DETAILED ACTION
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 Remarks
This Office action is considered fully responsive to the amendments filed 08/12/2026.
a) Claims 1-8 are pending in the application, claims 1, 5 and 6 have been amended, claim 8 has been added, and claims 2-4 and 7 were previously presented.
b) The Claim objection is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments.
c) The objection to the Specification is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments.
d) The Claim Interpretation has recital the structure regarding claims 1 and 6.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, filed 08/12/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of (US-20250184199-A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munier et al. (US-20220278881-A1), in view of Liu et al. (US-20250184199-A1).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Munier teaches terminal comprising (Figs. 1-2 show the terminal (UE) as a part of the method and an interactions between the gNodeB and the device (e.g., UE ) is supported via the Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol, as stated in [0003], lines 15-17): a receiver that receives a configuration related to a transmission comb of a sounding reference signal (SRS) (claims 1 and 18 explicitly state “receiving a configuration from a network node configuring a sounding reference signal, SRS, pattern within a resource, the SRS pattern being based at least in part on at least one of a comb size, at least one comb offset, at least one cyclic shift and a number of orthogonal frequency division multiplexing, OFDM, symbols within the resource; and transmitting a SRS to the network node using the SRS pattern.” That implies the UE can receive, through the radio interface (as a receiving section shown in Fig. 3 and described in [0093] and [0096]) configuration related to a transmission comb of a sounding reference signal (SRS), and the UE then transmit SRS using this configuration as required, see also [0054], [0113] and claim 8); the configuration including cyclic shift indexes based on a maximum number of cyclic shifts ([0051] states ,“ a maximum number of cyclic shifts is a multiple of a number of cyclic shifts in a legacy radio access technology. In some embodiments of this aspect, a maximum number of cyclic shifts is configured at least one of: as part of a resource configuration of the resource; per resource; and independently of the comb size.” [0131] and [0209] describe the maximum CS count is configurable and the actual CS is an index bounded by the maximum CS. [0240]-[0241] clearly link the configured CS index to the configured maximum number of CSs. See also [0056], [0130] and [0238]-[0239] that describe the relationship/dependence between them);
Munier does not explicitly teach and a processor that determines, when a bandwidth of the SRS is narrower than a bandwidth to which the maximum number of cyclic shifts is applicable, a cyclic shift index based on the configuration and the bandwidth of the SRS.
However, Liu teaches a processor that determines, when a bandwidth of the SRS is narrower than a bandwidth to which the maximum number of cyclic shifts is applicable, a cyclic shift index based on the configuration and the bandwidth of the SRS ([0009] and [0075] provide that the UE receives SRS configuration to specify the comb size then transmits the number of applicable Cs values, the sequence length based on the actual SRS BW, comb size and frequency sounding factor. Thus, the sequence length can be reduced lower than the nominal maximum CS count , as illustrated, for example, in [0067]. [0061] further describes the UE can use only odd or even CS values, as an example for narrowing allocation. [0015] provides the example for Comb 4, P=2, the nominal maximum 12 CSs: the applicable CS values are 0, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10, or 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11. Therefore, the narrower allocation determines the allowable CS subset while the comb configuration determines which subset rule can be applied, [0077], [0059]. [0010] states “Accordingly, when the SRS sequence length is shorter than the maximum number of CSs, additional rule is required to ensure that the resultant SRS sequences corresponding to the allowed CS values for a SRS resource are orthogonal”. See also claim 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Munier to incorporate the teachings of Liu (in analogous art) by adding the maximum number of the cyclic shifts does not depend on the bandwidth to ensure that the resultant SRS sequences corresponding to the allowed CS values for a SRS resource are orthogonal (Liu, [0010]).
Regarding claim 2 (Original) Munier and Liu teach the terminal according to claim 1,
Munier further teaches wherein the number of the transmission combs and the maximum number of the cyclic shifts depend on the bandwidth ([0050] provides how to use the configuration and the SRS bandwidth (SRS BW) to determine the number of transmission combs (comb size). [0192] describes the larger BW can supports higher combs size, hence the UE can use more transmission combs as configured by the network, see also examples in [0113], claim 9 , [0047] and Table 1. [0227] states “It is possible to use comb 12 for SRS transmission, with the minimum SRS bandwidth to be a multiple of 12 PRBs up to 24 PRBs, and 4 PRBs afterward.” Which also confirms number of the transmission combs based on the SRS bandwidth. [0114] states “a maximum number of cyclic shifts is configured at least one of: as part of a resource configuration of the resource; per resource; and independently of the comb size” and [0051] explains that the SRS configuration, including the maximum number of cyclic shifts, can be set as a part of the resource configuration that sent to the U, where the maximum number of cyclic shifts is a multiple of a number of cyclic shifts in a legacy radio access technology, as stated in [0055]. [0128]-[0130] lines 1-10, and Table B provides that the number of cyclic shifts may depend on the SRS bandwidth).
Regarding claim 3 (Original), Munier and Liu teach the terminal according to claim 1,
Munier does not explicitly teach wherein the maximum number of the cyclic shifts does not depend on the bandwidth.
However, Liu teaches wherein the maximum number of the cyclic shifts does not depend on the bandwidth ([0007] states “For Comb-8, one issue is the maximum number of cyclic shifts (CSs) supported for Comb-8.”and “NR Release 15 specifies that the maximum number of CSs for Comb-2 is 8, and the maximum number of CSs for Comb-4 is 12.” That also indicated Table 3, Figs. 1 Step 104, Fig. 2 Step 204, Figs. 4-5, [0009]-[0010], [0047], which confirms that the maximum number of CSs may set by the transmission comb size, linked only with comb size, not by the SRS BW. However, [0068] and [0081] describe the applicable number of the cyclic shifts ( applicable CS values) can be effected by the SRS BW, since the applicable number of CSs based on the SRS sequence length).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Munier to incorporate the teachings of Liu (in analogous art) by adding the maximum number of the cyclic shifts does not depend on the bandwidth to ensure that the resultant SRS sequences corresponding to the allowed CS values for a SRS resource are orthogonal (Liu, [0010]).
Regarding claim 4 (Previously Presented), Munier and Liu teach the terminal according to claim 2,
Munier further teaches wherein the number of the cyclic shift depends on the bandwidth ([0128]-[0130] lines 1-10, and Table B provides that the number of cyclic shifts may depend on the SRS bandwidth as stated, “As seen in Table B, the available number of cyclic shifts, at least for frequency 1 (FR1), is much larger than the currently configurable values for SRS.” [0054] states “the configuration specifying the SRS pattern is a radio resource control, RRC, configuration and the SRS pattern is shifted in frequency according to a comb offset parameter in the RRC configuration.” That implies the number of the cyclic shift depends on the bandwidth).
As to claims 5, see similar rejections to claim 1, the apparatus teaches the method.
Regarding claim 6 (Currently Amended), Munier teaches a base station comprising (Figs. 1-3, and [0071] provides the different types of network node, including the base station, as states “ The term “network node” used herein can be any kind of network node comprised in a radio network which may further comprise any of base station (BS)”): a transmitter configured to transmit a configuration related to a transmission comb of a sounding reference signal (SRS) ([0014] describes how the BS can connected with the terminal WD/UE to transmit the SRS configuration. claims 1 and 18 explicitly state “receiving a configuration from a network node configuring a sounding reference signal, SRS, pattern within a resource, the SRS pattern being based at least in part on at least one of a comb size, at least one comb offset, at least one cyclic shift and a number of orthogonal frequency division multiplexing, OFDM, symbols within the resource; and transmitting a SRS to the network node using the SRS pattern.” That implies the BS can transmit, through the radio interface (as a transmitting section shown in Fig. 3 and described in [0093] and [0096]) configuration related to a transmission comb of a sounding reference signal (SRS), see also [0054], [0113] and claim 8), the configuration including cyclic shift indexes based on a maximum number of cyclic shifts ([0051] states ,“ a maximum number of cyclic shifts is a multiple of a number of cyclic shifts in a legacy radio access technology. In some embodiments of this aspect, a maximum number of cyclic shifts is configured at least one of: as part of a resource configuration of the resource; per resource; and independently of the comb size.” [0131] and [0209] describe the maximum CS count is configurable and the actual CS is an index bounded by the maximum CS. [0240]-[0241] clearly link the configured CS index to the configured maximum number of CSs. See also [0056], [0130] and [0238]-[0239] that describe the relationship/dependence between them); and processor configured to control reception of the SRS (Fig. 3 and [0094]-[0095] describe the processing circuitry 68 may be configured to control any of the methods and/or processes described herein and/or to cause such methods, and/or processes to be performed, e.g., by BS” which indicates the using of control circuit to perform the method procedure, as stated “For example, processing circuitry 68 of the network node 16 may include SRS pattern unit 32 which is configured to determine a sounding reference signal (SRS) pattern within a resource, each symbol of the SRS pattern being configured to have specific comb offset or cyclic shift.”),
Munier does not explicitly teach wherein a cyclic shift index based on the configuration and the bandwidth of the SRS is determined when a bandwidth of the SRS is narrower than a bandwidth to which the maximum number of cyclic shifts is applicable.
However, Liu teaches wherein a cyclic shift index based on the configuration and the bandwidth of the SRS is determined when a bandwidth of the SRS is narrower than a bandwidth to which the maximum number of cyclic shifts is applicable ([0009] and [0075] provide that the UE receives SRS configuration to specify the comb size then transmits the number of applicable Cs values, the sequence length based on the actual SRS BW, comb size and frequency sounding factor. Thus, the sequence length can be reduced lower than the nominal maximum CS count , as illustrated, for example, in [0067]. [0061] further describes the UE can use only odd or even CS values, as an example for narrowing allocation. [0015] provides the example for Comb 4, P=2, the nominal maximum 12 CSs: the applicable CS values are 0, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10, or 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11. Therefore, the narrower allocation determines the allowable CS subset while the comb configuration determines which subset rule can be applied, [0077], [0059]. [0010] states “Accordingly, when the SRS sequence length is shorter than the maximum number of CSs, additional rule is required to ensure that the resultant SRS sequences corresponding to the allowed CS values for a SRS resource are orthogonal”. See also claim 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Munier to incorporate the teachings of Liu (in analogous art) by adding the maximum number of the cyclic shifts does not depend on the bandwidth to ensure that the resultant SRS sequences corresponding to the allowed CS values for a SRS resource are orthogonal (Liu, [0010]).
Regarding claim 7 (Previously Presented), Munier and Liu teach the terminal according to claim 3,
Munier further teaches wherein the number of the cyclic shift depends on the bandwidth (([0128]-[0130] lines 1-10, and Table B provides that the number of cyclic shifts may depend on the SRS bandwidth as stated, “As seen in Table B, the available number of cyclic shifts, at least for frequency 1 (FR1), is much larger than the currently configurable values for SRS.” [0054] states “the configuration specifying the SRS pattern is a radio resource control, RRC, configuration and the SRS pattern is shifted in frequency according to a comb offset parameter in the RRC configuration.” That implies the number of the cyclic shift depends on the bandwidth).
Regarding Claim 8 (New), Munier and Liu teach the terminal according to claim 1,
Munier does not explicitly teach wherein the processor determines one of the discrete cyclic shift indexes that maximize an angle between SRSs corresponding to adjacent cyclic shift indexes from among the cyclic shift indexes included in the configuration, as the cyclic shift index to be actually applied.
However, Liu teaches wherein the processor determines one of the discrete cyclic shift indexes that maximize an angle between SRSs corresponding to adjacent cyclic shift indexes from among the cyclic shift indexes included in the configuration, as the cyclic shift index to be actually applied (Claim 4 and [0015] confirms that the sets, for example {0, 2, 4, 6} or {1, 3, 5 , 7} for Comb 2 and {0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10} or {1, 3, 5 , 7, 9, 11} for Comb 4/8 are discrete and uniformly spaced by two CS index location. [0009]-[0010], [0015] and [0019] provides the restriction of the CS values to alternating, index-spaced sets to maintain orthogonality).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Munier to incorporate the teachings of Liu (in analogous art) by adding the maximum number of the cyclic shifts does not depend on the bandwidth to ensure that the resultant SRS sequences corresponding to the allowed CS values for a SRS resource are orthogonal (Liu, [0010]).
Relevant Prior Art
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Wang et al. (US-20230396379-A1), Jacobsson et al. (US-20240187188-A1), Li et al. (CN-101384055-A), Nishikawa et al. (AU-2014265044-A1), and Ouchi et al (US-20150124673-A1) provide flexible and efficient configuration of SRS method in wireless network systems.
Conclusion
7. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SANAA S AL SAMAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4171. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/SANAA AL SAMAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights