DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/738,551 filed on 06/10/2024 is presented for examination by the examiner.
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 17, 18, 20 and 21 are amended. Claim 8 and 16 are cancelled. Claims 1-7, 9-15 and 17-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, filed on 04/28/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-7, 9-15 and 17-21 have been considered but are not persuasive because the arguments do not apply to the references as used in the current rejection. Examiner provides a new ground(s) of rejections to address Applicant’s arguments.
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 –
(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.
Claims 1, 3, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Zarifi et al. (Pub. No. 2018/0278450 A1 hereinafter Zarifi).
Regarding claim 1, Zarifi discloses “a user equipment (UE),” as [(para. 0040), user equipment (UE)] “comprising: one or more memories;” [(Para. 0040), a memory storage] “one or more transceivers;” [(Para. 0125), transmitters and receivers] “and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the one or more memories and the one or more transceivers,” [(Para. 0040), one or more processors] “the one or more processors configured to: receive, via the one or more transceivers, a sounding reference signal (SRS) configuration,” [(Para. 0128), The SRS for each UE is configured by the network and the configuration is sent to the UE] “the SRS configuration including one or more parameters defining an SRS resource” [(Para. 0185), SRS resource that is configured for a UE] “and a cyclic shift hopping parameter for SRS transmissions,” [(Para. 0131), different SRS configurations may include…different cyclic shifts] “wherein the cyclic shift hopping parameter indicates a hopping pattern of a cyclic shift of the SRS transmissions,” [(Para. 0132), cyclically shifted versions of the same ZC sequence, i.e. any shift being a hopping pattern] “wherein the cyclic shift changes across SRS symbols within a slot,” [(Para. 0131), SRS symbol duration…Each UE may be assigned multiple SRSs with different configurations at different times in one embodiment; para. 0185, OFDM symbols in a slot; para. 0008, , the first plurality of SRS sequences are to be sent by the first UE in respective orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol intervals within a time slot, i.e. any time slot has multiple symbols within it and many SRS sequences] “and wherein the UE is capable of supporting a cyclic shift pattern in which the cyclic shift of the SRS transmissions changes across the SRS symbols of the slot;” [(Para. 0131), different cyclic shifts…SRS symbol duration…Each UE may be assigned multiple SRSs with different configurations at different times in one embodiment; para. 0185, OFDM symbols in a slot, i.e. within the slot there are different cyclical shifts of SRS] “and transmit, via the one or more transceivers, an SRS on the SRS resource, the SRS configured according to at least the cyclic shift hopping parameter” [Fig. 5, UE receives the SRS Configuration information 508, then transmits the SRS 512].
Regarding claim 3, Zarifi discloses “wherein the SRS resource is persistent, semi-persistent, or aperiodic” as [(Para. 0131), The different SRS configurations may include, for example, at least one of the following: …. including periodic with different periodicities, aperiodic, or event-driven, and semi-persistent].
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 21, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
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 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 2, 4, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zarifi in view of Choi et al. (Pub. No. 2021/0036825 A1 hereinafter Choi).
Regarding claim 2, Zarifi does not specifically disclose wherein the cyclic shift hopping parameter indicates: values for a cyclic shift hopping pattern of the SRS transmissions, or an index to the values for the cyclic shift hopping pattern in a table of cyclic shift hopping patterns.
In an analogous art, Choi teaches “wherein the cyclic shift hopping parameter indicates: values for a cyclic shift hopping pattern of the SRS transmissions, or an index to the values for the cyclic shift hopping pattern in a table of cyclic shift hopping patterns” as [(Para. 0197), the corresponding CS hopping pattern may be configured for each SRS resource, or configured for each SRS resource set, or configured for each UE to which SRS resources or SRS resource sets are configured. That is, the CS hopping pattern for the port allocation of SRS resources may be configured for each SRS resource, each SRS resource set, or each UE. The CS hopping pattern may be configured or indicated via signaling between the base station and the UE, or pre-defined on the system.].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the technique of Zarifi with the modified system of Choi to provide a method for effectively configuring a cyclic shift (CS) value and/or a hopping pattern to be applied to SRS and/or other uplink transmission with regard to SRS transmission/reception [Choi: Para. 0005].
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Zarifi and Choi, specifically Choi teaches “wherein: the SRS resource is configured with one or more antenna ports, and the cyclic shift hopping parameter is associated with one port of the one or more antenna ports” as [(Para. 0176), the number of ports in one SRS resource may be configured up to four…. (Para. 0148), A cyclic shift (CS) αi for an antenna port pi may be given by the following Equation 4…].
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Zarifi and Choi, specifically Choi teaches “wherein: the one or more parameters and the cyclic shift hopping parameter are radio resource control (RRC) parameters” as [(Para. 0158), In this case, a hopping pattern may be UE-specifically designated to higher layer signalling (e.g., RRC signalling) … (Para. 0213), In this instance, a configuration parameter (e.g., On/Off parameter) related to a linkage of the CS hopping pattern (hereinafter, referred to as “PUCCH-SRS CS linkage”) may be UE-specifically configured via higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signalling).].
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Zarifi and Choi, specifically Choi teaches “wherein: the SRS configuration is received via RRC signaling,” as [(Para. 0299), First, the UE may receive, from the base station, configuration information for transmission of the SRS in S1505. The corresponding configuration information may be transmitted via higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signalling, MAC-CE, etc.)] “the cyclic shift hopping parameter is received in one or more of a medium access control element (MAC-CE), downlink control information (DCI), or both,” [(Para. 0299), First, the UE may receive, from the base station, configuration information for transmission of the SRS in S1505. The corresponding configuration information may be transmitted via higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signalling, MAC-CE, etc.) and/or lower layer signaling (e.g., DCI). The corresponding configuration information may include one or more SRS resources (e.g., SRS resource set) for the transmission of the SRS, a cyclic shift (CS) hopping pattern for the SRS, CS relation information (e.g., configuration, parameter, etc. for PUCCH-SRS CS linkage) about whether or not there is a relation in a CS hopping pattern between the SRS and a PUCCH, and the like] “and the cyclic shift hopping parameter enables, disables, or updates another cyclic shift hopping pattern indicated by the one or more parameters of the SRS configuration” [(Para. 0215), In the Equation 19, nSRS cs(x) denotes the CS hopping pattern for SRS, nPUCCH cs(ns,l) denotes the CS hopping pattern for PUCCH, and β0 denotes a shifted value (e.g., natural number). That is, according to the Equation 19, the CS hopping pattern for SRS may be shifting the CS hopping pattern for PUCCH by β0.].
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zarifi in view of Zhou et al. (Pub. No. 2020/0374809 A1 hereinafter Zhou).
Regarding claim 6, Zarifi does not specifically disclose wherein the SRS transmissions are repetitions that span multiple symbols of at least one slot.
In an analogous art, Zhou teaches “wherein the SRS transmissions are repetitions that span multiple symbols of at least one slot” as [(Para. 0132), Slot aggregation may be supported, e.g., data transmission may be scheduled to span one or multiple slots.].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the technique of Zarifi with the modified system of Zhou for transmission power adjustment for a transmission of sounding reference signals to improve uplink beam management delay and/or improve power consumption [Zhou: Para. 0236].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zarifi in view of Zhou, and further view of Gou et al. (Pub. No. 2014/0064213 A1 hereinafter Guo).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Zarifi and Zhou does not specifically disclose wherein the cyclic shift hopping parameter indicates that a different cyclic shift is used for different SRS symbols of the multiple symbols.
In an analogous art, Guo teaches “wherein the cyclic shift hopping parameter indicates that a different cyclic shift is used for different SRS symbols of the multiple symbols” as [(Para. 0044), FIG. 7B is substantially similar to FIG. 7A, except that different cyclic shift configurations are used in the two SRS transmission slots (SRS1 and SRS2].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the technique of Zarifi and Zhou with the modified system of Guo for effectively choose a particular cyclic shift configuration for transmission of the SRS in order to convey desired feedback information to the base station [Guo: Para. 0036].
Allowable Subject Matters
Claims 5, 9, 14-15 and 17 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. Claims 10-13 are also objected since they depend claims 9 and 16 respectively.
Conclusion
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 NATALI N PASCUAL PEGUERO whose telephone number is (571)272-4691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11AM-9PM.
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 M 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.
/NATALI PASCUAL PEGUERO/Examiner, Art Unit 2463 /ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights