Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 30, 2026
Application No. 18/968,223

METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR CRC AIDED ENCODING AND BP DECODING FOR POLAR CODES

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Dec 04, 2024
Priority
Mar 12, 2021 — provisional 63/160,183 +2 more
Examiner
CHAUDRY, MUJTABA M
Art Unit
2112
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
InterDigital Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
710 granted / 841 resolved
+29.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
866
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.5%
-30.5% vs TC avg
§103
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
§102
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§112
40.0%
+0.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 841 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Applicants’ response filed 6/17/26 has been considered. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-20 are pending. Prior rejections under 35 USC 101 are withdrawn in view of amendments/remarks. Rejections under 35 USC 112 are presented in view of amendments. Application is pending. 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 1-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. For example, claim 1 recites: PNG media_image1.png 428 653 media_image1.png Greyscale The claim states, “…determine whether at least one short cycle in the factor graph is removed based on the determined one or more CRC-dependent relation operations…generate a set of encoding nodes based on: i) whether the at least one short cycle is removed from the factor graph or ii) the one or more determined CRC-dependent relation operations used in the polar encoder…” These limitations appear to be contradictory. If the short cycle is removed based on the CRC relaxation operations, then how can the set of encoded nodes be based on i) or ii) conditions presented? In other words, first the claim states that the short cycle is removed based on the CRC relaxation and then it states to generate encoding nodes based on the short cycle removed or CRC relaxation operations. Essential elements are missing from the claim. Independent claim 11 is rejected for similar reasons. Respective dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20 are rejected at least based on dependency. Corrections are requested. It is the Examiner’s conclusion that the claims of the present application, as presented, are not clear. Applicants are requested to formulate claim language that clearly defines the novelty of the application. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MUJTABA M CHAUDRY whose telephone number is (571)272-3817. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm. 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, Albert DeCady can be reached at 571-272-3819. 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. MUJTABA M. CHAUDRY Primary Examiner Art Unit 2112 /MUJTABA M CHAUDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 04, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 16, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 16, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 17, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 02, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12719604
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING DECODING BASED ON FANO DECODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12712663
SIMULTANEOUS TRANSMIT SIGNALS AND RECEIVE SIGNALS
2y 8m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12712669
EFFICIENT INTERLEAVER DESIGN FOR POLAR CODES
1y 11m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12712048
EFFICIENT SOFT DECODING OF ERROR CORRECTION CODE VIA EXTRINSIC BIT INFORMATION
1y 10m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12704547
AUTOMATED TEST EQUIPMENT AND METHOD USING A TRIGGER GENERATION
1y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+3.7%)
2y 7m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 841 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