CTNF 18/737,823 CTNF 94973 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation For purposes of the rejections below, the phrase " first and second FMCW signal " in the claim 2 is interpreted in light of the instant specification as referring to the two chirp components that together form the synchronization signal : (See instant specification para. [0095]) a first component whose frequency increases in time according to a first slope and a second component, overlapping the first, whose frequency decreases in time according to a second slope that is the negative of the first slope. The instant specification explains that FMCW generally refers to a signal whose frequency increases linearly with time (an up-chirp) or decreases linearly with time (a down-chirp), and further teaches that the disclosed synchronization signal may be formed using a first FMCW waveform 1110 that ramps up linearly over a period T and a second FMCW waveform 1120 that ramps down linearly over the same period T, such that the two waveforms form an X shape (instant specification, paras. [0004]-[0005], [0031], [0034], [0105]-[0107]; Figs. 11, 20, and 21). Accordingly, the claim phrase is reasonably read to require the disclosed two-branch synchronization waveform structure, rather than some additional waveform type apart from the opposed up-sweep and down-sweep chirp components described in the specification. The specification's discussion of the X-shaped FMCW-based synchronization signal confirms that the claimed first and second FMCW signals are the two overlapping opposed-slope branches of the synchronization signal itself (instant specification, paras. [0031], [0034], [0105]-[0107], [0130]; Fig. 11). Under that interpretation, Vishwanath's dual-chirp synchronization waveform maps to the claimed first and second FMCW signals because Vishwanath teaches a synchronization waveform transmitted to the mobile terminal that includes an up-chirp waveform whose frequency increases linearly with time and a down-chirp waveform whose frequency decreases linearly with time, where the component waveforms are transmitted simultaneously and have opposite slopes, +K and −K. (See FIG.4) Thus, Vishwanath's up-chirp corresponds to the claimed first FMCW signal , and Vishwanath's down-chirp corresponds to the claimed second FMCW signal (Vishwanath, col. 6, lines 60-65; col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24). This interpretation is also consistent with the frequency-offset-estimation portion of the claim because the instant specification describes performing frequency offset estimation based on the first and second FMCW signals, and Vishwanath likewise estimates frequency offset from the detected component-waveform frequencies of the up-chirp and down-chirp components (instant specification, para. [0130]; Vishwanath, col. 10, lines 40-60; col. 21, lines 23-47). 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 5-10, and 12-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vishwanath (US6418158B1) in view of Ko (US20200383129A1) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Vishwanath (US6418158B1) . Regarding claim 20, Vishwanath discloses: A method for wireless communication at a wireless node, comprising: obtaining a synchronization signal (SS) comprising a first frequency modulated continuous waveform (FMCW) signal associated with a frequency that increases in time for a duration according to a first slope and a second FMCW signal that overlaps with the first FMCW signal, wherein the second FMCW signal is associated with a frequency that decreases in time for the duration according to a second slope that corresponds to a negative of the first slope; and Vishwanath teaches a dual-chirp synchronization waveform transmitted to the mobile terminal, where the up-chirp waveform increases linearly with time, the down-chirp waveform decreases linearly with time, the two component waveforms overlap, and the slopes are opposite (Vishwanath, col. 6, lines 60-65; col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24). Further, Vishwanath discloses: performing frequency offset estimation based on the first and second FMCW signals. Vishwanath teaches detecting the component-waveform frequencies and estimating the frequency offset and timing offset from those first and second component-waveform frequency estimates (Vishwanath, col. 10, lines 40-60; col. 21, lines 23-47) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-fti The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 5-10, and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vishwanath (US6418158B1) in view of Ko (US20200383129A1) . Regarding claim 1, Vishwanath discloses: obtain a synchronization signal (SS) comprising a first frequency modulated continuous waveform (FMCW) signal associated with a frequency that increases in time for a duration according to a first slope . PNG media_image1.png 608 847 media_image1.png Greyscale Vishwanath in FIG.4 teaches a dual-chirp synchronization waveform (i.e., “ continuous waveform (FMCW) signal ” as claimed ) transmitted from the gateway station to the mobile terminal, where the up-chirp waveform increases linearly (See FIG. 4 element 60) with time according to slope +K (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24). Moreover, Vishwanath discloses: and a second FMCW signal that overl aps with the first FMCW signal, Vishwanath teaches that the up-chirp waveform and the down-chirp waveform (See FIG. 4 element 62) are transmitted simultaneously as the two component waveforms of the synchronization waveform (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24). Additionally, Vishwanath discloses: wherein the second FMCW signal is associated with a frequency that decreases in time for the duration according to a second slope that corresponds to a negative of the first slope; Vishwanath teaches that the down-chirp waveform decreases linearly (See FIG. 4 element 62) with time according to slope -K, which corresponds to the negative of the up-chirp waveform's slope +K (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24). Furthermore, Vishwanath discloses: and perform frequency offset estimation based on the first and second FMCW signals. Vishwanath teaches using an FFT to identify the dominant frequency components of the deswept up-chirp waveform and the deswept down-chirp waveform, and then estimating the frequency offset and timing offset from those two component-waveform (i.e., “ based on the first and second FMCW signals ” as claimed) frequency estimates (Vishwanath, col. 10, lines 40-60; col. 21, lines 23-47). With respect to claim 1, Vishwanath discloses a wireless communications terminal to acquire a transmitted synchronization waveform as described above. Although it is inherent that Vishwanath would include processor and memory containing computer-executable instructions (see col. 6, lines 31-65; col. 15, lines 12-30), it is not explicitly clear that Viswanath teaches that the processor and memory inherently described would cause the mobile terminal to implement the synchronization process: An apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory comprising computer-executable instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to: However, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches a wireless communication device architecture including a processor, memory, and transceiver, where instructions stored in the memory are executable by the processor and the processor performs synchronization-signal-block procedures in the wireless device (Ko, paras. [0096]-[0097]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Vishwanath with the processor-and-memory wireless-device architecture of Ko because Ko teaches implementing synchronization- signal procedures using processor-executed instructions stored in memory in a wireless device, while Vishwanath teaches the particular dual-chirp synchronization acquisition and frequency-offset-estimation operations to be performed at the terminal. Doing so would have predictably provided a practical hardware and software implementation of Vishwanath's known synchronization-waveform acquisition and offset-estimation functions in a wireless communication apparatus while using conventional wireless-device processor, memory, and transceiver components taught by Ko. Regarding claim 2, Vishwanath discloses: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second slope corresponds to a negative of the first slope. Vishwanath teaches that the up-chirp waveform has slope +K and the down-chirp waveform has slope −K (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24). Thus, the rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 2. Regarding claim 3, Vishwanath discloses: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein performing the frequency offset estimation involves estimation of a difference between a first beat frequency associated with the first FMCW signal and a second beat frequency associated with the second FMCW signal. Vishwanath teaches estimating the frequencies of the deswept up-chirp waveform and deswept down-chirp waveform and using those two frequency estimates to solve for the frequency offset and timing offset, where the deswept component-waveform frequencies correspond to the first and second beat frequencies used for the estimation (Vishwanath, col. 10, lines 40-60; col. 21, lines 23-47). Thus, the rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 3. Regarding claim 5, Vishwanath discloses: The apparatus of claim 3, wherein in order to perform the frequency offset estimation, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: process the first FMCW signal via a first signal path that involves estimating the first beat frequency; process the second FMCW signal via a second signal path that involves estimating the second beat frequency; and estimate the difference between the first beat frequency and the second beat frequency based on the estimate of the first beat frequency and the estimate of the second beat frequency. Vishwanath teaches an acquisition system in which sampled data are split into a first path 107 and a second path 109, coupled respectively to first and second phase shifters and first and second FFT processors, and the detection and estimation processor uses the outputs from the first and second FFT processors to estimate the component-waveform frequencies and compute the frequency offset and timing offset (Vishwanath, col. 15, lines 12-30, 37-45; col. 16, lines 11-33; col. 21, lines 23-47). Accordingly, the rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 5. Regarding claim 6, Vishwanath discloses: The apparatus of claim 5, wherein the first FMCW signal is obtained via a frequency band B over a period T, wherein the first slope is B/T and the second slope is −B/T. Vishwanath teaches a dual-chirp waveform defined over burst duration T, with the up-chirp frequency given by f1(t)=K(t−T/2) and the down-chirp frequency given by f2(t)=−K(t−T/2), where K is the sweep parameter or slope of the up-chirp waveform and −K is the slope of the down-chirp waveform, and the discussion of the chirp bandwidth and burst duration shows the slope corresponds to the swept bandwidth over the burst period, i.e., B/T and −B/T (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 63 - col. 10, line 24; col. 11, lines 4-14). Accordingly, the rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 6. Regarding claim 7, Vishwanath teaches a sliding-search-window process used to scan across a frame looking for the dual-chirp waveform, where digital time-domain samples are sampled for a time T in order to search for the composite waveform and each sliding search window begins at a hypothesized time τ: The apparatus of claim 6, wherein the apparatus searches for the FMCW signal for a duration L (Vishwanath, col. 16, lines 47-58; col. 22, lines 1-16). Further, Vishwanath teaches that the detected component-waveform frequencies vary with the hypothesized start time τ according to the sweep parameter K and that the chirp bandwidth β and burst duration T satisfy β=KT, from which scanning over a duration L corresponds to a searched frequency span of K·L = B·L/T: across a frequency range of B*L/T. (Vishwanath, col. 21, lines 23-47; col. 22, lines 35-60). The rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 7 because Vishwanath teaches scanning the dual-chirp waveform over time while using the disclosed sweep relations to relate the searched time span to the corresponding searched frequency span. Regarding claim 8, Vishwanath teaches a dual-chirp synchronization waveform having waveform bandwidth and duration parameters (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 63 - col. 10, line 24; col. 11, lines 4-14). However, Vishwanath does not disclose that the synchronization signal is obtained according to multiple frequency rasters or multiple operating bands and that a value of B, T, or B/T is defined for each of the multiple frequency rasters or each of the multiple operating bands: The apparatus of claim 6, wherein: the SS is obtained according to multiple frequency rasters or multiple operating bands; and a value of B, T, or B/T is defined for each of the multiple frequency rasters or each of the multiple operating bands. Nevertheless, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches that, when PSS/SSSs are transmitted in different frequency bands, the multiplexing scheme may be applied differently according to channel-bandwidth conditions, including PSS/SSS transmissions below 6 GHz and at 6 GHz or greater (Ko, paras. [0078]-[0080]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to define the applicable bandwidth, duration, or corresponding slope value of Vishwanath's synchronization waveform for each operating band in order to implement the band-specific synchronization-signal structures taught by Ko. The rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 8. Regarding claim 9, Vishwanath teaches a dual-chirp synchronization waveform having waveform bandwidth and duration parameters (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 63 - col. 10, line 24; col. 11, lines 4-14). However, Vishwanath does not disclose that the synchronization signal is obtained according to one of multiple numerologies and that a value of B, T, or B/T is defined for each of the multiple numerologies: The apparatus of claim 6, wherein: the SS is obtained according to one of multiple numerologies; and a value of B, T, or B/T is defined for each of the multiple numerologies. On the other hand, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches synchronization signals using different numerologies, different subcarrier spacings, and different OFDM symbol durations, including matching synchronization-signal time positions across numerology types (“ SS is obtained according to one of multiple numerologies ”, as claimed) and configuring the same transmission period irrespective of different OFDM symbol durations (Ko, paras. [0044]-[0046], [0071 “ the time position of the synchronization signal in Numerology type 1 having a long OFDM symbol duration and the time position of the synchronization signal in Numerology type 2 having a short OFDM symbol duration may match each other as shown in FIG. 7 .”, [0072]-[0074], [0078]-[0079]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to define the applicable duration or corresponding slope value of Vishwanath's synchronization waveform for each numerology in order to implement Ko's numerology-dependent synchronization-signal structures while preserving the intended synchronization-signal timing relationship. The rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 9. Regarding claim 10, Vishwanath discloses: The apparatus of claim 6, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: perform timing offset estimation based on the first beat frequency, the second beat frequency, B, and T. Vishwanath teaches that the detected frequencies of the deswept up-chirp waveform and deswept down-chirp waveform are used to compute the timing offset t0, including the equation t0=(fup−fdn)/2K, and because the chirp slope K corresponds to the swept bandwidth B over period T, the timing offset estimation is based on the first beat frequency, the second beat frequency, B, and T (Vishwanath, col. 21, lines 23-47; col. 9, line 63 - col. 10, line 24; col. 11, lines 4-14). Thus, the rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 10. Regarding claim 12, Vishwanath teaches a synchronization waveform having a defined duration T (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 63 - col. 10, line 24). However, Vishwanath does not expressly disclose that the duration corresponds to an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol duration: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the duration corresponds to an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol duration. Yet, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches synchronization signals transmitted with OFDM symbol durations, including synchronization-signal transmission periods and examples where the OFDM symbol duration for synchronization-signal transmission is the same as or different from the OFDM symbol duration for other channels (Ko, paras. [0073]-[0074], [0079]-[0080]). The rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 12 because Ko teaches implementing synchronization signals using OFDM symbol-duration structures in the same wireless synchronization context. Regarding claim 13, Vishwanath teaches a synchronization signal waveform used for synchronization of a wireless communications terminal (Vishwanath, col. 6, lines 60-65; col. 10, lines 40-60). However, Vishwanath does not expressly disclose that the synchronization signal comprises a primary synchronization signal: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the SS comprises a primary synchronization signal (PSS). However, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches that the synchronization signal of the NR system may include a Primary Synchronization Signal (PSS) and a Secondary Synchronization Signal (SSS) (Ko, paras. [0075]-[0079]). The rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 13 because Ko teaches the PSS as a known synchronization-signal component in the same wireless synchronization framework. Regarding claim 14, Vishwanath teaches that the synchronization waveform is received at a mobile terminal that is a wireless terminal or wireless transceiver, and that the waveform is sent from the gateway station for synchronization of the mobile terminal (Vishwanath, col. 6, lines 31-65). However, Vishwanath does not expressly disclose a UE apparatus further comprising at least one transceiver configured to receive the synchronization signal in the processor-and-memory architecture of claim 1: The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising at least one transceiver configured to receive the SS, wherein the apparatus is configured as a user equipment (UE). Nevertheless, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches a UE including a processor, memory, and transceiver, where the transceiver transmits and receives radio signals and the UE performs synchronization-related processing (Ko, para. [0096]). The rationale set forth with respect to claim 1 also applies to claim 14 because Ko teaches the conventional UE transceiver architecture used to receive synchronization signals. Regarding claim 15, Vishwanath teaches a gateway station transmitting a dual-chirp synchronization waveform to a mobile terminal in a wireless communications system (Vishwanath, col. 6, lines 31-65; col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24). However, Vishwanath does not expressly disclose a memory comprising computer-executable instructions and one or more processors configured to execute the computer-executable instructions: An apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory comprising computer-executable instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to: However, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches a wireless communication device architecture including a processor, memory, and transceiver, where instructions stored in the memory are executable by the processor and the processor performs synchronization-signal-block transmission procedures in the device (Ko, paras. [0096]-[0097]). Further, Vishwanath discloses: output, for transmission, a first frequency modulated continuous waveform (FMCW) signal associated with a frequency that increases in time for a duration according to a first slope; and output, for transmission, a second FMCW signal that overlaps with the first FMCW signal, wherein the second FMCW signal is associated with a frequency that decreases in time for the duration according to a second slope that corresponds to a negative of the first slope, wherein the first FMCW signal and second FMCW signal form a synchronization signal (SS). Vishwanath teaches the gateway station transmitting a dual-chirp waveform that includes an up-chirp waveform whose frequency increases linearly with time and a down-chirp waveform whose frequency decreases linearly with time, the two component waveforms overlapping and together forming the synchronization waveform transmitted to the mobile terminal (Vishwanath, col. 6, lines 60-65; col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24). Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Vishwanath with Ko because Ko teaches implementing synchronization-signal transmission procedures using processor-executed instructions stored in memory in a wireless device and Vishwanath teaches the particular dual-chirp synchronization waveform transmitted from the gateway station. Doing so would have predictably provided a practical hardware and software implementation of Vishwanath's known dual-chirp synchronization-signal transmission in conventional wireless network equipment using processor, memory, and transceiver components taught by Ko. Regarding claim 16, the claim recites: The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the first FMCW signal is output across a frequency band B over a period T, wherein the first slope is B/T and the second slope is −B/T. Claim 16 is analogous to claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons. Regarding claim 17, the claim recites: The apparatus of claim 16, wherein: the SS is generated according to one of multiple frequency rasters or operating bands; and a value of B, T, or B/T is defined for each of the multiple frequency rasters or each of the multiple operating bands. Claim 17 is analogous to claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons. Regarding claim 18, the claim recites: The apparatus of claim 16, wherein: the SS is generated according to one of multiple numerologies; and a value of B, T, or B/T is defined for each of the multiple numerologies. Claim 18 is analogous to claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons. Regarding claim 19, Vishwanath teaches that the gateway station transmits the synchronization waveform to the mobile terminal in the wireless communications system (Vishwanath, col. 6, lines 31-65). However, Vishwanath does not expressly disclose a network-entity apparatus further comprising at least one transceiver configured to transmit the first FMCW signal and the second FMCW signal in the processor-and-memory architecture of claim 15: The apparatus of claim 15, further comprising at least one transceiver configured to transmit the first FMCW signal and the second FMCW signal, wherein the apparatus is configured as a network entity. Yet, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches a base station or eNB including a processor, memory, and transceiver, where the transceiver transmits radio signals and the processor performs a procedure of transmitting the synchronization-signal block (Ko, para. [0096]). The rationale set forth with respect to claim 15 also applies to claim 19 because Ko teaches the conventional network-entity transceiver architecture used to transmit synchronization signals . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vishwanath (US6418158B1) in view of Ko (US20200383129A1) and further in view of Filipovic (US 2007/0189419 A1) . Regarding claim 4, Vishwanath in view of Ko discloses first and second signal paths for the dual-chirp waveform in the acquisition system, including first path 107 and second path 109 coupled respectively to first and second phase shifters and first and second FFT processors (Vishwanath, col. 15, lines 12-30, 37-45; col. 16, lines 11-33). Further, Vishwanath in view of Ko discloses: The apparatus of claim 3, wherein in order to perform the frequency offset estimation, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: process the first FMCW signal via a first signal path; Moreover, Vishwanath in view of Ko discloses two separate signal paths used to estimate the component-waveform frequencies and the resulting frequency offset (Vishwanath, col. 15, lines 12-30, 37-45; col. 21, lines 23-47). However, Vishwanath in view of Ko does not disclose the second signal path merging with the first signal path prior to analog to digital conversion or estimating the beat-frequency difference based on an output of that analog to digital conversion: process the second FMCW signal via a second signal path that merges with the first signal path prior to performing an analog to digital signal conversion; and estimate the difference between the first beat frequency and the second beat frequency based on an output of the analog to digital signal conversion. Nevertheless, Vishwanath in view of Ko and further in view of Filipovic teaches combining multiple analog signal paths before a single ADC and generating a composite digital signal from the ADC output, from which the corresponding digital signals are recovered by digital processing (Filipovic, paras. [0015], [0017], [0019]-[0020]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the dual-path FMCW processing of Vishwanath with Filipovic's single-ADC composite-conversion architecture because Filipovic teaches combining multiple analog signals and converting them with a single ADC to generate a composite digital signal for subsequent digital recovery. Doing so would have predictably reduced front-end converter complexity while still permitting digital recovery of the component signals and associated beat-frequency information from the ADC output . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vishwanath (US6418158B1) in view of Ko (US20200383129A1) and further in view of Jung (US20200280942A1) . Regarding claim 11, Vishwanath in view of Ko teaches a dual-chirp synchronization signal in which the up-chirp waveform and the down-chirp waveform have opposite slopes and are equal in frequency at the midpoint of the waveform duration, and Ko further teaches allowing the time region position and frequency region position of the synchronization signal to coincide across resource structures (Vishwanath, col. 9, line 49 - col. 10, line 24; Ko, paras. [0018]-[0020]). However, Vishwanath in view of Ko does not disclose that this common-time same-frequency condition corresponds to a raster point of the synchronization signal: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the frequency associated with the first FMCW signal and the frequency associated with the second FMCW signal are the same at a time corresponding to a raster point of the SS. Nevertheless, Vishwanath in view of Ko and further in view of Jung teaches that the synchronization raster represents the frequency location of the SS block (i.e., “ FMCW signal are the same at a time corresponding to a raster point of the SS ”) and that the synchronization raster needs to be located at the center of the SS block for initial cell detection (Jung, paras. [0006], [0208] “ The synchronization raster needs to be located at the center of the SS block .” [0209] “ When the synchronization raster is considered, two followings need to be considered for the initial cell detection. [0210] The subcarrier of the SS block needs to be aligned with the subcarrier of the data signal in order to avoid the ICI . [0211] At least one SS block may be located in the CBW of the UE which operates in a minimum CBW ”) Therefore, it would have been obvious to align the known midpoint crossing of Vishwanath's dual-chirp waveform, at which the two component waveforms share the same frequency, with the centered synchronization-raster location of the SS block taught by Jung because Jung teaches that the synchronization raster is the frequency location used for initial cell detection and is placed at the center of the SS block, while Ko teaches maintaining coincident time/frequency positioning for the synchronization signal. Doing so would have predictably positioned the common-frequency crossing of Vishwanath's synchronization waveform at a time corresponding to the raster-point-defined center of the synchronization signal block while retaining Ko's conventional synchronization-signal positioning across resource structures. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHONGSUH (John) PARK whose telephone number is 408-918-7574. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:30 PST 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, Avellino, Joseph can be reached at 571-272-3905 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. /CHONGSUH PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 2478 /JOSEPH E AVELLINO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 2 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 3 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 4 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 5 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 6 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 7 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 8 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 9 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 10 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 11 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 12 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 13 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 14 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 15 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 16 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 17 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 18 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 19 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 18/737,823 Page 20 Art Unit: 2478
Prosecution Insights