DETAILED ACTION
Brief Summary
This is a Final Office Action addressing U.S. Application No. 18/369,198.
On November 17, 2023, a Non-Final Office Action (“NFOA”) was mailed in which among other findings, claims 41-43 (all pending claims at the time), were (1) rejected under 35 USC § 251 for being based on a defective reissue declaration and for impermissible recapture of surrendered subject matter; (2) rejected for obviousness-type double patenting of US RE49,665 and RE47,910; and (3) rejected under 35 USC § 103 for being obvious over Dabak in view of Luo.
On May 18, 2026, the Applicant filed their response to the NFOA which included amendments to the claims, a proper terminal disclaimer, and Remarks toward the outstanding rejections in view of the instant response.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Claim Amendments
The Examiner acknowledges the statement of support for the instant claim amendments at pages 10-12 of the Remarks.
Defective Declaration
The Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s statement of an intention to file a supplemental reissue declaration once all other issues are resolved, however the rejections will be maintained until such time a formal supplemental declaration is filed.
Non-Statutory Double Patenting
The proper terminal disclaimer filed with the instant amendment is sufficient to overcome the outstanding double patenting rejections. The double patenting rejections are withdrawn.
Prior Art Rejections
The Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art rejections are persuasive. Specifically, the Applicant argues,
“FIG. 1 of the 241 application fails to teach or suggest that the second secondary synchronization signal (e.g., S-SCH at sub-frame 5) comprises a fifth sequence and a sixth sequence, and the fifth sequence comprises the fourth sequence scrambled with the first scrambling sequence (different from the S-SCH at sub-frame 0). The '241 provisional, including Section 4 ('S-SCH Scrambling'), discusses only the intra-symbol scrambling relationship between segment 1 and segment 2 of a single SSS symbol. It does not disclose or suggest any specific internal sequence structure of the second SSS (subframe 5), let alone the cross-subframe sequence relationship recited in new claim 44 - namely, that the same fourth sequence appearing in the first SSS (scrambled with the second scrambling sequence) reappears in the second SSS scrambled with the first scrambling sequence instead. No portion of the '241 provisional teaches or suggests this cross-subframe sequence swapping structure.” (See page 17 of the Remarks).
The prior art rejections are 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 is a copy of the reissue declaration filed in the parent application U.S. Patent App. 16/813,737 thus does not identify an error being corrected by the continuation reissue application. A new declaration is required a statement explaining compliance with 37 CFR 1.175(f)(2) is appropriate. See MPEP 1414(II)(D)(1).
Claims 44-64 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 44-64 are free from prior art rejections, but are rejected under 35 USC $ 251 for being based on a defective reissue declaration.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record, taken alone or in combination fails to fairly teach or suggest a communication method or a communication apparatus comprising circuitry configured for receiving a first secondary synchronization signal and a second secondary synchronization signal in a frame further comprising a primary synchronization signal, wherein the first secondary synchronization signal (1st SSS) comprises two sequences (i.e. the claimed first and second sequences), the first sequence of the 1st SSS (i.e. the claimed first sequence) comprising third sequence scrambled with first scrambling sequence and the second sequence of the 1st SSS (i.e. the claimed second sequence) comprises a fourth sequence scrambled with a second scrambling sequence, and wherein the second secondary synchronization signal (2ⁿᵈ SSS) comprises two sequences (i.e. the claimed fifth and sixth sequences), the first sequence of the 2nd SSS (i.e. the claimed fifth sequence) comprises the fourth sequence scrambled with the first scrambling sequence and the second sequence of the 2ⁿᵈ SSS (i.e. the claimed sixth sequence) comprises the third sequence scrambled with a third scrambling sequence as required by independent claims 44, 51, and 58.
Dabak, which is seen as the closest prior art of record, in the '241 provisional application discloses secondary synchronization signals comprising first and second segments and teaches the first segments may have a common scrambling (see page 10), however Dabak's provision fails to teach or suggest the specific arrangement of the first and second secondary synchronization signals set forth in the claims.
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 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 571-273-9900.
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
Prosecution Insights