DETAILED ACTION
Brief Summary
On September 3, 2024, a Non-final Office Action was mailed in which, among other findings, claims 1 and 21-28 were rejected for being based on a defective reissue declaration, rejected on the grounds of non-statutory double patenting, and under 35 USC 102(e) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0147539 to Gorokhov et al.
On March 3, 2025, the Applicant filed their response to the September 3, 2024 Office Action which included a properly terminal disclaimer, amendments to the claims, the addition of new claims, and arguments toward the outstanding rejections.
On April 22, 2025, a Final Office Action was mailed in which, among other findings, the pending claims were rejected for being based on a defective reissue declaration, 35 USC §§ 251/112 for new matter issues; and 35 USC § 102 for being anticipated by Gorokhov.
On October 22, 25, the Applicant filed a Request for Continued Examination.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on October 22, 25 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Reissue Declaration
The Examiner acknowledges the Applicants statement regarding the filing of a corrected declaration at a later date, however the 35 USC 251 rejections will be maintained until the corrected declaration is filed.
Prior Art Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-13 of the Remarks, filed October 22, 2025, with respect to the amendment to the independent claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejections of claims 21-35 have been withdrawn.
Reissue Applications
The reissue oath/declaration filed with this application is defective (see 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP § 1414) because of the following:
The reissue declaration filed with the instant application appears to be a copy of the reissue declaration filed with the parent application. The reissue application is defective because it should identify a new error that is being corrected or a statement explaining compliance with 37 CFR 1.175(f)(2), if appropriate. See MPEP 1414(II)(D).
35 USC § 251 Rejections – Defective Declaration
Claims 21-35 are rejected as being based upon a defective reissue declaration under 35 U.S.C. 251 as set forth above. See 37 CFR 1.175.
The nature of the defect(s) in the declaration is set forth in the discussion above in this Office action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-35 are free from prior art rejections but are rejected under 35 USC § 251 for the reasons mentioned above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest alone or in combination, a User Equipment (UE) and a method for using a UE comprising performing, at the UE, first channel coding on a first stream to generate a first channel coded data stream and second channel coding on a second stream to generate a first channel coded data stream, wherein the first and second channel coding are performed according to different coding schemes, mapping, at the UE the first and second channel coded streams to modulation symbols, generating, at the UE, SC-FDMA symbols from the modulation symbols and transmitting the SC-FDMA symbols, in combination with the other recited claim elements, as required by independent claims 21, 25, and 29.
The pending dependent claims are allowable at least based on their dependence the corresponding independent claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERON J SORRELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-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, Michael Fuelling can be reached at 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.
Signed:
/ERON J SORRELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees: /JOSEPH R POKRZYWA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/M.F/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992