DETAILED FINAL OFFICE ACTION
This action is responsive to Applicant’s filing of a response, dated 10/16/2025.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Reissue
For reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the current provisions. This reissue application was filed 07/21/2022. Thus, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 made in this application are to the current provisions.
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceed-ing in which Patent No. 10,721,695 is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation.
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is mate-rial to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue appli-cation.
These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Applicant is notified that any subsequent amendment to the specification and/or claims must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 – 31 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.
Response to Amendment
Amended claims have been reviewed. The amendments filed in the Response do not comply with 37 CFR 1.173.
Claims
Claim 13 has the status of “Three Times Allowed”, and claims 20 – 30 have “New” as their status which is incorrect. The status of claim 13 should be “Three Times Amended”. The status of claims 20 – 30 should be “Amended New” or “New Amended” to show they are both of those status and if there are multiple amendments to that claim, the number of times amended. Applicant is notified that any subsequent amendment to the specification and/or claims must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)2,
(2) Claims. An amendment paper must include the entire text of each claim being changed by such amendment paper and of each claim being added by such amendment paper. For any claim changed by the amendment paper, a parenthetical expression "amended," "twice amended," etc., should follow the claim number. Each changed patent claim and each added claim must include markings pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section, except that a patent claim or added claim should be canceled by a statement canceling the claim without presentation of the text of the claim.
Applicant is also notified that any subsequent amendment to the specification and/or claims must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(c),
“(c) Status of claims and support for claim changes. Whenever there is an amendment to the claims pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, there must also be supplied, on pages separate from the pages containing the changes, the status (i.e., pending or canceled), as of the date of the amendment, of all patent claims and of all added claims, and an explanation of the support in the disclosure of the patent for the changes made to the claims.”
The Remarks do not show the specific teachings to the specific amended limitations of the claims. Applicant merely states what claims were amended and the teachings are somewhere in the argument section of the Response without any mapping to specific sections of the specification to show support for the specific amendments. As seen in MPEP 1453 V. D. Amendment of New Claims, the status of a claim shows specific claims limitations amended and specifically maps those new and amended limitations to the sections of the specification that teach the amended claim limitation,
Example from MPEP 1453 V. D. Amendment of New Claims:
First Amendment (wherein claim 11 was first presented):
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 11 (New). A knife comprising a handle portion and a notched blade portion.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In the Remarks (supplied on a separate page):
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Status: The present application includes pending claims 1-11, with claims 1 and 11 being independent. With this amendment, applicant has added new independent claim 11. Support for this new claim is found in column 4, lines 26-41, column 5, lines 3-18, and column 6, lines 5-15.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Second Amendment (wherein claim 11 is amended):
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 11 (New, amended). A fishing knife comprising a bone handle portion and a notched blade portion.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In the Remarks (supplied on a separate page):
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Status: The present application includes pending claims 1-11, with claims 1 and 11 being independent. With this amendment, applicant has amended new independent claim 11 as described below.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 11: Claim 11 is amended to add "fishing" before "knife" and "bone" before "handle". Support for these changes is found in column 4, lines 34-41 and column 6, lines 5-8, respectively.
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 3, 7, 12, 15, 18, 23, 26, 29, and 30 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.
Claims 3, 7, 15, and 18, recite the limitation of “the frequency position of the synchronization signal is the same or about the same as the frequency step of the channel raster” The term “is the same or about the same” in claim 3, 7, 15, 18, is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “is the same or about the same” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 12, 23, and 29 recite the limitation of "the frequency location" in the beginning of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears that the Applicant amended the independent claims to recited “the position” and did not amend the rest of the claim to reflect this change.
Claim 26 recites the limitation of "the apparatus" in the beginning of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears that the Applicant amended the preamble to read “a base station” and did not amend the rest of the claim to reflect the base station.
Claim 30 recited the limitation "the apparatus" in the beginning of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears that the Applicant made a similar typographical error herein as was done in claim 26.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 4, 12, 23, and 29, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. In claim 4, the limitation of, “wherein the synchronization signal is configured to enable the user equipment to identify a radio access technology deployment scenario or a radio access technology” is the essence of the independent claim, i.e., the sync signal aids on finding the carrier frequency, which can be interpreted as a “radio access technology deployment signal or a radio access technology”.
In claims 12, 23 and 29, the limitation of, “the frequency location of the synchronization signal inside the carrier bandwidth of the carrier depends on the center frequency of the carrier and on the channel raster”, is also found, almost word for word, in claims 20 and 26, respectively, which it depends on.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 – 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. 2014/0169361, hereinafter “Kim”.
Claim 1:
A method comprising:
configuring, by a base station, a carrier comprising a synchronization signal, the carrier having a carrier bandwidth, and the carrier bandwidth having a center frequency,
wherein a frequency position of the synchronization signal is substantially equal to the frequency step of a channel rater for the synchronization signal of the carrier or is fixed with respect to the channel raster for the synchronization signal of the carrier;
Kim teaches the use of a carrier comprising a sync signal and having a center frequency, (e.g., ¶¶ 0178 – 0179 and 0183 – 0186 et seq., & Figs. 6 - 10 with supporting areas of the specification.).
transmitting the synchronization signal to a user equipment so that a center frequency of the synchronization signal is transmitted with a frequency offset with respect to the center frequency of the carrier bandwidth,
wherein the synchronization signal is positioned inside the carrier bandwidth, and
wherein, inside the carrier bandwidth, an allowed frequency position of the synchronization signal depends on the center frequency of the carrier bandwidth and on the channel raster; and
Kim teaches such a transmitting step, (e.g., ¶¶ 0178 – 0179 and 0183 – 0186 et seq., & Figs. 6 - 10 with supporting areas of the specification.).
indicating to the user equipment, after the user equipment finds the frequency position of the synchronization signal, a frequency position of the carrier.
Kim teaches the use of a carrier comprising a sync signal and having a center frequency, (e.g., ¶¶ 0178 – 0186 et seq., & Figs. 6 - 10 with supporting areas of the specification.).
Claims 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 15, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26, 28, 29 and 30 claim similar limitations as claim 1 or have the same teachings disclosed in the cited areas of the prior art, and is therefore rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Claim 2:
The method according to claim 1, wherein the frequency position of the synchronization signal is aligned with a subcarrier spacing grid of a radio-access technology.
Kim teaches this limitation with regards to alignment (e.g., ¶¶ 0178 – 0179 and 0183 – 0186 et seq., & Figs. 6 - 10 with supporting areas of the specification.).
Claims 6, 14, 16, 17, 21, 25, 27, and 31 teach similar limitations as claim 2 and are therefore rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Claim 10:
The method according to claim 1, wherein a bandwidth of the synchronization signal is smaller than the carrier bandwidth.
Kim teaches this limitation since it is known that the sync signal would have to be smaller since it needs to fit on the carrier bandwidth to be sent (e.g., ¶¶ 0178 – 0179 and 0183 – 0186 et seq., & Figs. 6 - 10 with supporting areas of the specification.).
Claims 22 and 28 teaches similar limitations as claim 10 and are therefore rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Claim 11:
The method of claim 1, wherein variable frequency offset between the center frequency of the synchronization signal and the center frequency of the carrier is allowed.
Kim teaches the use of variable frequency offsets between the center frequency, (e.g., ¶¶ 0178 – 0179 and 0183 – 0186 et seq., & Figs. 6 - 10 with supporting areas of the specification.).
Claims 13, 16, 19, 20, and 26 teach similar limitations as claim 11 and are therefore rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Claim 12:
The method according to claim 1, wherein the frequency location of the synchronization signal inside the carrier bandwidth of the carrier depends on the center frequency of the carrier and on the channel raster.
Kim teaches the frequency location of the sync signal varies depending on the offsets, (e.g., ¶¶ 0178 – 0179 and 0183 – 0186 et seq., & Figs. 6 - 10 with supporting areas of the specification.).
Claim 23 and 29 teaches similar limitations as claim 12 and are therefore rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
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 DAVID E. ENGLAND whose telephone number is (571)272-3912. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Michael Fuelling can be reached on 571-270-1367. 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.
DAVID E. ENGLAND
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3992
/DAVID E ENGLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/ROBERT J HANCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/M.F/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992