DETAILED ACTION
This final action replies to applicant’s response/amendment, filed February 10, 2026, in application 18/582322 (filed on 02/20/2024) that is a broadening reissue of US Patent 10,950,938, that issued on Mar. 16, 2021. Their response amends the specification to provide notice of multiple reissue applications of same 10950938 patent, submits a terminal disclaimer of 10641882 and RE49920, cancels claims 1-9, amends claims 10 and 13 to add “wherein the integer is two or more” to further define the phase rotation amount equal to an integer multiple of 2π. New claims 10-15 are pending, where claims 10 and 13 are amended.
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
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 2 and 6, filed Feb. 10, 2026, with respect to objection of specification for lacking notice of multiple applications of reissue to same patent have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of specification has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed Feb. 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding remarks on pages 6-7 and the current reissue application declaration submitted with their response, although the revised declaration states it is a broadening reissue, states the claims of 10641882 do not cover “Embodiment 3” which was disclosed in the original application and states the entirety of claim 1 limitations do not cover “Embodiment 3”, it fails to specify a limitation, word or phrase as required by 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP 1414, II, that states in part “In identifying the error, it is sufficient that the reissue oath/declaration identify a single word, phrase, or expression in the specification or in an original patent claim, and how it renders the original patent wholly or partly inoperative or invalid.” Further, MPEP 1414, II states, “It is not sufficient for an oath/declaration to merely state "this application is being filed to correct errors in the patent which may be noted from the changes made in the disclosure."” The reference in the recently filed declaration to “Embodiment 3” is akin to the aforementioned “not sufficient” example since it fails to specify a single word, phrase or expression relied on for this reissue application. The rejection of claims 10-15 [1-9 having now been cancelled are omitted] is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed Feb. 10, 2026, with respect to duplicate claims under 35 USC 251 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-9 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed Feb. 10, 2026, with respect to written description under 35 USC 112, first para. and related indefiniteness under 35 USC 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 4 and 10-15 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed Feb. 10, 2026, with respect to double patenting under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-9 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed Feb. 10, 2026, with respect to judicially created obviousness double patenting have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 10-15 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed Feb. 10, 2026, with respect to obviousness under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 10-15 has been withdrawn.
Reissue Application Declaration
Claims 10-15 are rejected as being based upon a defective reissue application declaration by the inventor 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 Response to Arguments and herein. The current declaration states:
“US Patent 10,641,882 is wholly or partially inoperative or invalid by reason of the patentee claiming less than he had the right to claim in the patent. More specifically, the claims of US Patent 10,641,882 do not cover Embodiment 3, which was disclosed in the original application. For example, claim 1 of US Patent 10,641,882 recites, in part, a radar transmitter which, in operation, transmits radar signals in a plurality of transmission cycles; and a radar receiver which, in operation, receives reflection wave signals, the reflection wave signals being reflections of the radar signals on a target, wherein the radar transmitter includes a phase rotation controller which, in operation, assigns a unit phase rotation amount every Ne transmission cycles of the plurality of transmission cycles, and generates a phase rotation amount change signal that controls a phase rotation amount, Ne being an integer greater than one, the phase rotation amount of the phase rotation amount change signal being constant within each of the plurality of transmission cycles, the phase rotation amount of the phase rotation amount change signal being changed within the Ne transmission cycles according to the unit phase rotation amount and a predetermined pattern, and a transmission phase rotator which, in operation, assigns first phase rotations to the radar signals in accordance with the phase rotation amount change signal, and the radar receiver includes a reception phase rotator which, in operation, assigns second phase rotations, which are in directions opposite to directions of the first phase rotations, to the reflection wave signals in accordance with the phase rotation amount change signal. The limitations of claim 1 of US Patent 10,641,882 do not cover Embodiment 3. The limitations of claims 2-9 of US Patent 10,641,882 also do not cover Embodiment 3 for similar reasons. Accordingly, the present reissue application is being filed to pursue the overlooked aspects of the original application.”
In summary, the current declaration states it is a broadening reissue (“patentee claiming less than he had the right to claim in the patent”), recites claim 1 of 10641882 and states claims of 10641882 do not cover “Embodiment 3”, but “Embodiment 3” fails to specify a limitation, word or phrase as required by 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP 1414 II, that states in part “In identifying the error, it is sufficient that the reissue oath/declaration identify a single word, phrase, or expression in the specification or in an original patent claim, and how it renders the original patent wholly or partly inoperative or invalid.” Further, MPEP 1414, II states, “It is not sufficient for an oath/declaration to merely state "this application is being filed to correct errors in the patent which may be noted from the changes made in the disclosure."” The reference to “Embodiment 3” is not sufficient since it fails to specify a single word, phrase or expression in the patent relied on for this reissue application to correct deficiency of claims of 10641882 for this reissue. The rejection of claims 10-15 [1-9 having now been cancelled are omitted] is maintained for reasons above.
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 Mark Sager whose telephone number is (571) 272-4454. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 6:30 AM - 3 PM, 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, Alexander Kosowski can be reached at (571) 272-3744. 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.
/Mark Sager/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/JEFFREY D CARLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/ALEXANDER J KOSOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992