DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the Applicant’s response filed on April 17, 2026. As set forth in the Applicant’s response, claims 18-20 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Reissue Applications
For reissue applications filed before September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the law and rules in effect on September 15, 2012. Where specifically designated, these are “pre-AIA ” provisions.
For reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the current provisions.
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceeding in which Patent No. 9,099,078 is or was involved. These proceedings would include any trial before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, interferences, reissues, reexaminations, supplemental examinations, and litigation.
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is material to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue application.
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.
Response to Arguments
Specification
The Examiner notes that in response to the previous objection to the specification, the Applicant amends the specification in order to list the application numbers of the copending application. The Examiner acknowledges the correction to the application numbers of the amended specification; however, the Examiner notes that the Applicant states that the amendment is to “page 1 of the Specification”. It is noted that the amendment must be made to the original patent specification and thus should not be in reference to “page 1”. In this case, the amendment should list both the column and line number of US Patent 9,099,078 for which a correction is being made.
Therefore, the objection to the specification will be maintained.
Reissue Declaration
The Examiner acknowledges that the Applicant has submitted a replacement reissue declaration. The Examiner notes, however, that the previous non-final office action cited two issues. The first being with respect to the ‘attachment’ to the reissue declaration being clearly linked to the reissue declaration as well as certain language in the error statement and the second issue being with respect to box 1.46 of the reissue declaration.
With respect to the first issue, the Examiner finds that the Applicant has corrected this issue and therefore, the rejection to this first issue will be withdrawn. However, the replacement reissue declaration continues to indicate that the application for the original patent was filed under 37 CFR 1.46 by the assignee.
It is noted that the record does not show that the application for the original patent was filed under 37 CFR 1.46. The Examiner notes that 37 CFR 1.46 is only applicable to a patent application filed, on or after September 16, 2012. It is noted that US Patent Application 13/191,236 (US Patent 9,099,078) was filed on July 26, 2011.
Therefore, the rejection to claims as being based on a defective reissue declaration will be maintained.
Claim Interpretation and 35 U.S.C 112
The Applicant maintains that the claim language explicitly defines that the upmixer is implemented using a hardware apparatus, or using a computer, or using a combination of a hardware apparatus and a computer and that such a definition is sufficient because there is no need for a more detailed structural disclosure, i.e. the person skilled in the art would know how to implement the clamed functionality of the upmixer and of the parameter applier using a hardware apparatus, or using a computer, or using a combination of a hardware apparatus and a computer.
In addition, the Applicant states that Figures 2A and 2B and the equations within the description define the functionality to be implemented in uc detail, and the person skilled in the art is well aware how to implement such functionality using a hardware apparatus, or using a computer, or using combination of a hardware apparatus and a computer without requiring further explanation. The Applicant further states that Figures 2A and 2B disclose a certain processing order and information flow, which means that they actually define a “structure” of an implementation, e.g. a structure of a hardware, in the sense of a signal flow, or a structure of a software running on a computer, e.g., in the sense of a processing order and an information flow.
The Applicant states that a parameter applier is shown in Figure 2A at reference numeral 240 and that Figure 2A explicitly shows that the matrix vector multiplier is part of the parameter applier.
The Examiner acknowledges that Figure 1, 2A and 2B (as illustrated below) is directed to an upmixer which includes inter alia, a parameter applier. See also col. 6, line 62 - col. 7, line 16.
PNG
media_image1.png
499
786
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
541
777
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In view of the Applicant’s arguments and their reference to Figures 2A and 2B, and upon further review of col. 7, lines 40-col. 12, line 18 (detailed description of Figures 2A and 2B), the Examiner finds the Applicant’s arguments persuasive. Thus, the 112 2nd paragraph rejections will be withdrawn.
Double Patenting
The terminal disclaimer filed on April 17, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of 19/030,638, 19/030,830, 19/030,770, 19/030,718, 19/030,864, 19/031,786, 19/031,817, 19/031,795, and 19/031,833 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on January 15, 2026, November 13, 2025 and November 10, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The claims filed on April 17, 2026 presents claims that do not comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b), which sets forth the manner of making amendments in reissue applications.
The Examiner notes that new claims 18-20 are not underlined in accordance with 37 CFR 1.173(d)(2) which states that matter to be added by reissue must be underlined.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The amendment to the specification, filed on April 17, 2026 does not refer to the original patent specification (both the column and line number should be listed) for amending the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Reissue Declaration
The reissue oath/declaration filed on April 17, 2026 is defective (see 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP § 1414) because of the following:
The Examiner notes that the reissue declaration checks the 1.46 box which states that “the application for the original patent was field under 37 CFR 1.46 by the assignee of the entire interest.” However, a review of the application for the original patent does not show that it was filed under 37 CFR 1.46.
Claims 18-20 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.
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 Ovidio Escalante whose telephone number is (571)272-7537. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday - 6:00 AM to 2:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Fuelling, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-7537. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/Ovidio Escalante/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3992
/MATTHEW E HENEGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992 /M.F/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Prosecution Insights