCE COLLISIONS IN MISSION CRITICAL SERVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12581282
VIRTUAL NETWORK (VN) GROUP AUTOMATION FOR DYNAMIC SHARED DATA IN 5G CORE NETWORK (5GC)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12561717
Monitoring and Using Telemetry Data
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556485
FINE-GRAINED AND COARSE-GRAINED CONGESTION WINDOW SYNCHRONIZATION FOR TCP
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12537707
SORTING METHOD FOR SORTING A PARTICIPANT LIST COMPRISING PARTICIPANTS OF A VIDEO CONFERENCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
81%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+12.4%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 670 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