DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1, 3-6, 8, and 10-14 are pending in this application for reissue of US Patent 10,580,415 (hereinafter “the '415 patent”) issued from application no. 15/978,342 (“the ‘342 application”). Claims 1-16 are original patent claims. In this reissue application, claim 1 has been amended and claims 2, 7, 9, 15-16 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 3-6, 8, and 10-14 are currently pending. This Office Action is responsive to the arguments filed on October 24, 2025, in response (“the Response”) to the Non-Final Office Action issued on July 15, 2025. Claims have not been amended in the Response.
Prior or Concurrent Proceedings
2. 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 the ‘415 patent is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation.
Information Material to Patentability
3. 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.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
4. The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 251
5. Applicant argues that the rejection based upon a defective reissue declaration should be withdrawn because Applicant submitted a supplemental declaration. However, the record does not indicate that a supplemental declaration was submitted. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
Double Patenting – Non-Statutory
6. Applicant has filed a terminal disclaimer to overcome the double-patenting rejection. Corresponding rejection is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. Applicant asserts that a patch generator and other elements are not taught by Villemoes allegedly because Villamoes is either silent or does not disclose any block based issues. Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. For example, Applicant asserts that “Fig. 1 is a continuous representation that does not disclose any block-based issues” (Remarks, p. 5, 1st paragraph). This assertion is in direct contradiction of the actual disclosure on p. 7, l. 12-13 (7:12-13) where Villamoes states that “Fig. 1 illustrates the operation of a block based transposer using transposition orders of 2, 3, and 4 in a HFR enhanced decoder frame work;” (emphasis added).
Applicant’ other arguments are not persuasive because they are also based on the false premise that Villemoes does not disclose block based signal processing.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 251
8. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §251 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(a) IN GENERAL.—Whenever any patent is, through error, deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective specification or drawing, or by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had a right to claim in the patent, the Director shall, on the surrender of such patent and the payment of the fee required by law, reissue the patent for the invention disclosed in the original patent, and in accordance with a new and amended application, for the unexpired part of the term of the original patent. No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue.
9. Claims 1, 3-6, 8, and 10-14 are rejected as being based upon a defective reissue declaration under 35 U.S.C. 251. See 37 CFR 1.175. The nature of the defect(s) in the October 27, 2017 Declaration is set forth below.
The reissue oath/declaration filed with this application is defective because it fails to properly identify at least one error which is relied upon to support the reissue application. See 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP § 1414. MPEP 1414 II.(B) 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.” The statement of error in the oath/declaration fails to specifically identify an error. "Any error in the claims must be identified by reference to the specific claim(s) and the specific claim language wherein lies the error." See MPEP 1414 II. (C).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
10. 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 pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
11. Claims 1, 3-6, and 8 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Villemoes.
12. With respect to claim 1, Villemoes discloses an apparatus for generating a bandwidth extended signal from a bandwidth limited audio signal, the bandwidth limited audio signal comprising a plurality of consecutive bandwidth limited time blocks, each bandwidth limited time block comprising at least one associated spectral band replication parameter comprising a core frequency band and the bandwidth extended signal comprising a plurality of consecutive bandwidth extended time blocks, the apparatus comprising:
a patch generator (FIG. 1, 103; see also FIG 26, 1010 and 1020) for generating a patched signal comprising an upper frequency band (see p. 15, ll. 8-10 or 15:8-10) using a bandwidth limited time block (7:13-14) of the bandwidth limited audio signal (see also FIG 26, input and output);
wherein the patch generator is configured to perform a harmonic patching algorithm (32:15-17; see also 16:28-34) to acquire the patched signal;
wherein the apparatus is configured to acquire the bandwidth extended signal depending on the patched signal (see FIG. 1; see also 32:7-8);
wherein the patch generator is configured to perform the harmonic patching algorithm for a current bandwidth extended time block of the plurality of consecutive bandwidth extended time blocks using a timely preceding bandwidth limited time block of the plurality of consecutive bandwidth limited time blocks of the bandwidth limited audio signal (see FIG. 2, 204 and 16:15-24);
wherein the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block timely precedes the current bandwidth limited time block in the plurality of consecutive bandwidth limited time blocks of the bandwidth limited audio signal (16:15-24),
the apparatus further comprising
a signal manipulator (FIG 26, envelope adjuster 1030) for manipulating the patched signal generated using the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block using a spectral band replication parameter associated with current bandwidth limited time block to acquire a manipulated patched signal comprising the upper frequency band.
13. With respect to claim 3, Villemoes discloses the apparatus in accordance with claim 1,
wherein the patch generator is configured for applying the harmonic patching algorithm to the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block using a bandwidth extension factor of two (15:25-28);
wherein the patch generator is configured for generating from the core frequency band of the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block a first target frequency band of the current bandwidth extended time block (16:15-24); and
wherein the patch generator is configured for applying a copy-up patching algorithm (9:1-6) for copying up the first target frequency band of the current bandwidth extended time block generated from the core frequency band of the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block to a second target frequency band of the current bandwidth extended time block.
14. With respect to claim 4, Villemoes discloses the apparatus in accordance with claim 1,
wherein the patch generator is configured for applying the harmonic patching algorithm to the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block using a bandwidth extension factor of two (15:25-28);
wherein the patch generator is configured for generating from the core frequency band of the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block a first target frequency band of the current bandwidth extended time block (16:15-24);
wherein the patch generator is configured for applying the harmonic patching algorithm to the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block using a bandwidth extension factor of three (15:25-28); and
wherein the patch generator is configured for generating from the core frequency band of the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block a second target frequency band of the current bandwidth extended time block (16:15-24).
15. With respect to claim 5, Villemoes discloses the apparatus in accordance with claim 1, wherein the patch generator is configured for continuously applying the harmonic patching algorithm to each bandwidth limited time block of the bandwidth limited audio signal (see FIG 1, input to the system is a bit stream).
16. With respect to claim 6, Villemoes discloses the apparatus in accordance with claim 1, further comprising:
a provider for providing a patching algorithm information (5:33-35, application of a patching scheme that applies a mixed patching consisting of harmonic patching and copy-up patching requires a provider to provide the algorithm information);
wherein the patch generator is configured for performing a copy-up patching algorithm for a timely preceding bandwidth extended time block using the timely preceding bandwidth limited time block or a timely succeeding bandwidth limited time block for a timely succeeding bandwidth extended time block, the timely succeeding bandwidth limited time block timely succeeding the current bandwidth limited time block (5:33-35);
wherein the patch generator is configured for using the patched signal for the current bandwidth extended time block generated from the harmonic patching algorithm in response to the patching algorithm information (5:33-35).
17. With respect to claim 8, Villemoes discloses the apparatus in accordance with claim 6, wherein the provider is configured for providing the patching algorithm information in dependence on a signal analysis of the bandwidth limited audio signal (see 4:12-19, and 5:33-35, application of patching algorithms is in dependence on signal analysis filter banks of the input audio signal).
Conclusion
18. 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 extension fee 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 Woo H Choi whose telephone number is (571) 272-4179. The examiner can normally be reached on weekdays between 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, Hetul Patel can be reached on 571-272-4184. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Woo H. Choi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/Cameron Saadat/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/ALEXANDER J KOSOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992