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. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. FILLIN "Insert series code and serial no. of parent." GR20220100075 , filed on FILLIN "Enter the date filing of the parent application." 01/27/2022 and parent Application No. PCT/US2022/080422, filed on 11/23/2022. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means,” and are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are found in claims 24 and 25 : “ FILLIN "Identify each claim limitation." \d "[ 1 ]" means for de fining one or more groups of antennas ” and “ means for sending, to a network entity of a wireless network, data” and “ means for receiving configuration data” and “ means for, based on the configuration data, sending or receiving reference signals” in claim 24 “ means for sending, to the network entity, information” in claim 25 Structure for th ese limitation s may be found in the specification as originally filed: F ig. 10 example of UE, Fig. 11 example of base station, Fig. 12 example of computer system, as well as claims 15 and 16, provide a detailed example wireless network node with components such as a memory, wireless communication interface, antennas, and processors for communication that can carry out the various actions of claims 24-25. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim s 28 -30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Regarding independent claim 28, t he claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it recites transitory signals. Claim 28 recites " A computer-readable apparatus comprising a storage medium, the storage medium comprising a plurality of instructions configured to, when executed by one or more processors… " . The specification clarifies the meaning of the computer -readable apparatus on page 1 8 , paragraph 0165 : " A set of these instructions and/or code might be stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, such as the storage device(s) 1225 described above. In some cases, the storage medium might be incorporated within a computer system, such as computer system 1200. In other embodiments, the storage medium might be separate from a computer system (e.g., a removable medium, such as an optical disc), and/or provided in an installation package, such that the storage medium can be used to program, configure, and/or adapt a general purpose computer with the instructions/code stored thereon. These instructions might take the form of executable code, which is executable by the computer system 1200 and/or might take the form of source and/or installable code, which, upon compilation and/or installation on the computer system 1200 (e.g., using any of a variety of generally available compilers, installation programs, compression/decompression utilities, etc.), then takes the form of executable code. " The specification further discloses on pg. 18, paragraph 0167 : “ Additionally or alternatively, the machine-readable media might be used to store and/or carry such instructions/code. In many implementations, a computer-readable medium is a physical and/or tangible storage medium. Such a medium may take many forms, including but not limited to, non-volatile media and volatile media. ” Therefore, because the BRI of the claim covers both subject matter that falls within a statutory category (e.g., non-volatile media, non-transitory computer readable storage media), as well as subject matter that does not (e.g., storage media not specified to be non-transitory), the claim as a whole is not to a statutory category and thus fails the first criterion for eligibility. See MPEP 2106(II). Claims 29 and 30 are rejected for being dependent on claim 28 and also do not narrow the scope of claim 28 to direct the claimed invention to eligible subject matter. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (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. Claim(s) FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 1-3, 6-8, 12, 14-17, 19-20, 23-25, 27-28, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 FILLIN "Insert either \“(a)(1)\” or \“(a)(2)\” or both. If paragraph (a)(2) of 35 U.S.C. 102 is applicable, use form paragraph 7.15.01.aia, 7.15.02.aia or 7.15.03.aia where applicable." \d "[ 2 ]" (a)(2) as being FILLIN "Insert either—clearly anticipated—or—anticipated—with an explanation at the end of the paragraph." \d "[ 3 ]" anticipated by FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 4 ]" Zhang et al. (US 20200413366 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses A method for supporting positioning of a user equipment (UE) in a wireless network, the method comprising (see pg. 1, paragraph 0002, “The disclosure relates to methods and devices in wireless communication systems, and in particular to a method and a device supporting positioning”; Fig. 1, UE 201) : defining one or more groups of antennas associated with a wireless network node (see Fig. 10, antenna groups with various beam directions and RF chains; pg. 10, paragraph 0271, “one antenna port is formed by antennas in a positive integer number of antenna group(s) through antenna virtualization superposition; one antenna group includes a positive integer number of antenna(s)”) , each of the one or more groups of antennas grouped according to at least a phase-based parameter correlated with an electromagnetic characteristic of a plurality of antennas (see Fig. 10, phase shifters; pg. 10, paragraph 0271 , beamforming vectors corresponding to antenna groups; pg. 10, paragraph 0273, beam directions correspond to beamforming vectors and antenna ports ) ; sending, to a network entity of the wireless network, data identifying the defined one or more groups of antennas (see Fig. 5, S20 second node N2 transmit s second information signal, S10 first node N1 receives second information signal ; see pg. 2, paragraph 0052, “In one embodiment, the second information includes partial or all IEs in an E-CID MEASUREMENT INITIATION REQUEST.” ) ; receiving configuration data from the network entity, the configuration data identifying at least one group of antennas of the one or more groups of antennas (see Fig. 5, S31 target node N3 receives signals; pg. 7, paragraph 0194, “A target terminal N3 receives Q1 first-type radio signal(s), and obtains Q1 piece(s) of channel information according to the received Q1 first-type radio signal(s) respectively in S31, and transmits a first radio signal in S32.”) ; and based on the configuration data, sending or receiving reference signals with the wireless network node using the identified at least one group of antennas of the one or more groups of antennas, the reference signals configured to be used in the positioning of the UE (see pg. 8, paragraph 0213, “the first node N1 is a base station, and the Q1 first-type radio signals are all PRSs.”; pg. 8, paragraph 0216, “the first node N1 is a base station, and the Q1 first-type radio signals are all PRSs.”; Fig. 5, F2 S2 determining position of a target terminal) . Regarding claim 2, Zhang further discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising sending, to the network entity, information relating to a capability of the wireless network node, the capability indicative of whether the wireless network node is configured to support usage of multiple groups of the plurality of antennas grouped according to at least the phase-based parameter ( see Abstract, “the first information includes a first Identifier (ID) and Q1 piece(s) of channel information, and the first information is used for indicating Q1 geographic position(s); the Q1 piece(s) of channel information is(are) based on a channel measurement(s) performed by a target node for the Q1 spatial parameter group(s) respectively”; Fig. 5, all three nodes can communicate with each other ) . Regarding claim 3, Zhang further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the wireless network node comprises a base station, the UE, or a peer UE different from the UE (see pg. 8, paragraphs 0213-0216, the network node can be a base station or a UE) . Regarding claim 6, Zhang further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the sending or receiving of the reference signals is further based on a request from the network entity (see pg. 2, paragraph 0052, “In one embodiment, the second information includes partial or all IEs in an E-CID MEASUREMENT INITIATION REQUEST.”) . Regarding claim 7, Zhang further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the reference signals comprise an uplink reference signal or a downlink reference signal, the uplink reference signal comprising a sounding reference signal (SRS), the downlink reference signal comprising a positioning reference signal (PRS) (see pg. 8, paragraph 0216, “the Q1 first-type radio signals are all PRSs.”) . Regarding claim 8, Zhang further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the network entity comprises a base station or a location management function (LMF) (see pg. 2, paragraph 0057, “In one embodiment, the second node is a Location Management Function (LMF).”) . Regarding claim 12, Zhang further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the positioning of the UE comprises either ( i ) performing an angle of departure ( AoD ) measurement based at least on the reference signals sent with the wireless network node using the identified at least one group of antennas, or (ii) performing an angle of arrival ( AoA ) measurement based at least on the reference signals received with the wireless network node using the identified at least one group of antennas (see pg. 8, paragraph 0236, “In one embodiment, each of the Q1 piece(s) of channel information includes an Angle of Arriving ( AoA )”) . Regarding claim 14, Zhang further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein each of the one or more groups of antennas comprises a subset of the plurality of antennas (see pg. 10, paragraph 0272, “In one embodiment, the Q1 first-type radio signal(s) is(are) transmitted by Q1 antenna port group(s) respectively, any one of the Q1 antenna port group(s) includes a positive integer number of antenna port(s), different antenna ports in one antenna port group are formed by same antennas, and different antenna ports in one same antenna port group correspond to different beamforming vectors.”) . Regarding claim 1 5, the same cited sections and rationale from claim 1 are applied. Zhang f urther discloses A wireless network node comprising (see Fig. 4, example diagram of communication nodes; Figs. 10-12 example communication device and nodes) : at least one wireless communication interface (see pg. 2, paragraph 0051, “In one embodiment, the second information is transmitted through an air interface.” ) ; memory (see Fig. 4, memory 460 and memory 476 ) ; a plurality of antennas (see Fig. 10) ; and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the at least one wireless communication interface and the memory (see Fig. 10, baseband processor) , and configured to: Regarding claims 16-17 , the same cited sections and rationale for claims 2-3 are applied. Regarding claim s 19-20 , the same cited sections and rationale from claim s 7-8 are applied. Regarding claim 23 , the same cited sections and rationale from claim 12 are applied. Regarding claim 24 , the same cited sections and rationale from claim 15 are applied. Regarding claim 25 , the same cited sections and rationale from claim 16 are applied. Regarding claim 27 , the same cited sections and rationale from claim 12 are applied. Regarding claim 28 , the same cited sections and rationale from claim 15 are applied. Regarding claim 30 , the same cited sections and rationale from claim 12 are applied. 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 4-5, 9, 18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 4 ]" Zhang et al. (US 20200413366 A1) in view of Thurfjell (US 20160212738 A1) . Regarding claim 4, Thurfjell discloses The method of claim 1, wherein: each of the one or more groups of antennas is located within the wireless network node such that a distance between two antennas within a group of antennas is defined (see Fig. 2; pg. 4, paragraph 0058, “the distance d between the antennas is half a wavelength, which corresponds to a path difference of ¼ wavelengths (i.e. 90 degrees) from the 5 antennas to the UE”) ; and the positioning of the UE is based at least on ( i ) the distance, and (ii) phases associated with the reference signals (see Fig. 4, S1 reference signal phase differences and S4 determining a position of a device) . It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Thurfjell into the invention of Zhang. Both Zhang and Thurfjell are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose UE positioning methods with a plurality of antennas. Zhang discloses all the limitations of claim 1 ; however, Zhang fails to disclose a defined distance between two antennas within a group of antennas, and the positioning of a UE being based on that distance. This feature is disclosed by Thurfjell where the distance between antennas can be specified as half a wavelength, which leads to a difference of wavelengths from each antenna, and the phase difference s of signals can be used to determine the position of a wireless device. The combination of Zhang and Thurfjell would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve positioning accuracy by having set distances, and therefore wavelengths, for each antenna, leading to a wider direction range. Regarding claim 5, Zhang further discloses The method of claim 4, further comprising determining an angle of departure ( AoD ) or an angle of arrival ( AoA ) based on a difference between the phases associated with the reference signals; wherein the positioning of the UE is further based on the AoD or the AoA (see pg. 8, paragraph 0236, “In one embodiment, each of the Q1 piece(s) of channel information includes an Angle of Arriving ( AoA )”) . Regarding claim 9, Thurfjell discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the electromagnetic characteristic comprises: a phase noise, a relative phase, a phase bias, or a phase error margin, or a combination thereof (see pg. 3, paragraph 0045, “Preferably, the antenna elements of each correlated antenna pair should have calibrated phases, or the phase errors between the antenna elements should be known”) . It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Thurfjell into the invention of Zhang. Zhang discloses the limitations of claim 1, including grouping antennas together based on a phase based parameter ; however, Zhang fails to disclose grouping antennas together based on a specific phase based parameter such as phase noise, relative phase, phase bias, or phase error margin. This feature is disclosed by Thurfjell where the phase errors between antenna elements can be known. The combination of Zhang and Thurfjell would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to group antennas together based on phase error to minimize signal error or preemptively correct for known phase errors, improving signal transmission and reception. Regarding claim 18 , the same cited sections and rationale from claims 4 and 5 are applied. Regarding claim 21 , the same cited sections and rationale from claim 9 are applied. Allowable Subject Matter The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Allowance of claims 10-11, 13, 22, 26, and 29 is indicated because: None of the prior art of record teach or suggest the subject matter of dependent claims 10-11, 13, 22, 26, and 29. The prior art of record does not anticipate or render fairly obvious in combination to teach all of the additional limitations of the claimed invention, as best understood within the context of Applicant’s claimed invention as a whole, such as i n claim 10 (and similarly claims 22, 26, and 29) a group of antennas comprising phase-noise groups, as well as in claim 13, choosing an antenna group based on a reliability factor determined by a machine learning algorithm. Accordingly, claims 10, 13, 22, 26, and 29 are deemed to have allowable subject matter. Claim 11 could also be considered allowable subject matter by virtue of their dependence on allowable claims. Clai ms 10-11, 13, 22, 26, and 29 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Additional Relevant Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure and may be found on the accompanying PTO-892 Notice of References Cited: Dwivedi et al. (US 20220006589 A1) ; A system and method for providing phase noise-based signal design for positioning in a communication system. In one embodiment, an apparatus is configured to receive configuration parameters for a reference signal based on a level of phase noise for the reference signal estimated by a user equipment, apply the configuration parameters to the reference signal to obtain a modified reference signal, and transmit the modified reference signal to the user equipment to enable a position of the user equipment to be determined. Garin et al. (US 20140308976 A1) ; Disclosed are systems, apparatus, devices, methods, media, products, and other implementations, including a method that includes determining, at a first wireless device comprising multiple transmit antennas, at least one signal transmission characteristic according to at least one pre-determined varying transmission characteristic determination process. The at least one transmission characteristic includes, for example, a transmit antenna selected from the multiple transmit antennas, a beam characteristic, a cyclic delay diversity parameter, and/or any combination thereof. The method also includes transmitting from the first wireless device to a second wireless device a signal using the at least one signal transmission characteristic determined according to the at least one pre-determined varying transmission characteristic determination process. The transmitted signal is configured to facilitate position determination of the second wireless device upon deriving at the second wireless device a reconstructed value of the at least one signal transmission characteristic determined at the first wireless device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ISABELLA A EDRADA whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-4859 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon - Fri 9am-5pm 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT William Kelleher can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-7753 . 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. /ISABELLA AMEYALI EDRADA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648 /William Kelleher/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648