in view of Kumar (US 2001/0050926). The Applicants respectfully
`
`traverse these rejections based on the following points.
`
`The Applicants respectfully submit that the applied
`
`references, considered alone or together, fail to teach or
`
`suggest the feature recited in claim 23 of converting information
`
`to a code word having a code-word minimum distance that is
`
`proportional to the measured quality of a downlink channel. The
`
`Final Rejection acknowledges that Tong does not disclose this
`
`feature, but proposes that Kumar discloses it in paragraph 82
`
`(Final Rejection paragraph bring pages 3 and 4). The Applicants
`
`respectfully disagree and submit that this reference in no way
`
`discloses this subject matter.
`
`Kumar discloses, in paragraph 82, a receiver that receives
`
`two code words that were identical when transmitted, but degraded
`
`by the effects of a propagation channel (see Kumar abstract,
`
`lines 7-12). The receiver decodes, presumably using error
`
`correction decoding, both of the received code words and then
`
`re-encodes estimates of the two decoded words to regenerate the
`
`expected pair of error-correction-coded (ECC) code words sent by
`
`the transmitter (182, lines 1-9). Thereafter, the receiver
`
`determines the Hamming distance between each of the regenerated
`
`ECC code words and the corresponding received code word. The
`
`determined Hamming distance is approximately proportional to the
`
`2
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 500
`
`

`

`bit error rate (BER) for the received code word (182, lines 9-
`
`13). When the determined BER estimates for the two code word are
`
`substantially different, the receiver system selects the code
`
`word from the pair with the lower BER (i.e., smaller Hamming
`
`distance) for use in regenerating the communicated information
`
`(!82, lines 14-18). Otherwise, the receiver may combine the two
`
`code words for use in regenerating the communicated information
`
`(182, lines 18-24).
`
`In summary, the only conversion of information to a code
`
`word disclosed by Kumar is the conversion of previously decoded
`
`information back to coded information by an encoding operation.
`
`Presumably, the decoding operation is performed on the received
`
`code word to eliminate the detectable and correctable errors in
`
`the decoded information. Thereafter, the information obtained
`
`through decoding is re-encoded so as to regenerate the code word
`
`the receiver expects was transmitted by its communicating
`
`partner. This regenerated code word is compared to the received
`
`code word to determine the Hamming distance (i.e., bit position
`
`differences) between the two code words, which provides an
`
`indication of the expected BER for the communication.
`
`However, Kumar's receiver does not make a determination
`
`about the communication channel quality until the expected code
`
`word is regenerated and compared to the received code word. As a
`
`3
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 501
`
`

`

`result, it necessarily follows that Kumar cannot disclose
`
`regenerating the expected code word to have a Hamming distance
`
`proportional to the measured channel quality because the channel
`
`quality is not determined until after the expected code word is
`
`regenerated and compared to the received code word.
`
`Moreover, the receiver must regenerate the code word using
`
`the same code used by the transmitter. Since the receiver cannot
`
`determine the channel quality until after the code word is
`
`regenerated, it necessarily follows that both the transmitter and
`
`receiver must use a fixed code having a Hamming distance that is
`
`invariant to the measured channel quality.
`
`Accordingly, the Applicants respectfully submit that the
`
`applied references, considered singly or in combination, do not
`
`teach or suggest the subject matter defined by claim 23. More
`
`specifically, the applied references do not suggest a transmitter
`
`that converts information to a code word, having a code-word
`
`minimum distance that is proportional to the measured quality of
`
`a downlink channel, and then transmits the code word. Therefore,
`
`allowance of claim 23 is warranted.
`
`Claim 25 recites the feature of converting each of a
`
`plurality of digits of information related to channel quality to
`
`a code word having a length proportional to the digit's degree of
`
`significance within the information. The Final Rejection
`
`4
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 502
`
`

`

`acknowledges that Tong does not disclose this feature, but
`
`proposes that Kumar does in paragraph 82 (Final Rejection page 4,
`
`sixth paragraph). The Applicants respectfully disagree and
`
`submit that the reference in no way discloses such subject
`
`matter.
`
`An examination of Kumar's paragraph 82 reveals that Kumar
`
`discloses nothing similar to generating multiple code words
`
`having variable lengths. As a result it necessarily follows that
`
`Kumar cannot disclose generating each of multiple code words
`
`having a length proportional to a digit's degree of significance
`
`in a value represented by multiple digits. Kumar also does not
`
`disclose anything similar to a digit's degree of significance.
`
`Moreover, as discussed in connection with claim 23, Kumar's
`
`receiver does not make a determination about the communication
`
`channel quality until an expected code word is regenerated and
`
`compared to a received code word. As a result, it necessarily
`
`follows that Kumar cannot disclose regenerating expected code
`
`words representing information based on a measured channel
`
`quality because Kumar's receiver must regenerate the expected
`
`code words before the channel quality measurement can be made.
`
`Claim 28 distinguishes over the applied references for
`
`reasons analogous to those provided for distinguishing claim 25.
`
`More specifically, Kumar discloses nothing in the cited
`
`5
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 503
`
`

`

`paragraph, i82, that is similar to coding a most significant bit
`
`of information so that it is less susceptible to error, when
`
`transmitted through a propagation path, than other bits of the
`
`information. Also, claim 28 recites that the information
`
`indicates the measured reception quality of a pilot signal.
`
`Since Kumar's receiver cannot measure the quality of a received
`
`signal until an expected code word of the received signal is
`
`regenerated, it necessarily follows that Kumar cannot disclose
`
`generating an expected code word representing the measured
`
`quality of the received signal. The Final Rejection acknowledges
`
`that Tong does not supplement the teachings of Kumar in this
`
`regard (see Final Rejection page 5, last paragraph).
`
`Accordingly, the Applicants respectfully submit that the
`
`applied references, taken alone or together, do not disclose or
`
`suggest the subject matter defined by claims 25 and 28.
`
`Therefore, allowance of claims 25 and 28 is warranted.
`
`Claim 26 recites transmitting each of a plurality of
`
`informational digits using a transmission power proportionate to
`
`the digit's degree of significance in the information. The Final
`
`Rejection does not propose that either Tong or Kumar teach this
`
`feature.
`
`Instead, the Final Rejection parses the words of the
`
`claimed feature and proposes that: (1) Tong discloses in ii37-38
`
`a transmitter that reports measured channel quality indications
`
`6
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 504
`
`

`

`using a transmission power (see Final Rejection page 4, last 5
`
`lines, and page 5, lines 1-2) and (2) Kumar discloses in 182
`
`representing each of a plurality of digits, providing information
`
`related to a measured channel quality, in a manner proportionate
`
`to the digit's degree of significance in the information (see
`
`Final Rejection page 5, second paragraph). The Applicants
`
`respectfully disagree that either reference discloses the
`
`proposed subject matter.
`
`An examination of Tong's 1137-38 reveals that Tong does not
`
`disclose varying a transmission power.
`
`Instead, Tong discloses
`
`selecting a transmission data rate based upon a reported channel
`
`quality. Since Tong does not disclose varying a transmission
`
`power, it necessarily follows that Tong cannot disclose varying a
`
`transmission power to provide an indication of a measured channel
`
`quality.
`
`As discussed in connection with claim 25, Kumar does not
`
`disclose anything similar to a digit's degree of significance in
`
`paragraph 82. The previous discussion is incorporated herein by
`
`reference.
`
`Accordingly, the Applicants respectfully submit that the
`
`applied references, whether considered individually or together,
`
`do not teach or suggest the subject matter defined by claim 26.
`
`Therefore, allowance of claim 26 is warranted.
`
`7
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 505
`
`

`

`To promote a better understanding of the differences between
`
`the claimed invention and the applied references, the Applicants
`
`provide the following additional remarks.
`
`Claims 23, 25, 26 and 28 all recite a transmitter, and,
`
`accordingly, the invention defined by claims 23, 25, 26, and 28
`
`relates to a communication terminal apparatus at the transmitting
`
`side of a communication.
`
`By contrast to the claimed invention, Kumar discloses a
`
`receiver system that either: (1) combines two (i.e., upper and
`
`lower sideband signal) codeword estimates together to form one
`
`estimate, which is then decoded or (2) selects one of the two
`
`decoded estimates, thereby discarding the remaining decoded
`
`estimate, to determine the received decoded codeword estimate,
`
`which is less likely to be erroneous (see Kumar 181).
`
`In short,
`
`the portion of Kumar's disclosure cited in the Final Rejection
`
`{i.e., 182) discloses a communication receiver.
`
`Accordingly, the invention defined by claims 23, 25, 26 and
`
`28 relates to a transmitter, whereas the cited portion of Kumar
`
`relates to a receiver.
`
`In addition, although Kumar's paragraph 82 may suggest that
`
`the BER of an upper sideband signal codeword and the BER of a
`
`lower sideband signal codeword differ, this difference is caused
`
`passively by noise, interference, or RF propagation channel
`
`8
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 506
`
`

`

`distortion, such as multipath, and is not created actively by the
`
`transmitter (see Kumar 181).
`
`Furthermore, Kumar's upper sideband signal and lower(cid:173)
`
`sideband signal refer to a high frequency signal and a low
`
`frequency signal on the frequency axis, respectively. The upper
`
`and lower sideband regions are located around the conventional
`
`analog FM-band signal and occupy the frequency region from about
`
`a ±100 KHz frequency offset to about a ±200 KHz frequency offset
`
`from the analog FM-band channel's center frequency (see Kumar,
`
`172). Thus, Kumar's upper sideband signal and lower sideband
`
`signal bear no relationship to the most significant bit and the
`
`other bits of information recited in claim 28. Kumar does not
`
`disclose or suggest making the BER of a most significant bit and
`
`the BER of other bits different at the transmitter and
`
`transmitting the information.
`
`Moreover, Kumar does not disclose the coding device, recited
`
`in claim 28, which encodes information such that the most
`
`significant bit of a plurality of bits is less susceptible to
`
`errors in a propagation path than the other bits.
`
`In view of the above, it is submitted that this application
`
`is in condition for allowance and a notice to that effect is
`
`respectfully solicited.
`
`9
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 507
`
`

`

`If any issues remain which may best be resolved through a
`
`telephone communication, the Examiner is requested to telephone
`
`the undersigned at the local Washington, D.C. telephone number
`
`listed below.
`
`Date: January 25, 2006
`JEL/DWW/att
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`~zj(Jwl;c
`
`James E. Ledbetter
`Registration No. 28,732
`
`Attorney Docket No. L9289.02149B
`STEVENS DAVIS, MILLER & MOSHER,
`L.L.P .
`. 1615 L Street, N.W., Suite 850
`P.O. Box 34387
`20043-4387
`Washington, D.C.
`Telephone: (202) 785-0100
`Facsimile: (202) 408-5200
`
`10
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 508
`
`

`

`rminal Disclaimer To Obviate A Double
`atenting Rejection Over A Prior Patent
`
`Docket No.
`L9289.02149B
`
`Serial No.
`
`10/321,623
`
`Filing Date
`
`December 18, 2002
`
`Examiner
`
`D.LE
`
`Group Art Unit
`2683
`
`Invention: COMMUNICATION TERMINAL APPARATUS, BASE STATION APPARATUS, AND RADIO
`
`COMMUNICATION METHOD
`
`Owner of Record: MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL co., LTD.
`
`TO THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS:
`
`percent interest in the instant application hereby disclaims, except as
`100
`The above-identified owner of record of a
`provided below, the terminal part of the statutory term of any patent granted on the instant application, which would extend beyond
`the expiration date of the full statutory term defined in 35 U.S.C. 154 to 156 and 173, as presently shortened by any terminal
`6,760,590
`. The owner hereby agrees that any patent so granted on the instant application shall
`disclaimer, of prior Patent No.
`be enforceable only for and during such period that it and the prior patent are commonly owned. This agreement runs with any
`patent granted on the instant application and is binding upon the grantee, its successors and/or assigns.
`
`..
`
`In making the above disclaimer, the owner does not disclaim the terminal part of any patent granted on the instant
`application that would extend to the expiration date of the full statutory term as defined in 35 U.S.C. 154 to 156 and 173 of the prior
`patent, as presently shortened by any terminal disclaimer, in the event that it later expires for failure to pay a maintenance fee, is
`held unenforceable, is found invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, is statutorily disclaimed in whole or terminally disclaimed
`under 37 C.F.R. 1.321, has all claims cancelled by a reexamination certificate, is reissued, or is in any manner terminated prior to
`the expiration of its full statutory term as presently shortened by any terminal disclaimer.
`
`Check either box 1 or 2 below, if appropriate.
`
`1. 0 For submissions on behalf of an organization (e.g., corporation, partnership, university, government agency, etc.), the
`undersigned is empowered to act on behalf of the organization.
`
`I hereby declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are true and that all statements made on
`information and belief are believed to be true; and further that these statements were made with the knowledge that willful false
`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United
`States Code and that such willful false statements may jeopardize the validity of the application or any patent issued thereon.
`
`2. ~ The undersigned is an attorney of record.
`
`~.Z,~
`
`Dated:
`
`January 25, 2006
`
`James E. Ledbetter, Reg. No. 28,732
`Typed or Printed Name
`Terminal disclaimer fee under 37 C.F.R. 1.20(d) included.
`D PTO suggested wording for terminal disclaimer was unchanged.
`D Certification under 37 C.F .R. 3. 73(b) is required if terminal disclaimer is signed by the assignee.
`
`01/26/200b SZEWDIE1 00000014 10321b23
`01 FC:1814
`130.00 OP
`
`Copyright 1997 Lega1Star
`
`P32/REV01
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 509
`
`

`

`... , -
`~ .~ ..
`. ----------,!Ill.-~----------
`PATENT APPUCA110N EEEDl!1'IRMIHA110N RECORD
`Eft'ecdve .•o._...r 10. 1198
`ClAIM8 A8 FILED• PART I
`-
`11
`
`°'
`
`• 1 tt1e Clfflcaa ta c:dumn t Is less than za,o. tlltel'T In cokmll 2
`CLAIMS AS AMENDED• PART a·
`
`11
`
`,fi
`
`..9Dmtnua• • --·
`jl .... .. :l '
`
`,.
`•
`• ~1111ildenl • .c'
`Ulla
`OF IIU.11PUi Oel 'lll)INT' a.AIU
`AJIST.
`
`Rlilll\8ClfG
`AF'IER
`
`NUMIIBI
`PRIMOUSQ'
`Ml)MII
`
`.. .~
`
`,I(
`
`I
`
`... -..... ~--- .. __ ..,_ __
`
`a-----1i----10R,-_....., _ _
`OR
`-------i---. 1---+---
`----..... i----.OR,_ __ ..... __ ___
`OR
`10TAL ..... ___ OR~ ........ -
`OIHERnwt
`SIIAU.EN'fflY
`ADl)I..
`
`SMALLENmY OR
`ADDI•
`RATE 110NAL
`~ ..
`
`RATe T
`
`31 .
`
`.
`
`l!X1M
`
`D
`
`.....,,.
`--~
`
`,lll
`
`1\
`
`in
`
`-
`
`NUM8IR
`IIEl'IOl8Y
`'MDFOR
`
`....
`.. d.0
`Mina - °I
`
`QAIM
`
`I'-
`
`PREllENT<
`EIC1'RA
`
`. --• -
`
`u
`
`I
`
`1'1111
`
`I' (IS/ o~
`ftElolAIGNG
`AFl'ER
`.
`M1ENDMENI'
`({
`•
`•ud ;a•• • •• i;.r
`AASf PRESENrRION OF MUL11PU!
`.
`.
`.... .., ..... u ......... .., ...... ,. ... ,,.........
`/IV-
`.... ,........,~._.lf'IIIBIIIICIII._._ ..... , .
`. , .. ,__......,~~Flll*lf'Mllllw:illl._11111 .. ..,,.,. -----·
`.................. Ft
`fW(W•UtJI 1 011 ...... ~ ......... C J W,.lllall..._1.
`
`RATE Sr-:-
`
`s::i:s:
`
`.
`
`.ADDI-
`~TE 1IONAL
`/
`OR
`~
`/V ' OR
`OR ~n.--
`
`111:11:C:
`
`--;sm: _
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 510
`
`

`

`Ref
`#
`
`Hits Search Query
`
`DBs
`
`.
`
`.............. .
`
`.... .. . ................... .................
`
`@H~~~·izoooo~o.t\(~od.icclQw.oifo'.k: • osf PG.Pu:a;:
`~Pwhi11hkifo,rfia.t~)•W,th.:lqµa,i11:yj::•:•: • ••Q$P.4t:•:••:::::••:
`~i;ii:1:(¢9.ti¢WP.ri:I c:qcl¢'.:WPri:I ¢.®~H : ·::::
`:::::··
`~pJi:Jv,qr,d)ii!!!··::;;;••••························:::::;;; :: ::: .......... ··················
`
`Default
`Operator
`
`Plurals Time Stamp
`
`Search History 2/7/06 5:18:42 PM Page 1
`C:\Documents and Settings\Dle8\My Documents\EAST\Workspaces\10321623.wsp
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 511
`
`

`

`Application/Control No.
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent under
`Reexamination
`
`10/321,623
`
`MIYOSHI ET AL.
`
`Application Number
`
`*1032162
`3*
`D0cume·n1: cotie•• .. ••01sa·
`
`················································································
`
`...........................................................................
`
`. .
`
`.
`
`. .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`TERMiNAt•T>•
`D1sc1..A1nnta•••
`
`. .
`
`.
`
`. .
`
`. .
`
`. . . . . . . . . . .
`
`: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : '. : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
`
`.•..•.•... P .•.•. · .•. P .•..•.•. R .•. ·.· ... o.•.•.· .•. v.•.•
`·~ •.•. A
`.•.•. e.·
`~
`
`.. •.• ... D.•.• .•.•. •.•. t TH:
`
`: ~ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ; : ; : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ; :
`
`n•o1SAPPROVED •••
`
`LJ ....•••••••••.••.••••••••..•...••..•..
`
`Date Filed : 01-25-06
`
`This patent is subject
`to a Terminal
`Disclaimer
`
`TERMINAL DISCLAIMER APPROVED SENT TO SCANNING ON 02-08-06 BY
`KAREN L. WARD
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 512
`
`

`

`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PA TENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`10/321,623
`
`FILING DATE
`
`12/18/2002
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`CONFIRMATION NO.
`
`Kenichi Miyoshi
`
`L9289.021498
`
`5366
`
`02/23/2006
`7590
`24257
`STEVENS DA VIS MILLER & MOSHER, LLP
`1615 L STREET, NW
`SUITE 850
`WASHINGTON, DC 20036
`
`EXAMINER
`
`LE,DANHC
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2683
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`DA TE MAILED: 02/23/2006
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`PT0-90C (Rev. 10/03)
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 513
`
`

`

`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`
`10/321,623
`
`Examiner
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`MIYOSHI ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2683
`DANH C. LE
`•• The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address ••
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE~ MONTH($) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`• Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1 )1:81 Responsive to communication(s) filed on 25 January 2006.
`2a)O This action is FINAL.
`2b)i:81 This action is non-final.
`3)0 Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 0.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`4)1:81 Claim(s) 21-29 is/are pending in the application.
`4a) Of the above daim(s) __ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`5)1:81 Claim(s) 24 is/are allowed.
`6)[81 Claim(s) 23.25.26 and 28 is/are rejected.
`7)0 Claim(s) __ is/are objected to.
`8)0 Claim(s) __ are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`Application Papers
`
`9)0 The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`10)0 The drawing(s) filed on __ is/are: a)O accepted or b)O objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) induding the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`11 )0 The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PT0-152.
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`a)O All b)O Some* c)O None of:
`1.0 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.0 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. __ .
`3.0 Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`1) [81 Notice of References Cited (PT0-892)
`2) 0 Notice of Draflsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PT0-948)
`3) D Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PT0-1449 or PTO/SB/08)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date __ .
`
`4) 0 Interview Summary (PT0-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date. __ .
`5) 0 Notice of Informal Patent Application (PT0-152)
`6) 0 Other: __ .
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 7-05)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20060207
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 514
`
`

`

`-,
`'
`
`Application/Control Number: 10/321,623
`Art Unit: 2683
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Response to Amendment
`
`1 .. Applicant's request for reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last Office
`
`action is persuasive and, therefore, the finality of that action is withdrawn.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC§ 102
`
`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:
`
`A person shall be entitled to a patent unless -
`
`(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by
`another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent
`granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the
`applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section
`351 (a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States
`only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21 (2)
`of such treaty in the English language.
`
`2. Claims 23, 25, 26, 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102{e) as being anticipated
`
`by Niemelia (US 6,452,914).
`
`As to claim 23, Niemelia teaches a communication terminal apparatus (figure 2,
`
`3, 4 and col.4, lines 2- 65), comprising:
`
`a measuring device (that measures downlink channel quality; and
`
`a transmitter that transmits a notification signal to notify a base station apparatus
`
`of information generated based on said measured downlink channel quality, wherein:
`
`the information of the notification signal, prior to its transmission, is converted to
`
`a code word whose code-word minimum distance is proportional to the degree of
`
`measured downlink channel quality.
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 515
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 10/321,623
`Art Unit: 2683
`
`Page 3
`
`As to claim 25, Niemelia teaches a communication terminal apparatus (figure 1
`
`and paragraph 37-38) comprising:
`
`a measuring device that measures downlink channel quality; and
`
`a transmitter that transmits a notification signal to notify a base station apparatus
`
`of information generated based on said measured downlink channel quality, wherein:
`
`each of a plurality of digits representing the information of the notification signal
`
`is converted, prior to its transmission, to a code word whose code length is proportional
`
`the digit's degree of significance.
`
`As to claim 26, Niemelia inherently teaches a communication terminal apparatus
`
`(figure 2, 3A, B) comprising:
`
`a measuring device that measures downlink channel quality: and
`
`a transmitter that transmits a notification signal to notify a base station apparatus
`
`of information generated based on said measured downlink channel quality, wherein:
`
`the transmitter transmits each of a plurality of digits representing the information
`
`of the notification signal using a transmission power that is proportionate to the digit's
`
`degree of significance.
`
`As to claim 28, Niemelia teaches a communication terminal apparatus (figure 2-5
`
`and clo.4, line 2-col.5, line 23) comprising:
`
`a measuring device that measures reception quality of a pilot signal to output
`
`information having a plurality of bits that indicate the measured reception quality;
`
`a cod'ing device that encodes code word; and
`
`a transmitter that transmits the information to obtain a the code word, wherein:
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 516
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 10/321,623
`Art Unit: 2683
`
`Page4
`
`the coding device encodes the information such that the most significance of the
`
`plurality of bits is less susceptible to errors in a propagation path than other bits of the
`
`plurality of bits.
`
`Claim 24 is allowed.
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`As to claim 24, the teaching of above prior arts either alone or in combination
`
`fails to teach a table that indicates a correspondence between the notification signal and
`
`a code word, a rewriting device that rewrites contents of said table in accordance with a
`
`control signal from the base station apparatus, wherein the transmitter converts the
`
`notification signal, prior to its transmission, to a code word based on the contents of said
`
`table.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to DANH C. LE whose telephone number is 571-272-7868.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00AM-5:00PM.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, WILLIAM TROST can be reached on 571-272-7872. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 517
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 10/321,623
`Art Unit: 2683
`
`Page 5
`
`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).
`
`·~
`
`FirRFMf3~ 0 tttJOq_6E
`PRIMARY EXAMINER
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 518
`
`

`

`Notice of References Cited
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`10/321,623
`
`Examiner
`
`DANH C. LE
`
`Document Number
`Country Code-Number-Kind Code
`
`*
`* A US-6,452,914
`B US-
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`Date
`MM-YYYY
`
`09-2002
`
`Niemela, Kari
`
`Name
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent Under
`Reexamination
`MIYOSHI ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2683
`
`Page 1 of 1
`
`Classification
`
`370/337
`
`C US-
`
`D US-
`
`E US-
`
`F US-
`
`G US-
`
`H US-
`
`I
`
`J
`
`US-
`
`US-
`
`K US-
`
`L US-
`
`M US-
`
`*
`
`Document Number
`Country Code-Number-Kind Code
`
`Date
`MM-YYYY
`
`Country
`
`Name
`
`Classification
`
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`N
`
`0
`
`p
`
`a
`
`R
`
`s
`
`T
`
`u
`
`V
`
`w
`
`X
`
`*
`
`NON-PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`Include as applicable: Author, Title Date, Publisher, Edition or Volume, Pertinent Pages)
`
`*A copy of this reference 1s not bemg furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707 .05(a).)
`Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.
`
`U.S. Patent ard Trademark Office
`PT0-892 (Rev. 01-2001)
`
`Notice of References Cited
`
`Part of Paper No. 20060207
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 519
`
`

`

`Index of Claims
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent under
`Reexamination
`
`II
`
`10/321,623
`Examiner
`
`DANH C. LE
`
`MIYOSHI ET AL.
`Art Unit
`
`2683
`
`II 111
`-
`
`111
`
`1111 111
`
`../ Rejected
`
`= Allowed
`
`(Through numeral)
`Cancelled
`
`N Non-Elected
`
`+
`
`Restricted
`
`I
`
`Interference
`
`A
`
`0
`
`Appeal
`
`Objected
`
`Date
`
`Claim
`
`Date
`
`Claim
`
`Date
`
`'ii!
`C
`u:
`
`'iii
`C
`·en
`·c
`0
`
`1 -
`
`I
`
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`
`21 ·-
`22 N
`23 v
`24 =
`25 V
`26 \I
`27 N
`28 V
`29 IN
`30
`31
`32
`33
`34
`35
`36
`37
`38
`39
`40
`41
`42
`43
`44
`45
`46
`47
`48
`49
`50
`
`1i!
`C
`u:
`
`'iii
`C
`·en
`·c
`0
`51
`52
`53
`54
`55
`56
`57
`58
`59
`60
`61
`62
`63
`64
`65
`66
`67
`68
`69
`70
`71
`72
`73
`74
`75
`76
`77
`78
`79
`80
`81
`82
`83
`84
`85
`86
`87
`88
`89
`90
`91
`92
`93
`94
`95
`96
`97
`98
`99
`100
`
`I" :I Claim
`
`111111 ~ cii
`
`C
`·en
`·c
`0
`101
`102
`103
`104
`105
`106
`107
`108
`109
`110
`111
`112
`113
`114
`115
`116
`117
`118
`119
`120
`121
`122
`123
`124
`125
`126
`127
`128
`129
`130
`131
`132
`133
`134
`135
`136
`137
`138
`139
`140
`141
`142
`143
`144
`145
`146
`147
`148
`149
`150
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. 20060207
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 520
`
`

`

`Search Notes
`
`1111 1111111111111
`
`II
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`10/321,623
`Examiner
`
`DANH C. LE
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent under
`Reexamination
`MIYOSHI ET AL.
`Art Unit
`
`2683
`
`. SEARCHED
`
`SEARCH NOTES
`(INCLUDING SEARCH STRATEGY)
`
`Class
`
`Subclass
`
`Date
`
`Examiner
`
`DATE
`
`EXMR
`
`--:A ,...T ~ K u-v-L±i
`t ~ . '-',tit'(.-
`( u~ I u~ PU~ ) I
`
`r:. .•
`
`I
`
`1
`nc.
`
`~71
`I
`I
`
`DCL
`
`~'10
`
`~~rJ
`4'1Ci
`
`!l 7 '1'1
`
`OC\
`
`INTERFERENCE SEARCHED
`
`Class
`
`Subclass
`
`Date
`
`Examiner
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. 20060207
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 521
`
`

`

`UNITED ST A TES PA TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`FILING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Addrc,s: COMMISSIONER FOR PA TENTS
`P.O. Box 14SO
`Alexandria, Virginia 223 l 3-l 4SO
`www.uspt0.gov
`
`I ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. I CONFIRMATION NO.
`
`10/321,623
`
`12/18/2002
`
`Kenichi Miyoshi
`
`L9289.02149B
`
`5366
`
`7590
`24257
`03/01/2006
`STEVENS DA VIS MILLER & MOSHER, LLP
`1615 L STREET, NW
`SUITE 850
`WASHINGTON, DC 20036
`
`EXAMINER
`
`LE,DANHC
`
`ART UNIT
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`2683
`
`DATE MAILED: 03/01/2006
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`PT0-90C (Rev. 10/03)
`
`IPR2018-1556
`HTC EX1002, Page 522
`
`

`

`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`10/321,623
`
`Examiner
`
`MIYOSHI ET AL.
`
`Art Unit
`
`2683
`DANH C. LE
`-· The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address -(cid:173)
`Period for Reply
`I
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE~ MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of
`-
`is communication.
`).
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 1
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months af