Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/973,744

Information Interaction Method and Related Apparatus

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 09, 2024
Examiner
PEREZ, JAMES M
Art Unit
2635
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
606 granted / 678 resolved
+27.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
696
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
§103
31.9%
-8.1% vs TC avg
§102
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§112
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 678 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION This action is responsive to the communications filed on 12/9/2024 and the preliminary claim amendments filed on 1/3/2025. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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. 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. Section 3a) With regards to independent claim 1, independent claim 1 states (with emphasis added): 1. A method, comprising: generating configuration information comprising a device address of one or more devices and sequence configuration information, wherein the sequence configuration information comprises first quantities [i.e. plural] of cyclic shift positions [i.e. plural] that correspond to the one or more devices, wherein the first quantities [i.e. plural] of cyclic shift positions [i.e. plural] are configured to cyclically shift a first sequence [i.e. singular] in a sequence set [i.e. plural], wherein a periodic auto-correlation side lobe amplitude of any second sequence [i.e. singular] in the sequence set is 0, and wherein second quantities that are of the first quantities of cyclic shift positions and that correspond to first portions of the one or more devices completing different first services in the one or more devices are different; and sending the configuration information. Section 3a1, context) Where the emphasized limitation (i.e. “wherein the first quantities [i.e. plural] of cyclic shift positions [i.e. plural] are configured to cyclically shift a first sequence [i.e. singular] in a sequence set [i.e. plural], ), first requires the existence of multiple base/root sequences in order to define the “sequence set” (note the mathematically a ‘set’ typically requires at least two elements), which is further verified by the stated “first sequence” and “second sequence” in independent claim 1. Furthermore, the emphasized limitation (i.e. “wherein the first quantities [i.e. plural] of cyclic shift positions [i.e. plural] are configured to cyclically shift a first sequence [i.e. singular] in a sequence set [i.e. plural]), requires multiple cyclic shift positions (of the first quantities) to be applied to only one (i.e. the first) base/root sequence within the sequence set. Which so is consistent with the merits of the instant Detailed Specific, e.g. see paragraph [0150] which states the use of “two Ipatov sequences” and “two different Ipatov sequences”. Where instant figures 10a shows different cyclic shift values being applied to the same/first Ipatov sequence. Section 3a2, rejection using the context of section 3a1, supra) However, the emphasized limitation (i.e. “wherein a periodic auto-correlation side lobe amplitude of any second sequence in the sequence set is 0”), requires the property of the ‘periodic auto/self-correlation side lobe amplitude being equal to zero’ to only apply to the “any second sequence in the sequence set”. In other words, the ‘first sequence in the sequence set’ is excluded from having the property of have zero amplitude auto/self-correlation side lobes, which contradicts the merits of the instant Detailed Description since the both the first and second sequences are two different Ipatov sequences (see [0150+0191], and TABLE 1 within the instant specification). Additionally, instant figure 8+S101 (as well as the original claim 1) which stated that ‘any (i.e. all) sequence within the sequence set’ will have the ‘periodic auto-correlation side lobe amplitude of zero/0’. Furthermore, the Examiner notes that by technical/engineering definition any valid Ipatov sequence will have the property of zero amplitude periodic auto/self-correlation side lobes (which is not limited to only Ipatov sequence; e.g. CAZAC or Zaddoff Chu sequences). Where the emphasized limitations (“wherein a periodic auto-correlation side lobe amplitude of any second sequence in the sequence set is 0”, within the context addressed above) renders the scope of the claim 1 to be indefinite with regards to the knowledge and abilities of a person having ordinary skill in the art (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) since said limitations contradict the Detailed Description of the instant Specification. Additionally but not exclusively, the contradiction between Detailed Description of the instant specification and the cited/emphasized limitations above also fail(s) the threshold requirements for clarity and precision as pursuant to MPEP 2173.02.II, which also renders the scope of claim 1 to be indefinite with regards to the knowledge and abilities of a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (as pursuant to MPEP 2173.02.II). Independent claims 6 and 12 each recited similar language as independent claim 1, and thus independent claims 6 and 12 are each rejected for having indefinite claim scope for substantially similar rationale as claim 1 (addressed supra). Dependent claims 2-5, 7-11, and 13-20 each fail to mitigate the indefinite scope of independent parent claim 1, 6, and/or 12 (as addressed above) and thus are each rejected for similar rationale as independent/parent claim 1, 6, and/or 12 (as applicable), above. Section 3b) With regards to independent claim 1, independent claim 1 states (with emphasis added): 1. A method, comprising: generating configuration information comprising a device address of one or more devices and sequence configuration information, wherein the sequence configuration information comprises first quantities of cyclic shift positions that correspond to the one or more devices, wherein the first quantities of cyclic shift positions are configured to cyclically shift a first sequence in a sequence set, wherein a periodic auto-correlation side lobe amplitude of any second sequence in the sequence set is 0, and wherein second quantities that are of the first quantities of cyclic shift positions and that correspond to first portions [plural] of the one or more devices completing different first services in the one or more devices are different; and sending the configuration information. Where the emphasized limitation (i.e. wherein second quantities that are of the first quantities of cyclic shift positions and that correspond to first portions of the one or more devices completing different first services in the one or more devices are different) is narrative in form; and fails to meet the threshold requirements for clarity and precision (as pursuant to MPEP 2173.02.II) for defining clear “boundaries of the subject matter for which protection is sought” (as pursuant to MPEP 2173.01) as well as “clearly and precisely define the metes and bounds of the claimed invention” (as pursuant to MPEP 2173.02) in regards to what technical/engineering meaning/step/function is/are actually represented/required by the emphasized limitation of claim 1 (with respect to the knowledge and abilities of a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention). Independent claims 6 and 12 each recited similar language as independent claim 1, and thus independent claims 6 and 12 are each rejected for having indefinite claim scope for substantially similar rationale as claim 1 (addressed supra). Dependent claims 2-5, 7-11, and 13-20 each fail to mitigate the indefinite scope of independent parent claim 1, 6, and/or 12 (as addressed above) and thus are each rejected for similar rationale as independent/parent claim 1, 6, and/or 12 (as applicable), above. Allowable Subject Matter No allowable subject matter will be indicated until the above 112(b) issues are clarified/resolved (either by amendments or arguments). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and are cited in the attached PTO-892 form. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James M. Perez, telephone number is (571)270-3231. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 10am to 6pm EST. 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, David C. Payne can be reached on (571)272-3024. 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. /JAMES M PEREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635 3/13/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 09, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598100
TRANSMITTER BASED ON RLM COMPENSATION AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12580723
METHOD AND APPARATUS OF DESKEW PROCESS FOR A CIRCUITRY, COMPUTER STORAGE MEDIUM, AND TERMINALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12567878
COMMON CONTROL CHANNEL-FREE COMMUNICATION METHOD AND SYSTEM FEATURING INTEGRATED AUTONOMOUS LINK ESTABLISHMENT AND FREQUENCY CONVERSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12562938
Attack Detection Method for Wi-Fi Secure Ranging from Transmitter to Receiver
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12562790
CODEBOOK GENERATION METHOD AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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 (+14.5%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 678 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