Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/236,561

CHANNEL STATE INFORMATION FEEDBACK FOR MULTICAST BROADCAST SERVICES

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 12, 2025
Examiner
CHENG, CHI TANG P
Art Unit
2463
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
2 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
466 granted / 579 resolved
+22.5% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
604
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.8%
+9.8% vs TC avg
§102
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§112
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 579 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Response to Arguments The objection to the Specification/Abstract is hereby withdrawn, in view of the Abstract submitted by Applicant. The indefiniteness rejections are hereby withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 48 and 49 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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. Claim(s) 48 and 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0303157 A1 to Siomina et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2018/0115430 A1 to Seo. As to claim 49, Siomina discloses a user equipment (UE), comprising: an antenna for use in transmitting electromagnetic signals; a memory for storing computer readable code; and a processor for executing the computer readable code, the computer readable code causing the UE to: (Figs. 5,6,8, paragraphs 28-35, disclosing the UE receiving a “plurality of Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) transmissions” and performing “parallel multicast measurement[s]” on them, teaching the recited “UE”) receive more than one multicast broadcast services (MBSs) (Figs. 5,6,8, paragraphs 28-35, disclosing the UE receiving a “plurality of Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) transmissions” and performing “parallel multicast measurement[s]” on them) ; receive one or more messages including more than one measurement configurations associated with the more than one MBSs (Figs. 5,6,8, paragraphs 28-35, disclosing the UE receiving a “plurality of Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) transmissions” and performing “parallel multicast measurement[s]” on them; paragraphs 95-120, disclosing that in step 504, the UE receives “a configuration for performing parallel multicast measurements of MBMS transmissions” from the network node 115, where such “configuration” may configure or re-configure the one or more MBMS measurements [paragraph 98], teaching the recited “one or more messages including more than one measurement configurations …”, pursuant to BRI; also see steps 608 and 610, and step 804, paragraphs 145, 160-176, all teaching this limitation) ; perform measurements for the more than one MBSs based on the more than one measurement configurations (Figs. 5,6,8, paragraphs 28-35, steps 506,508,610,612: “perform the plurality of parallel multicast measurements of the plurality of MBMS transmissions …”, teaching this limitation); and drop one or more measurement reports with lower priority among more than one measurement reports associated with the more than one MBSs (Figs. 5,6,8, paragraphs 28-35, steps 506,508,610,612: “perform the plurality of parallel multicast measurements of the plurality of MBMS transmissions …”; further see paragraphs 31,146-153, 218, 229, disclosing prioritizing and dropping MBMS measurements, teaching this limitation) Siomina does not appear to explicitly disclose RRC messages. Seo discloses RRC messages (paragraphs 62,133,155,162,214: RRC messages/signaling). Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Seo, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Siomina, to reject the limitations of this claim. In particular, the messages disclosed in Siomina’s teaching of “receive one or more messages including more than one measurement configurations associated with the more than one MBSs” may be combined/incorporated with, and/or embodied by, the RRC messages disclosed in Seo, to reject “receive one or more RRC messages including more than one measurement configurations associated with the more than one MBSs”, at least since RRC messages in Seo are employed for control signaling, much like the messages disclosed in Seo’s teachings, and because both Seo and Siomina are in the same field of endeavor with regard to multicast/broadcast/MBS services. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the quality and efficiency of wireless control signaling, especially with regard to multicast/broadcast/MBS services (Seo, paragraphs 1-25; Siomina, paragraphs 1-35). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. As to claim 48, see rejection for claim 49. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM. 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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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. /CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 12, 2025
Application Filed
Oct 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 26, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598604
Uplink Control Information for Enabling Autonomous Uplink Transmissions
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12574922
INFORMATION TRANSMISSION METHOD, DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557107
UNUSED TRANSMISSION PUSCH OCCASION UPLINK CONTROL INFORMATION (UTO-UCI) FOR CG WITH MULTIPLE PUSCH OCCASIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549935
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PROVIDING DIRECT COMMUNICATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12537579
MEDIA ACCESS CONTROL (MAC) CONTROL ELEMENT (CE) (MAC-CE) AND PHYSICAL LAYER (PHY) CHANNEL STATE INFORMATION (CSI) ENHANCEMENTS
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.4%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 579 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