DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. In view of the Appeal Brief filed on 12/01/2025, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. A new ground of rejection is set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111; or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/ARLEEN M VAZQUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
3. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/18/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
4. Applicant’s amendments filed 4/18/2025 to claims are entered.
Claims 1, 5, 9, 15, 20, 23, 25, and 27 have been amended.
Claims 12-14, 18-19, and 21 have been canceled.
Claims 1-11, 15-17, 20, and 22-27 are examined.
Response to Argument
5. This Office action is re-open Non-Final in response to the appeal brief filed on 12/01/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. The following is a quotation under AIA of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action.
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
7. Claims 1-4, 9-11, and 20 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US patent 6,842,699 of Estes (of record) in view of US patent 7,617,049 of McElhinney et al, “McElhinney” (of record).
As per Claim 1, Estes teaches a method for measurements of geomagnetic field and an axial magnetic interference field, the method comprising:
measuring axial magnetic field measurements using three or more axial magnetometers positioned at three or more separate locations inside the house (Fig 4 shows a portion of bottomhole assembly “BHA” having 3 axial magnetometers 426a, 426b, 426c, disposed apart and enclosed in housing 430, see col 3 lines 35-41, col 11 lines 50-57, col 6 lines 48-52. Determined azimuth from magnetometer measurements is considered “measuring axial magnetic field”, see col 1 lines 53-55. A series of azimuthal positions is considered a series of axial magnetic fields measured by 3 magnetometers, see col 11 lines 55-62, col 12 lines 45-49 ) of a directional sensor within a drill string at a survey point ( MWD tool is a directional tool, see col 6 lines 48-52, col 15 lines 34-37 ), the three or more axial magnetometers longitudinally spaced from each other along a longitudinal tool axis of the directional sensor ( a position along the horizon axis, considered in axial axis along longitudinal tool axis because the axial axis refers to the direction of movement of the tool along the machine’s axis, which is z-axis, see col 9 lines 5-11, col 12 lines 6-22, the borehole axis/ BHA longitudinal axis is a z/axial axis, see col 7 lines 40-42 ); and,
receiving, with a computing system, the axial magnetic field measurements (as stated above, magnetometers receive axial magnetic field while using MWD tool, and “magnetometer measurements” are considered measuring the strength and/or direction of magnetic field, i.e., correct magnetometer measurements for the disturbance, see col 12 lines 6-22 and 40-49, i.e., determine the biases in measurements of the tool included magnetometers, see col 3 lines 35-38. It is noted “magnetometer bias” is magnetic field disturbance caused by magnetized object in the borehole, see col 12 lines 9-14 ).
Estes does not explicitly teach solving a set of simultaneous equations to obtain an axial component of the geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in the drill string, the set of simultaneous equations solving for unknowns of: axial geomagnetic field, interfering magnetic pole strength, and interfering pole position, wherein obtaining the axial component of the geomagnetic field includes determination of magnetic interference generated by magnetizations of the drill string at the survey point.
McElhinney teaches solving a set of simultaneous equations (Fig 1 and equation 1 and equation 2 represent simultaneous equations as they share a set of 3-magnetometers components MEX,MEy,Mez ) to obtain an axial component of the geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in the drill string (equation 1 represents measured geomagnetic fields and equation 2 represents interference of the geomagnetic fields. MEZ represents the geomagnetic field component in the z/axial axis is influenced by MTZ which represents interference of geomagnetic field component in z/axial axis, see col 6 lines 21-60, col 11 line 5 to col 13 line 13, the interference is influenced by other magnetic field vectors as the result of drilling string interference, see col 6 line 61 to col 7 line 2, col 11 lines 4-9), the set of simultaneous equations solving for unknowns of: axial geomagnetic field ( geomagnetic field considered an axial geomagnetic field which represented in 3-directional components MEX, MEY, MEZ as shown in equation 1 ), interfering magnetic pole strength (M in equation 3 represents interference magnetic strength, see col 7 lines 7-14. MTZ is maximum and minimum at axial positions between adjacent pairs of opposing poles as shown in Fig 2, thus, MTZ maximum between opposing poles considered pole strength, see col 8 lines 17-30, col 14 lines 42-55, magnetic field of the earth’s including magnitude considered “pole strength” see col 6 lines 5-7 ), and interfering pole position ( magnetic flux is inward toward the center point between two opposing South (S-S) poles, considered “interfering pole position”, see col 5 lines 25-37. Interference of axial magnetic field, magnetic pole strength and pole position considered “unknown parameters” because they depend on, i.e., specific geometry of the source, material magnetization, distance as addressed above ), wherein obtaining the axial component of the geomagnetic field includes determination of magnetic interference generated from the magnetizations in the drill string (magnetization present in the well casing string, see col 1 lines 44-45, col 8 lines 20-25 ) at a survey point ( the earth's magnetic field at the tool “using magnetometer” and in the coordinate system of the tool considered a survey point, see col 6 lines 21-32 ).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teaching Estes applying the simultaneous equations to obtain an axial component of the geomagnetic field as taught by McElhinney that would facilitate to determining axial magnetic field and subtracting other magnetic field components from measuring magnetic field vectors (McElhinney, col 6 lines 61-67).
As per Claim 2, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the method of claim 1, Estes does not teach comprising solving a set of simultaneous equations to obtain a magnetic pole strength parameter and a pole position. McElhinney teaches solving a set of simultaneous equations to obtain a magnetic pole strength parameter and a pole position (magnetic field of the earth’s including magnitude and direction component, see col 6 lines 5-7, where magnitude considered “pole strength parameter”, magnetic flux is inward toward the center point between two opposing South (S-S) poles, considered “pole position”, see col 5 lines 25-37, i.e., a measurement point of the magnetic field along the longitudinal axis considered “pole position”, see col 8 lines 1-3 ). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teaching of Estes having simultaneous equations to determine pole strength parameter and position as taught by McElhinney that would determine axial magnetic field without/subtracting other magnetic field components from measuring magnetic field vectors (McElhinney, col 6 lines 61-67).
As per Claim 3, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the method of claim 2, McElhinney further teaches comprising solving a set of simultaneous equations by first solving an equation for said pole position (see equation 6, angle θ=180° considered “pole position”, see col 8 step 5, col 9 lines 36-51). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teaching of Estes to solve simultaneous equations for pole position as taught by McElhinney that would determine axial magnetic field without/subtracting other magnetic field components from measuring magnetic field vectors (McElhinney, col 6 lines 61-67).
As per Claim 4, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the method of claim 1, Estes further teaches comprising the step of measuring, by the directional sensor (MWD is a directional drilling tool), gravity vector (measure the earth’s gravity, see col 1 lines 46-49, col 2 lines 4-9) and cross-axial magnetic field (x and y axis perpendicular to borehole axis considered crossed axial magnetic field, see col 7 lines 37-46).
As per Claim 9, Estes teaches a system, comprising:
an axial magnetic sensor of a drill string having a longitudinal tool axis, a housing, and having three or more axial magnetometers longitudinally spaced from each other along the longitudinal tool axis within the housing (Fig 4 shows a portion of bottomhole assembly “BHA” having 3 axial magnetometers 426a, 426b, 426c, disposed apart and enclosed in housing 430, see col 3 lines 35-41, col 11 lines 50-57, col 6 lines 48-52, a position along the horizon axis, considered in axial axis along longitudinal tool axis because the axial axis refers to the direction of movement of the tool along the machine’s axis, which is z-axis, see col 9 lines 5-11, col 12 lines 6-22, the borehole axis/ BHA longitudinal axis is a z/axial axis, see col 7 lines 40-42 ), the axial magnetic sensor including at least one data acquisition system configured to measure axial magnetic field with the three or more axial magnetometers at three or more distinct locations inside the housing the axial magnetic sensor (Fig 1, control unit 40 includes a memory for storing data, col 6 lines 18-20, determined azimuth from magnetometer measurements is considered “measuring axial magnetic field”, see col 1 lines 53-55. A series of azimuthal positions is considered a series of axial magnetic fields measured by 3 magnetometers, see col 11 lines 55-62, col 12 lines 45-49), while the system is stationary at a singular location and a computing system (Fig 1 shows the stationary computer 40 is at a single location, col 6 lines 10-19), receive at least three magnetic field measurements at the singular location from axial magnetometers at the three or more distinct locations within the housing of the axial magnetic sensor (the “axial position of the magnetic sensors” relative to target well determined considered receiving magnetic field from magnetometers, see col 2 lines 48-49); and
receiving three magnetic field measurements at the singular location from axial magnetometers at the three or more distinct locations from the three or more axial magnetometers (magnetometers measure magnetic fields, see above col 11 lines 55-62, col 12 lines 45-49).
Estes does not explicitly teach determining an axial component of geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in the drill string using the axial magnetic field measurements, wherein determining the axial component of the geomagnetic field includes determination of magnetic interference, at least a portion of the magnetic interference being generated from within a drill string in an axial direction.
McElhinney teaches determining an axial component of geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in the drill string using the axial magnetic field measurements, wherein determining the axial component of the geomagnetic field includes determination of magnetic interference (MEZ represents the geomagnetic field component in the z/axial axis is influenced by MTZ which represents interference of geomagnetic field component in z/axial axis, see col 6 lines 21-60, col 11 lines 40-60, col 8 lines 20-30), at least a portion of the magnetic interference being generated from within a drill string in an axial direction (the interference is influenced by other magnetic field vectors as the result of drilling string, see col 6 line 47 to col 7 line 2, magnetization present in the well casing string, see col 1 lines 44-45, col 8 lines 20-25).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teaching Estes applying the simultaneous equations to obtain an axial component of the geomagnetic field as taught by McElhinney that would facilitate to determining axial magnetic field and subtracting other magnetic field components from measuring magnetic field vectors (McElhinney, col 6 lines 61-67).
As per Claim 10, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the system of claim 9, wherein the computing system further executing instructions, but Estes does not teach to determine a magnetic pole strength parameter and a pole position. McElhinney teaches determining a magnetic pole strength parameter and a pole position (magnetic field of the earth’s including magnitude and direction component, see col 6 lines 5-7, where magnitude considered “pole strength parameter”, magnetic flux is inward toward the center point between two opposing South (S-S) poles, considered “pole position”, see col 5 lines 25-37, i.e., a measurement point of the magnetic field along the longitudinal axis considered “pole position”, see col 8 lines 1-3). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teaching of Estes having simultaneous equations to determine pole strength parameter and position as taught by McElhinney that would determine axial magnetic field without/subtracting other magnetic field components from measuring magnetic field vectors (McElhinney, col 6 lines 61-67).
As per Claim 11, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the system of claim 10, Estes does not teach wherein the pole position is determined prior to the magnetic pole strength parameter and the axial component of the geomagnetic field. McElhinney teaches the pole position is determined prior to the magnetic pole strength parameter and the axial component of the geomagnetic field (Fig 2 shows NN, SS poles. It is noted poles are defined as the areas where the magnetic field is most intense, meaning the location “position” happened before the force “strength” when they are intrinsically linked, col 3 lines 6-42, col 7 lines 20-21). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teachings of Estes and McElhinney having pole position is determined prior pole strength that would facilitate to determine a target well distance (McElhinney, col 7 lines 20-21).
As per Claim 20, Estes teaches a system, comprising:
a directional sensor having a longitudinal tool axis (The MWD tool is a directional drilling, see col 15 lines 34-37. Fig 4 shows a portion of bottomhole assembly “BHA” having magnetometers disposed in BHA’s longitudinal axis, see col 7 lines 40-42), the directional sensor comprising: a housing having an interior surface defining an interior (the drilling is enclosed in a housing 430, see abstract, col 11 lines 55-57, col 1 lines 46-51); a plurality of accelerometers (Fig 4: accelerometers 414x, 414y, 414z, col 11 lines 50-52); a plurality of magnetometers including three axial magnetometers longitudinally spaced from each other at three locations within the interior of the housing along the longitudinal tool axis (Fig 4: magnetometers 426a, 426b, and 426c disposed in BHA in 3 separate locations, the drilling includes the BHA, col 11 lines 55-57); and
a data acquisition system (Fig 1, control unit 40 includes a memory for storing data, col 6 lines 18-20) configured to measure gravity vector (measure the earth’s gravity, see col 1 lines 46-49, col 2 lines 4-9), cross-axial magnetic field and axial magnetic field (x and y axis perpendicular to borehole axis considered crossed axial magnetic field, see col 7 lines 37-46), and axial magnetic field with the three axial magnetometers from the three locations within the interior of the housing (determined azimuth from magnetometer measurements is considered “measuring axial magnetic field”, see col 1 lines 53-55. A series of azimuthal positions is considered a series of axial magnetic fields measured by 3 magnetometers, see col 11 lines 55-62, col 12 lines 45-49);
a computing system having one or more non-transitory computer readable medium storing a set of computer executable instructions for running on one or more processors that when executed cause the one or more processors (Fig 3, col 11 lines 7-30) to: receive the gravity vectors, cross-axial magnetic fields, and axial magnetic fields from the directional sensor (a directional package includes a set of accelerometers and magnetometers for measuring gravity and magnetic field, i.e., earth’s gravity generates a gravity vector and axial magnetic field, col 1 lines 46-49, col 2 lines 4-9); and,
determine at least one directional parameter using the gravity vectors, cross-axial magnetic fields, and the axial component of geomagnetic field (the borehole depth considered “directional parameter of the gravity vector”, col 16 lines 53-59; the borehole inclination considered “a directional parameter of cross-axial magnetic field, abstract line 4; and inclination angle considered a directional parameter of axial component of geomagnetic field, col 1 lines 52-55).
Estes does not explicitly teach determining an axial component of geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in a drill string including the directional sensor and at least one parameter of interfering magnetic field; and wherein determining the axial component of geomagnetic field includes determination of magnetic interference generated from within the drill string at a survey point.
McElhinney teaches determining an axial component of geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in a drill string including the directional sensor and at least one parameter of interfering magnetic field; wherein determining the axial component of geomagnetic field includes determination of magnetic interference generated from within the drill string at a survey point (MEZ represents the geomagnetic field component in the z/axial axis is influenced by MTZ which represents interference of geomagnetic field component in z/axial axis, see col 6 lines 21-60, col 11 lines 40-60, col 8 lines 20-30, the earth's magnetic field at the tool “using magnetometer” and in the coordinate system of the tool considered at survey point, col 6 lines 21-32, magnetic field strength considered interference magnetic field parameter, see col 7 lines 7-16 ).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teaching Estes applying the simultaneous equations to obtain an axial component of the geomagnetic field as taught by McElhinney that would facilitate to determining axial magnetic field and subtracting other magnetic field components from measuring magnetic field vectors (McElhinney, col 6 lines 61-67).
8. Claims 15-17 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Estes in view of Waters et al, “Waters”, US patent 5,064,006 (of record), and McElhinney.
As per Claim 15, Estes teaches a system, comprising:
a directional sensor having a longitudinal tool axis (MWD tool is a directional tool, see col 15 lines 34-37, a BHA considered a longitudinal tool axis, see col 7 line 41, col 15 lines 34-37), the directional sensor comprising: a housing having an interior surface defining an interior (see abstract, col 1 lines 46-51. MWD having 3 magnetometers considered a directional sensor because it measures direction, strength, and magnetic field, is enclosed in a housing 430, see col 3 lines 38-39, col 11 lines 55-57);
receive the axial magnetic field measurements from the directional sensor, wherein obtaining the axial component of the geomagnetic field includes determination of magnetic interference generated from within the drill string at survey point (as stated above, magnetometers receive axial magnetic field while using MWD tool, and “magnetometer measurements” are considered measuring the strength and/or direction of magnetic field, i.e., correct magnetometer measurements for the disturbance, see col 12 lines 6-22 and 40-49, i.e., determine the biases in measurements of the tool included magnetometers, see col 3 lines 35-38. It is noted “magnetometer bias” is magnetic field disturbance caused by magnetized object in the borehole, col 12 lines 3-5 and 9-14).
Estes does not explicitly teach at least one axial magnetometer positioned within the interior of the housing and moveable to three or more separate locations within the interior of the housing relative to the interior surface, along the longitudinal tool axis while, the directional sensor is located at a survey point; and,
a data acquisition system configured to obtain at least first, second, and third axial magnetic field measurements from the at least one axial magnetometer for respective ones of the three or more separate locations within the interior of the housing while the directional sensor is located at the survey point; and a computing system configured to: obtain an axial component of geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in a drill string including the directional sensor using the at least first, second, and third axial magnetic field measurements.
Waters teaches at least one axial magnetometer positioned within the interior of the housing and moveable to three or more separate locations within the interior of the housing relative to the interior surface, along the longitudinal tool axis while, the directional sensor is located at a survey point (a directional drilling downhole and survey tool, abstract. The measurements of magnetic intensity separation between the points at which the measurements are made, col 13 lines 50-56. The downhole MWD tool “directional tool” having sensors spaced apart along longitudinal axis “axial”, col 7 line 65 to col 8 line 7, the downhole tool includes a non-magnetic housing for the sensors fitted into the housing, col 7 lines 41-43. Fig 3 shows the magnetic sensors “magnetometer” moveable within a housing, i.e., the displaced magnetic sensors are moved to a new location, col 12 lines 50-51 and 37-56. A pair of triaxial magnetometers defining X, Y, Z coordinate systems. The X, Y, Z axes are aligned with the X and Y axes perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the instrument and the Z axis lying along the longitudinal axis of the instrument, see col 22 lines 38-42. It is noted a triaxial magnetometer is considered three magnetometers “separate sensors” to measure magnetic field components along x, y, z axes); and
a data acquisition system (col 6 lines 10-11 and 19-20) configured to obtain at least first, second, and third axial magnetic field measurements from the at least one axial magnetometer for respective ones of the three or more separate locations within the interior of the housing while the directional sensor is located at the survey point (Fig 11 shows x-axis, y-axis, and z-axis of magnetometer of a first triaxial magnetometer obtained, the axial magnetic field system data are used to calculate axial component of the magnetic field along the axis of the borehole, see col 8 lines 58-62).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teaching of Estes having magnetic sensor measurements at one of three locations as taught by Waters that would determine direction to the magnetic body from some point in space (Waters, col 14 lines 23-27).
Estes teaches a computer system (col 6 lines 10-11 and 18-20), Estes in view of Waters does not explicitly teach obtaining an axial component of geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in a drill string including the directional sensor using the at least first, second, and third axial magnetic field measurements.
McElhinney teaches obtaining an axial component of geomagnetic field under interference from magnetizations in a drill string including the directional sensor using the at least first, second, and third axial magnetic field measurements (It is noted a 3-axis/triaxial magnetometers consists of three separate sensors to measure the magnetic field components along the x, y, z axes, equation 1 shows receiving magnetic field from a set of 3-magnetometer components MEZ, MEX, and ME, see col 6 lines 21-33, equation 2 shows interference magnetic components MTZ, MTX, and MTY, see col 8 lines 20-30, col 11 lines 40-60. The interference is influenced by other magnetic field vectors as the result of drilling string, see col 6 line 47 to col 7 line 2), at a survey point (the earth's magnetic field at the tool “using magnetometer” and in the coordinate system of the tool considered at survey point, col 6 lines 21-32).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teachings of Estes and Waters to determine an axial component of geomagnetic field under interference from magnetization in the drilling as taught by McElhinney that would facilitate to reduce measurement noise to increase the accuracy of the distance determination (McElhinney, col 14 lines26-29).
As per Claim 16, Estes in view of Waters and McElhinney teaches the system of claim 15, the computing system further, Estes does not teach determining a magnetic pole strength parameter and a pole position. McElhinney teaches determining a magnetic pole strength parameter and a pole position (magnetic field of the earth’s including magnitude and direction component, see col 6 lines 5-7, where magnitude considered “pole strength parameter”, magnetic flux is inward toward the center point between two opposing South (S-S) poles, considered “pole position”, see col 5 lines 25-37, i.e., a measurement point of the magnetic field along the longitudinal axis considered “pole position”, see col 8 lines 1-3 ). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teaching of Estes having simultaneous equations to determine pole strength parameter and position as taught by McElhinney that would determine axial magnetic field without/subtracting other magnetic field components from measuring magnetic field vectors (McElhinney, col 6 lines 61-67).
As per Claim 17, Estes in view of Waters and McElhinney teaches the system of claim 16, McElhinney further teaches wherein the determination of the pole position is prior to determination of the magnetic pole strength parameter and the axial component of the geomagnetic field (Fig 2 shows NN, SS poles. It is noted poles are defined as the areas where the magnetic field is most intense, meaning the location “position” happened before the force “strength” when they are intrinsically linked, col 3 lines 6-42, col 7 lines 20-21). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teachings of Estes and McElhinney having pole position is determined prior pole strength that would facilitate to determine a target well distance (McElhinney, col 7 lines 20-21).
9. Claim 22 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Estes in view of McElhinney and further Simeonov (US 2020/0386094 – of record).
As per Claim 22, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the system of claim 20, Estes does not teach wherein a first axial magnetometer of the three axial magnetometers is positioned at a distance between eight and eighteen inches from an adjacent second axial magnetometer of the three axial magnetometers. Simeonov teaches a first axial magnetometer of the three axial magnetometers is positioned at a distance between eight and eighteen inches from an adjacent second axial magnetometer of the three axial magnetometers (magnetometers being spaced 4 inches to 12 inches, paras 0025, 0002 lines 4-5 and 12). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teachings of Estes and McElhinney having magnetometers being spaced within 4 inches and 12 inches as taught by Simeonov that would provide a desired cross-axial magnetic field measurements (Simeonov, para 0024).
10. Claims 23-24 and 26-27 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Estes in view of McElhinney and further Clark et al. hereinafter Clark (US patent 10113414 (of record).
As per Claim 23, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the system of claim 20, Estes teaches the three-axial magnetometer at three locations along the longitudinal tool axis of the directional sensor within the housing of the directional sensor (Fig 5 shows a portion of the bottomhole assembly “BHA” having magnetometers disposed in BHA’s longitudinal axis, col 7 lines 40-42, and enclosed in a housing 530, col 12 lines 50-58. The MWD tool is a directional drilling, col 15 lines 34-37, col 2 lines 53-55).
Estes does not explicitly teach wherein the three axial magnetometers are equally spaced from each other at the three locations along the longitudinal tool axis of the directional sensor within the housing of the directional sensor.
Clark teaches the three axial magnetometers are equally spaced from each other at the three locations along the longitudinal tool axis of the directional sensor (Fig 18 shows magnetometer system 414 having 3 magnetometers spaced apart equally, col 16 lines 57-61, MWD is a directional drilling tool, col 17 lines 25-27). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teachings of Estes and McElhinney having three axial magnetometer spaced apart equally as taught by Clark that would provide a desired distance, where each inclinometer in each of the system 414 may be used to determine the inclinometer magnetometer 414 and the gravity toolface (Clark, col 17 lines 13-20).
As per Claim 24, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the system of claim 23, Estes further teaches the directional sensor has a proximal end along the longitudinal tool axis, a distal end along the longitudinal tool axis (Fig 5: up hole coupler 502 considered a proximal end of longitudinal axis and downhole coupler 532 considered a distal end of the longitudinal axis), and a midpoint section equally spaced between the proximal end and the distal end along the longitudinal tool axis (a lower stabilizer 58a coupled to bearing assembly 57 acts as a centralizer for the lowermost portion of the drilling string 20, col 6 lines 4-9. It is noted a centralizer is placed along the longitudinal axis of a drilling string between the proximal and distal ends of a drilling string, where the centralizer considered a midpoint section equally spaced between the proximal end and the distal end of the longitudinal axis of the drilling string).
Estes does not explicitly teach wherein the three axial magnetometers include a first axial magnetometer positioned at the distal end, a second axial magnetometer positioned at the midpoint section, and a third axial magnetometer positioned at the proximal end. Clark teaches the three axial magnetometers include a first axial magnetometer positioned at the distal end, a second axial magnetometer positioned at the midpoint section, and a third axial magnetometer positioned at the proximal end (Fig 19 haves three magnetometers 414 can be replaced in Fig 18 with an array of 3 magnetometers 414, where a first magnetometer at BHA at “distal end”, a second magnetometer at the midpoint, and a third magnetometer close to the housing at “proximal end”). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teachings of Estes and McElhinney having three axial magnetometer spaced apart equally at the distal end, the midpoint, and the proximal end as taught by Clark that would provide a desired distance, where each inclinometer in each of the system 414 may be used to determine the inclinometer magnetometer 414 and the gravity toolface (Clark, col 17 lines 13-20).
As per Claim 26, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the method of claim 1, Estes further teaches wherein the interference is a z-axis magnetometer bias error (magnetic field disturbance or the strength of disturbance caused by a magnetic object detected by magnetometers considered “z-axis magnetometer bias error”, col 12 lines 2-22).
As per Claim 27, Estes in view of McElhinney teaches the method of claim 1, Estes further teaches the survey point is a first survey point (magnetometers can be determined and subsequent survey measurements, thus, a first measurement considered “a first survey point”, col 13 lines 1-3), the method comprising: measuring a subsequent axial magnetic field measurement at a second survey point subsequent to the first survey point (as addressed above, a subsequent survey point is considered “a second survey point” in the measurements), with a first axial magnetometer of the three or more axial magnetometers at a first location of the three or more separate locations inside the housing of the directional sensor (Fig 5, magnetometer 526c is closest to downhole coupler 532 considered “a first axial magnetometer” is at a first location inside the housing 530, col 12 lines 50-58); wherein the first interference term includes magnetic interference generated from within the drill string (magnetic field disturbance or the strength of disturbance caused by a magnetic object detected by magnetometers considered “z-axis magnetometer bias error”, col 12 lines 2-22).
Estes in view of McElhinney does not explicitly teach subtracting a first interference term associated with the first location inside the directional sensor from the axial magnetic field measurement at the second survey point to obtain an axial component of the geomagnetic field at the second survey point. Clark teaches subtracting a first interference term associated with the first location inside the directional sensor from the axial magnetic field measurement at the second survey point to obtain an axial component of the geomagnetic field at the second survey point (Figs 28-29 show magnetic field noise/interference measured in Tesla along z-axial in meters, where mag 1 at “a first survey point and mag 2 at “a second survey point”, the DC magnetic field generated may be subtracted from the Earth’s large magnetic field, see col 17 lines 37-53). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the teachings of Estes and McElhinney to subtracting a first interference at a second survey point as taught by Clark that would facilitate accurate measurement of weaker magnetic field.
Novel and Non-Obvious Subject Matter
11. Claims 5-8 and 25 are considered novel and non-obvious subject matter with respect to the prior art and would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for considering novel and non-obvious subject matter:
None of the prior art in individual or in combination that teaches or suggests
“while the directional sensor is at the survey point. moving the axial magnetometer to a
second location within the housing of the directional sensor along the longitudinal
tool axis and measuring second axial magnetic field measurements at the second
location; while the directional sensor is at the survey point. moving the axial magnetometer to a third location within the housing of the directional sensor along the longitudinal tool axis and measuring third axial magnetic field measurements at the third
location, the third location different than the first location and the second location” as recited in claim 5.
Conclusion
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to LYNDA DINH whose telephone number is (571) 270-
7150. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10 AM-6 PM ET.
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, Arleen M Vazquez can be reached on 571-272-2619. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppairmy.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LYNDA DINH/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ARLEEN M VAZQUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857