DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the applicant’s request for continued examination filed on May 29, 2026. Claims 1-7, 9-20 and 22-24 are pending and addressed below.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 29, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In response to the applicant’s submission of a replacement sheet for Figure 2, which shows the configuration of the communication line embedded in the single, solid wire in a non-linear configuration the objections to the drawing have been withdrawn.
In response to the applicant’s amendments to claim 1, to include the limitations of “such that a length of the one or more communication lines exceeds a corresponding length of the single solid metallic wire” thereby limiting the forms of mechanical decoupling, the rejections of claims 1-7, 9-20 and 22-24 under 35 USC 112(a) have been withdrawn.
Claims 1, 12, and 19 have been amended. Claims 8 and 21 are cancelled. Claims 1-7, 9-20 and 22-24 are pending and addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on May 29, 2026 with respect to the rejections of claim(s) 1-7, 9-20, and 22-24 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1, 12 and 19, Applicant has argued that Ramos et al., US 2006/0157239 (hereinafter Ramos) in view of Taverner et al., US 2012/0111104 (hereinafter Taverner) fails to disclose a single solid metallic wire, with communication line(s) embedded within it, arranged in a non-linear undulating or wave-like path or configuration, the one or more communication lines follow the undulating or wave-like path such that a length of the one or more communication lines exceeds a corresponding length of the single sold metallic wire, and the communication line mechanically decoupled from axial strain. The Examiner disagrees with this position.
A. Applicants have stated that the claims require excess-length geometry supporting signal integrity.
Applicants have stated that the claims require:
1. the communication line(s) are embedded within a single solid metallic wire;
2. the communication line(s) follow a non-linear (undulating or wave-like) path within the
wire;
3. the non-linear path results in a communication-line length that exceeds the length of the
surrounding solid wire; and
4. The configuration results in communication line(s) that are a) mechanically decoupled from axial strain, and b) configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment.
Applicants have indicated that the claims now require not merely a non-linear configuration, but a configuration in which the communication line(s) have excess embedded length within the solid wire and that this geometry enables reliable communication during dynamic movement of the wire during deployment and retrieval.
As indicated in the current rejections, these limations are clearly obvious over Ramos in view of Taverner. Specifically, communication lines embedded within a solid wire in an undulating or wave-like would necessarily require an length in in excess to the solid wire, which is in a linear configuration, as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation. Clearly, the length of the optical fiber (308) in a serpentine orientation would exceed the corresponding length of the cable (215) as additional length is required for the optical fiber line in a serpentine orientation over the same distance as the cable (215) in a straight orientation. This feature is shown in Figure 4 of Traverner.
B. Applicant argues that Ramos Does not Teach or Suggest Maintaining Signal Integrity During Dynamic Deployment.
Applicant has argued that Ramos fails to disclose non-linear routing of communication lines within a wire, any excess length relationship between a communication line and the wire, or any structure directed to maintaining signal integrity during dynamic deployment of a solid wire and thus Ramos does not disclose the claimed structure or the claimed functional result. While the Examiner agrees that Ramos is silent as to maintaining signal integrity during dynamic deployment, Ramos was also not relied upon to meet these limations as indicated in the current rejection. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Further, although Ramos does not specifically address “maintain signal integrity”, Ramos does disclose a logging system that has the capability of transmitting logging tool data real time to the surface, which would require some level of signal intergrrity.
C. Applicant has argued that Taverner’s Tube Based Configuration Does Not Provide the Claimed Functionality
Applicant has argued that Taverner is relied upon for non-linear routing and mechanical decoupling, that Taverner discloses a fiber in metal tubing within a cable and not in a solid metallic wire and that the fiber within the internal tube structure and that a configuration in which the fiber is not fixed relative to the tube exhibits intermittent contact within the tube. Embedding of fiber inside a hollow tube is fundamentally different than embedding fiber within the metal body of a solid slickline and that any in Taverner the strain behavior arises from the relationship between the fiber and the tube interior and not from the relationship between a communicate line and single-solid metallic wire body. The Examiner would like to point out that although the optical fibers (Taverner 308) are embedded within a tube (Taverner 303) it is not a hollow tube and is instead filled with a filler material (Taverner 310) (Taverner par [0029]-[0030]). Further, Ramos already teaches the limitations of a communication line (Ramos optical fiber 14) embedded within a single solid metallic wire (Ramos 100) and Taverner was relied upon for the limitations of the non-linear configuration comprising a sinusoidal or serpentine path along the longitudinal axis of the wire and the additional features arising from said path. Additionally and as previously indicated, the communication lines embedded within a tube or within a solid wire in an undulating or wave-like fashion would necessarily require an length in in excess to the tube or solid wire, which is in a linear configuration, as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation. Clearly, the length of the optical fiber (308) in a serpentine orientation would exceed the corresponding length of the cable (215) as additional length is required for the optical fiber line in a serpentine orientation over the same distance as the cable (215) in a straight orientation. This feature is shown in Figure 4 of Traverner. Further, this arrangement of communication line and cable is configured to preserve communication integrity in the communication line as indicated by Traverner (par [0007]-[0008]).
D. Applicant has argued that the Combination Does not Teach or Suggest Signal Integrity Under Dynamic Deployment Conditions
Specifically, the applicant has argued that Ramos and Traverner do not disclose the non-linear path produces excess communication-line length relative to that wire and that this structure enable the communication line to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment of the wire. However, as clearly indicated in the current rejection and as shown in Figure 4 of Traverner, the non-linear path of the communication-line clearly has excess length with respect to the wire. It is in fact necessary that the length of the a communication line in a serpentine orientation would necessarily exceed the corresponding length of the cable as additional length is required for any line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation.
E. Applicant has argued that the Rejection Requires an Improper Reconstruction
In response to the Applicant’s arguments that the rationale for the combination of Ramos and Taverner relies on hindsight, the Examiner disagrees. In the current rejection Ramos was relied upon to meet all the limitations of claims 1, 12, and 19 with the exception of “one or more communication lines embedded within the single solid metallic wire in a non-linear configuration, the non-linear configuration comprising a sinusoidal or serpentine path along the longitudinal axis of the wire, wherein the one or more communication lines are mechanically decoupled from axial strain in the mono-cable, configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment”. Taverner was relied upon in order to teach one or more communication lines (Taverner optical fiber 308) embedded within the cable (215) (Taverner as shown in Fig 3) in a non-linear configuration comprising a sinusoidal or serpentine path along the longitudinal axis of the cable (215) (the serpentine orientation of an optical fiber 308 within the inner tube 303, shown in Fig 4, par [0030]). The one or more communication lines (308) follow the undulating or wave-like path such that a length of the one or more communication lines (308) exceeds a corresponding length of the single sold metallic wire (the length of the optical fiber 308 in a serpentine orientation would necessarily exceed the corresponding length of the cable 215 as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation). The one or more communication lines (308) are mechanically decoupled (not retained relative to the inner tube 303) from axial strain in the cable (serpentine orientation of optical fiber 308 within inner tube 303 results in intermittent contact point 402 therebetween, Fig 4, par [0030]), configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment (externally generated acoustic disturbances are masked by a cable in which the fiber is deployed, par [0008]). The motivation for modifying Ramos with Taverner is clearly stated in the rejection as being to minimize the contact points between the communication lines and the cable which would increase the sensitivity of the mono-cable as stated by Taverner (Taverner, abstract, par [0007]-[0008]).
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Regarding claims 2-7, 9-11, 13-18, 20, and 22-24, the arguments as presented above with respect to claims 1, 12, and 19 are equally applicable to claims 2-7, 9-11, 13-18, 20, and 22-24.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-7, 9-20, and 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramos et al., US 2006/0157239 (hereinafter Ramos) in view of Taverner et al., US 2012/0111104 (hereinafter Taverner).
Claim 1: Ramos discloses a downhole tool system (logging system 10), comprising:
a mono-cable (slickline 100, Fig 6, par [0013], [0042]) to support a downhole tool string (logging tool 12), the mono-cable (100) comprising a single solid wire having one or more communication lines (optical fiber 14) embedded within the single solid wire (optical fiber 14 is embedded within a slickline 100, Fig 2, 6, par [0042]) the one or more communication lines (14) sized to communicate instructions that comprise at least one of logic or data to the downhole tool string (data collected by the sensor 17 of logging tool 12 is transmitted real time to the surface via the fiber optic line 14, tool status reports may also be sent from the logging tool 12 through the fiber optic line 14, par [0031]);
a downhole tool (logging tool 12) coupled to the single solid wire (100, Fig 2, 6) in the downhole tool string (see Fig 2, 6, par [0042]); and
a controller (acquisition unit 44) comprising a processor and a memory device coupled to the processor (acquisition unit 44 is a computer unit, such as a laptop computer, par [0039]), the memory device comprising a set of instruction that, when executed by the processor (comprising:
generating a command (activation signal) to the downhole tool (12) (downhole tools described above may be activated by optical signals sent through the fiber optic line 14, par [0064]);
transmitting the command to the downhole tool (210) (surface optical transmitter 20 sends an unmodulated signal to the logging tool 10, par [0060], [0068]); and
receiving, on the one or more communication lines (14), data from the downhole tool (12) based on execution of the command by the downhole tool (modulator 48 modulates the signal so as to encode the data onto the signal that returns to the acquisition unit 44, sensor 17 reflects a return optical signal back to the acquisition unit 44 with the relevant measurement encoded therein, par [0068]).
Ramos fails to disclose having one or more communication lines embedded within the single solid metallic wire in a non-linear configuration, the non-linear configuration comprising an undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis of the wire, wherein the one or more communication lines follow the undulating or wave-like path such that a length of the one or more communication lines exceeds a corresponding length of the single solid metallic wire, and wherein the one or more communication lines are mechanically decoupled from axial strain in the mono-cable, the non- linear configuration providing excess length of the one or more communication lines relative to the wire, configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment.
Taverner discloses a downhole cable (cable 215 inside wellbore 102) with communication lines (optical fiber 308) embedded within the cable (215) (as shown in Fig 3) in a non-linear configuration comprising a undulating or wavelike (as shown in Fig 4) path along the longitudinal axis of the cable (215) (the serpentine orientation of an optical fiber 308 within the inner tube 303, shown in Fig 4, par [0030]), wherein the one or more communication lines (308) follow the undulating or wave-like path such that a length of the one or more communication lines (308) exceeds a corresponding length of the single sold metallic wire (the length of the optical fiber 308 in a serpentine orientation would necessarily exceed the corresponding length of the cable 215 as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation). The one or more communication lines (308) are mechanically decoupled (not retained relative to the inner tube 303) from axial strain in the cable (serpentine orientation of optical fiber 308 within inner tube 303 results in intermittent contact point 402 therebetween, Fig 4, par [0030]), the non-linear configuration providing excess length of the one or more communication lines relative to the wire (the length of the optical fiber 308 in a serpentine orientation would necessarily exceed the corresponding length of the cable 215 as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation), configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment (externally generated acoustic disturbances are masked by a cable in which the fiber is deployed, par [0008]).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embedded communication line of Ramos to be orientated in an undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis, wherein the one ore more communication lines following the undulating or wave-like path exceeds the length of the single solid metallic wire such that the one or more communication lines are mechanically decoupled from axial strain in the mono-cable and configured to maintain signal integrity as disclosed by Taverner, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis would have yielded the predictable results of minimizing the contact points between the communication lines and the cable, thereby increasing the sensitivity of the mono-cable (Taverner, abstract, par [0007]-[0008]).
Claim 12: Ramos discloses method for controlling a downhole tool, comprising:
running a downhole tool (logging tool 12) coupled to a mono-cable (slickline 100, Fig 6, par [0013], [0042]) into a wellbore (see Fig 2), the mono-cable (100) comprising a single solid wire having one or more communication lines (optical fiber 14) embedded within the single solid wire (optical fiber 14 is embedded within a slickline 100, Fig 2, 6, par [0042]);
generating a command (activation signal) to the downhole tool (12) (downhole tools described above may be activated by optical signals sent through the fiber optic line 14, par [0064]), the command comprising at least one of logic or data (downhole tools described above may be activated by optical signals sent through the fiber optic line 14, par [0064]);
transmitting on the one or more communication lines (14), the command to the downhole tool (12) (surface optical transmitter 20 sends an unmodulated signal to the logging tool 10, par [0060], [0068]); and
receiving, on the one or more communication lines (14), data from the downhole tool (12) based on execution of the command by the downhole tool (modulator 48 modulates the signal so as to encode the data onto the signal that returns to the acquisition unit 44, sensor 17 reflects a return optical signal back to the acquisition unit 44 with the relevant measurement encoded therein, par [0068]).
Ramos fails to disclose having one or more communication lines embedded within the single solid metallic wire in a non-linear configuration, the non-linear configuration comprising an undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis of the wire, wherein the one or more communication lines follow the undulating or wave-like path such that a length of the one or more communication lines exceeds a corresponding length of the single solid metallic wire, and wherein the one or more communication lines are mechanically decoupled from axial strain in the mono-cable, the non- linear configuration providing excess length of the one or more communication lines relative to the wire, configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment.
Taverner discloses a downhole cable (cable 215 inside wellbore 102) with communication lines (optical fiber 308) embedded within the cable (215) (as shown in Fig 3) in a non-linear configuration comprising a undulating or wavelike (as shown in Fig 4) path along the longitudinal axis of the cable (215) (the serpentine orientation of an optical fiber 308 within the inner tube 303, shown in Fig 4, par [0030]), wherein the one or more communication lines (308) follow the undulating or wave-like path such that a length of the one or more communication lines (308) exceeds a corresponding length of the single sold metallic wire (the length of the optical fiber 308 in a serpentine orientation would necessarily exceed the corresponding length of the cable 215 as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation). The one or more communication lines (308) are mechanically decoupled (not retained relative to the inner tube 303) from axial strain in the cable (serpentine orientation of optical fiber 308 within inner tube 303 results in intermittent contact point 402 therebetween, Fig 4, par [0030]), the non-linear configuration providing excess length of the one or more communication lines relative to the wire (the length of the optical fiber 308 in a serpentine orientation would necessarily exceed the corresponding length of the cable 215 as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation), configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment (externally generated acoustic disturbances are masked by a cable in which the fiber is deployed, par [0008]).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embedded communication line of Ramos to be orientated in an undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis, wherein the one or more communication lines following the undulating or wave-like path exceeds the length of the single solid metallic wire such that the one or more communication lines are mechanically decoupled from axial strain in the mono-cable and configured to maintain signal integrity as disclosed by Taverner, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis would have yielded the predictable results of minimizing the contact points between the communication lines and the cable, thereby increasing the sensitivity of the mono-cable (Taverner, abstract, par [0007]-[0008]).
Claim 19: Ramos discloses a method for controlling a downhole tool, comprising:
deploying a downhole tool (logging tool 12) on a slickline (slickline 100, Fig 6, par [0013], [0042]) in a wellbore (see Fig 2, 6) the slickline (100) including a single solid wire having one or more communication lines (optical fiber 14) embedded within the single solid wire (optical fiber 14 is embedded within a slickline 100, Fig 2, 6, par [0042]);
receiving a command from uphole that comprises at least one of data or logic at the downhole tool on the slickline (100) from a controller (acquisition unit 44 is a computer unit, such as a laptop computer, par [0039]) (downhole tools described above may be activated by optical signals sent through the fiber optic line 14, par [0064]);
actuating the downhole tool (12), based on the command, with an actuator communicably coupled to the controller (44) on the one or more communication lines (downhole tools described above may be activated by optical signals sent through the fiber optic line 14, par [0064]]); and
transmitting feedback associated with the actuation of the downhole tool (210) at the controller on the one or more communication lines (14) (modulator 48 modulates the signal so as to encode the data onto the signal that returns to the acquisition unit 44, sensor 17 reflects a return optical signal back to the acquisition unit 44 with the relevant measurement encoded therein, par [0068]).
Ramos fails to disclose having one or more communication lines embedded within the single solid metallic wire in a non-linear configuration, the non-linear configuration comprising an undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis of the wire, wherein the one or more communication lines follow the undulating or wave-like path such that a length of the one or more communication lines exceeds a corresponding length of the single solid metallic wire, and wherein the one or more communication lines are mechanically decoupled from axial strain in the mono-cable, the non- linear configuration providing excess length of the one or more communication lines relative to the wire, configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment.
Taverner discloses a downhole cable (cable 215 inside wellbore 102) with communication lines (optical fiber 308) embedded within the cable (215) (as shown in Fig 3) in a non-linear configuration comprising a undulating or wavelike (as shown in Fig 4) path along the longitudinal axis of the cable (215) (the serpentine orientation of an optical fiber 308 within the inner tube 303, shown in Fig 4, par [0030]), wherein the one or more communication lines (308) follow the undulating or wave-like path such that a length of the one or more communication lines (308) exceeds a corresponding length of the single sold metallic wire (the length of the optical fiber 308 in a serpentine orientation would necessarily exceed the corresponding length of the cable 215 as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation). The one or more communication lines (308) are mechanically decoupled (not retained relative to the inner tube 303) from axial strain in the cable (serpentine orientation of optical fiber 308 within inner tube 303 results in intermittent contact point 402 therebetween, Fig 4, par [0030]), the non-linear configuration providing excess length of the one or more communication lines relative to the wire (the length of the optical fiber 308 in a serpentine orientation would necessarily exceed the corresponding length of the cable 215 as additional length is required for a line in a serpentine orientation to cover the same distance as a line in a straight orientation), configured to maintain signal integrity during dynamic deployment (externally generated acoustic disturbances are masked by a cable in which the fiber is deployed, par [0008]).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embedded communication line of Ramos to be orientated in an undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis, wherein the one or more communication lines following the undulating or wave-like path exceeds the length of the single solid metallic wire such that the one or more communication lines are mechanically decoupled from axial strain in the mono-cable and configured to maintain signal integrity as disclosed by Taverner, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the undulating or wave-like path along the longitudinal axis would have yielded the predictable results of minimizing the contact points between the communication lines and the cable, thereby increasing the sensitivity of the mono-cable (Taverner, abstract, par [0007]-[0008]).
Claim 2: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses a power source electrically coupled with the downhole tool string (Ramos, optical transmitter may be located downhole] and linked to a downhole battery for power, par [0046]).
Claim 3: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses the power source comprises a portion of the downhole tool (Ramos, optical transmitter may be located downhole] and linked to a downhole battery for power, par [0046]).
Claim 4: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses the power source comprises a battery (Ramos, optical transmitter may be located downhole] and linked to a downhole battery for power, par [0046]).
Claim 5: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses the downhole tool (12) comprises a sensor (Ramos, sensor 17 may include pressure sensor 22, a flow sensor such as spinner 26, a chemical properly sensor 28, or a casing collar locator 30), and the data from the downhole tool is generated by the sensor (Ramos, each sensor 17 collects its data, and a signal representative of the data is transmitted via the optical fiber 14, par [0023]).
Claims 6 and 17: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses the one or more communication lines comprises an optical fiber strand or a conductor (Ramos, data collected by the sensor 17 of logging tool 12 is transmitted real time to the surface via the fiber optic line 14, tool status reports may also be sent from the logging tool 12 through the fiber optic line 14, par [0031]).
Claim 7: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, does not specifically disclose the one or more communication lines (14) comprises a plurality of optical fiber strands (Ramos, the use of more than one fiber line 14 provides redundancy to the real time transmission of the data from the logging tool 12 to the surface, par [0041]).
Claims 9 and 18: Bramlage, as modified by Taverner, discloses the mono-cable comprises a slickline (Ramos, slickline 100, Fig 2, 6, par [0013], [0042]).
Claim 14: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses performing an operation (logging) with the downhole tool (12) in the wellbore (wellbore 5) based on the command (Ramos, downhole tools described above may be activated by optical signals sent through the fiber optic line 14, par [0064], surface optical transmitter 20 sends an unmodulated signal to the logging tool 12, modulator 48 modulates the signal so as to encode the data onto the signal that returns to the acquisition unit 44, par [0068]).
Claim 15: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses supplying power to the downhole tool (12), with a power source that comprises a portion of the downhole tool (12), to perform the operation (Ramos, optical transmitter may be located downhole and linked to a downhole battery for power, par [0046]).
Claim 16: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses wherein receiving, on the one or more communication lines (14), data from the downhole tool (12) based on execution of the command by the downhole tool comprises: receiving, on the one or more communication lines (14), data from a sensor (sensor 17) (Ramos, (Ramos, each sensor 17 collects its data, and a signal representative of the data is transmitted via the optical fiber 14, par [0023], sensor 17 may include pressure sensor 22, a flow sensor such as spinner 26, a chemical properly sensor 28, or a casing collar locator 30) that comprises a portion of the downhole tool string (see Fig 2).
Claim 20: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses the one or more communication lines comprise one or more optical fiber stands (Ramos, data collected by the sensor 17 of logging tool 12 is transmitted real time to the surface via the fiber optic line 14, tool status reports may also be sent from the logging tool 12 through the fiber optic line 14, par [0031]), and the command and the feedback are received and transmitted, respectively, on the one or more optical fiber strands (14) (surface optical transmitter 20 sends an unmodulated signal to the logging tool 12, modulator 48 modulates the signal so as to encode the data onto the signal that returns to the acquisition unit 44, par [0068]).
Claim 23: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses generating the feedback associated with the actuation of the downhole tool (12) with one or more sensors (sensor 17, par [0032]) communicably coupled with the downhole (modulator 48 modulates the signal so as to encode the data onto the signal that returns to the acquisition unit 44, sensor 17 reflects a return optical signal back to the acquisition unit 44 with the relevant measurement encoded therein, par [0068]).
Claim 24: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, discloses the controller (44) is positioned at or near a terranean surface (Ramos, acquisition system in location at the surface in a truck 44, see Fig 2).
Claims 11, 13, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramos as modified by Taverner as applied to claims 1, 12, and 19 and further in view of Zaeper et al., US 2009/0250225 (Zaeper).
Claims 11 and 13: Ramos and Taverner are silent as to wherein the command comprises a first command, and the operations further comprise: based on the received data from the downhole tool, generating a second command to the downhole tool, the second command different than the first command; and transmitting, on the one or more communication lines, the second command to the downhole tool.
Zaeper discloses a control system for a downhole device in a wellbore (abstract). The processing unit (8) transmits a first command (command signal 7). The command signal (7) is a control signal for providing closed-loop control of a task (16) (Fig 2, par [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the operations of Ramos and Taverner, to include generating a second command on the one of more communication lines to the downhole tool based on data received from the downhole tool as disclosed by Zaeper. This modification would have allowed adjustments to the downhole operations based data acquired from the downhole tool, thereby optimizing downhole operations, through closed-loop control over a downhole task (Zaeper, Fig 2, par [0030]).
Claim 22: Ramos and Taverner are is silent as to performing an operation with the downhole tool based on the received feedback.
Zaeper discloses a control system for a downhole device in a wellbore (abstract). The processing unit (8) transmits a first command (command signal 7). The command signal (7) is a control signal for providing closed-loop control of a task (16) (Fig 2, par [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the operations of Ramos and Taverner to include performing an operation with the downhole tool based on the received feedback.as disclosed by Zaeper. This modification would have allowed adjustments to the downhole operations based data acquired from the downhole tool, thereby optimizing downhole operations, through closed-loop control over a downhole task (Zaeper, Fig 2, par [0030]).
Claim 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramos as modified by Taverner as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Sanderlin, US 2007/0007016 (hereinafter Sanderlin).
Claim 10: Ramos, as modified by Taverner, is silent as to the controller comprises a portion of the downhole tool string.
Sanderlin discloses an apparatus for performing a downhole operation include a tool string (11) supported by a slickline (12). The system includes a downhole controller (10) for storing programmed instructions and preset sensor thresholds (par [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the controller of Ramos to be located downhole as part of the downhole tool string as disclosed by Sanderlin, since it has been held that rearranging parts of a prior art structure involves only routing skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Conclusion
Claims 1-7, 9-20, and 22-24 are rejected. No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAROLINE N BUTCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1623. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6 pm 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, Tara E Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/CAROLINE N BUTCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights