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. The amendment filed on 01/02/2026 has been received and fully considered.
3. Claims 1-28 are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed 01/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s assertions that: “Claim 1 is integrated into a practical application, and claim 1 is an improvement to the technical field of generating subsurface structural maps. Specifically, claim 1 "determine[es] ... one or more structural corrections that: i) account for multi-scale structures of the subsurface region, and ii) ties the seismic mapping data to the well data[.]" Claim 1 also recites " increasing an accuracy of subsurface structural maps by integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data[.]" By determining the structural corrections that account for multi-scale structures of the subsurface region, and tie the seismic mapping data to the well data, the features of claim 1 increasing the accuracy of subsurface structural maps by integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data[.]" (See, e.g., paragraphs [0005], [0015-0016], and [0036] For at least these reasons, claim 1 is directed to patentable subject matter. Accordingly, the applicant respectfully requests that this rejection of claim 1 and its dependent claims be withdrawn.”, the Examiner respectfully notes that the claims, as currently presented, are clearly directed to abstract idea and do not recite anything that goes beyond the judicial exception. Furthermore, the claims do not in any way provide any improvement whatsoever to a technological field, as asserted by the Applicant. In fact, there absolutely no way to improve the functionality of the general processor by performing the steps set forth by the claims. Even assuming that the claims recite some sort of improvement, said improvement would have only applied to Applicants’ method and not the computer in general, i.e., when other computer applications are executed, they would not have benefited from the same improvement that Applicants intended to have produced. The Examiner further notes that
to transform an abstract idea, law of nature or natural phenomenon into "a patent-eligible application", the claim must recite more than simply the judicial exception "while adding the words 'apply it.'" Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294, 101 USPQ2d at 1965; and the generation of an output representing the subsurface is in no way amount to anything more significant to the recited abstract. Therefore, the claims are abstract, contrary to applicant’s assertions.
As per applicant’s assertions that: “West does not disclose "filtering information included in the well data using a second plurality of length scales determined from the structural amplitudes of the extracted structures[.], and that Bo has not been asserted to disclose "filtering information included in the well data using a second plurality of length scales determined from the structural amplitudes of the extracted structures[.]" As the cited references do not include each element claimed, the cited references do not support a prima facie case that the pending claims are obvious.", the Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that West et al. does provide for filtering the information using the second plurality of length scales determined, at para [0035] Note that the second length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the second direction of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume, but an appropriate range of length scales can be tested, or the second length scale may be set substantially equal to the first length scale, in alternative embodiments. Para [0056] which provide step 148 where regions in the combined curvature volume are identified that meet the curvature and amplitude criteria selected in step 147; i.e. filtering the information to remove unwanted data, and In step 149, the curvature regions of interest identified in step 148 are extracted into a moundedness attribute volume. This final resulting volume thus contains independently identified reflectors that meet both the specified geometric and amplitude criteria, and amount to the filtered information. It is clear that the second length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the second direction of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume, but an appropriate range of length scales can be tested herein and finally, in an alternative embodiment, at step 150, the moundedness attribute volume containing the curvature regions of interest from step 149 is displayed. The Examiner further notes that while a small portion of the cited references was cited in the office, the combination of West et al and Bo should be considered in its entirety; and that the combination of the cited references clearly renders obvious the limitation contrary to applicant’s assertions, as evidenced by the rejection set forth below.
As per applicant’s arguments regarding the combinational of the cited references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the Examiner provides a clearly mappings of the references addressing each limitation; both of which are in the same field of endeavor seismic data analysis and mapping. The examiner further pointed to specific portions of the references for motivation to combine the references and that a a prima facia of obviousness has clearly been established, contrary to applicant’s assertions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
5. 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.
5.1 Claims 1-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 2A- Prong One
The claim(s) recite(s) a method for integrating seismic mapping data and well data for a subsurface region comprising a reservoir: The step of: “determining a first plurality of length scales of the seismic mapping data”; generating a filtered structural map using the extracted structures for each of the first plurality of length scales”; “determining structural amplitudes of the extracted structures based on a curvature analysis performed on the filtered structural maps”; “filtering information included in the well data using a second plurality of length scales determined from the structural amplitudes of the extracted structures”; “determining, for the well data and based on an optimization scheme, one or more structural corrections that:
i) account for multi-scale structures of the subsurface region, and ii) ties the seismic mapping data to the well data”; “based at least on the filtered information, the structural amplitudes, and the structural corrections, increasing an accuracy of subsurface structural maps by integrating the seismic mapping data, and the well data”; and “generating an output representing the integrated seismic mapping data, the subsurface structural maps, and the well data”, the above steps, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, fall under a mental process. Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea, by use of generic computer components and thus are clearly directed to an abstract idea, as constructed.
Step 2A Prong Two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitations of: “a processing device” and “a non-transitory machine-readable storage device” storing “instructions” that are executable by the processing device, either alone or in combination, all serve to gather and process data and do not add anything more significantly to the judicial exception, but are mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component that are well known, routine, and conventional activities (see specification at para [0052]-[0053]) which can be of any type, including general-purpose computer (para [0061]) previously known in the industries. Merely adding a programmable computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice, 573 U.S. at 223-24. Furthermore, the use of a general-purpose computer to apply an otherwise ineligible algorithm does not qualify as a particular machine. See Ultramerciallnc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772F.3d 709, 716-17 (Fed. Cir. 20l4);In re TLI Commc 'ns LLC v. AV Automotive, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (mere recitation of concrete or tangible components is not an inventive concept); Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 785; the step of: “extracting a respective structure at each of the first plurality of length scales”, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, reasonable fall under data gathering activities that are pre-solution activities; and are also well-known, routine and conventional activities to gather data and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (See further MPEP 2106.05(d)(i-iv)-f), and thus are not patent eligible under 35 USC 101. Therefore, using computer components amount to no more than mere instructions to perform the abstract, and thus are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited abstract, as constructed.
Step 2B
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as previously discussed above with reference to the integration of abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of: “a processing device” and “a non-transitory machine-readable storage device” storing “instructions” that are executable by the processing device, either alone or in combination, all serve to gather and process data and do not add anything more significantly to the judicial exception, but are mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component that are well known, routine, and conventional activities (see specification at para [0052]-[0053], and fig.11) which can be of any type, including general-purpose computer (para [0061]) previously known in the industries. Merely adding a programmable computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice, 573 U.S. at 223-24. Furthermore, the use of a general-purpose computer to apply an otherwise ineligible algorithm does not qualify as a particular machine. See Ultramerciallnc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772F.3d 709, 716-17 (Fed. Cir. 20l4); In re TLI Commc 'ns LLC v. AV Automotive, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (mere recitation of concrete or tangible components is not an inventive concept); Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 785; the step of: “extracting a respective structure at each of the first plurality of length scales”, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, reasonable fall under data gathering activities that are pre-solution activities; and are also well-known, routine and conventional activities to gather data and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (See further MPEP 2106.05(d)(i-iv)-f), and thus are not patent eligible under 35 USC 101. Therefore, using computer components amount to no more than mere instructions to perform the abstract, and thus are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited abstract, as constructed.
5.2 Dependent claims 2-13, and 11-28 merely include limitations pertaining to further mental process and/or mathematical computations such as: Claims 2 and 15. “wherein generating an output representing the integrated seismic mapping data and the well data comprises: generating an integrated map of subsurface structures with structural information at a user-specified length scale, wherein the integrated map matches relevant structural depths and orientation information in wells that are located in an area of the subsurface region represented by the integrated map” (mental process and/or mathematical concept). Claims 3 and 16. “wherein integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data comprises: obtaining, from the filtered information included in the well data, structural information at a particular vertical length scale associated with a well” and “tying a seismic map of a corresponding horizontal length scale to the well at least by matching an orientation at a position of the well on the seismic map”; and “integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data at least by tying the seismic map of the corresponding horizontal length scale to the well” (mental process and/or mathematical concept). Claims 4 and 17. “wherein integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data comprises: modifying a depth map derived from seismic interpretation over an area comprising the subsurface region, wherein the depth map is modified using depth and structural orientation information of the well data” (mental process and/or mathematical concept). Claims 5 and 18. “wherein the seismic mapping data comprises a mapped geological structure that is intermediate one or more wells and the method further comprises: integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data without distorting a true structure of the mapped geological structure” (mental process). Claims 6 and 19. “wherein determining one or more structural corrections comprises: determining one or more length-scale specific structural orientation corrections” (mental process and/or mathematical concept). Claims 7 and 20. “wherein determining a first plurality of length scales comprises: performing scale selection analysis on the seismic mapping data”; and “determining a plurality of dominant length scales based on the scale selection analysis” (mental process and/or mathematical concept). Claims 8 and 21. “wherein determining one or more structural corrections comprises: calculating a single representative correction that accounts for the plurality of dominant length scales” (mathematical concept). Claims 9 and 22. “applying a multi-objective optimization scheme to the filtered information derived from the well data; and “in response to applying the multi-objective optimization scheme, minimizing a correction factor across each of the second plurality of length scales” (mathematical concept and/or otherwise a mental process). Claims 10 and 23. “wherein extracting a respective structure at each of the first plurality of length scales comprises: applying a spatial filtering technique to the seismic mapping data with reference to the first plurality of length scales”; and “extracting a respective structure at each of the first plurality of length scales in response to applying the spatial filtering technique to the seismic mapping data” (mathematical concept and/or otherwise a mental process). Claim 11 and 24. “wherein the spatial filtering technique comprises a bandpass filter” (mathematical concept and/or otherwise a mental process). Claims 12 and 25. “wherein: the seismic mapping data comprises a map of subsurface structures in the form of a depth grid that is referenced to x,y spatial coordinates”; and “the well data comprises well control locations with depth-dependent structures in the form of structural dip and dip direction” (mathematical concept and/or otherwise a mental process). Claims 13 and 26. “wherein generating an output representing the integrated seismic mapping data and the well data comprises: generating an imaging of subsurface geology for applications in: i) hydrocarbon production using the reservoir, ii) aquifer management, and iii) sequestration projects” (mathematical concept or otherwise a mental process). Claim 27 “wherein the operations further comprise: performing seismic survey of the subsurface region”; and “obtaining the seismic mapping data based the seismic survey” (data gathering and processing). Claim 28 “wherein the operations further comprise: performing well logging at a production site identified from an integrated map that corresponds to the output representing the integrated seismic mapping data and the well data” amount to data gathering and/or, all of which further amount to mental process and/or otherwise mathematical concept similar to that already recited by the independent claims and already addressed above and thus are further not patent eligible under 35 USC 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
6.0 Claim(s) 1-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over West et al. (USPG_PUB No. 2003/0009289), in view of Bo (USPG_PUB No. 2021/0247534).
6.1 In considering claims 1 and 14, West et al. teaches a method for integrating seismic mapping data and well data for a subsurface region comprising a reservoir, the method comprising:
determining a first plurality of length scales of the seismic mapping data; (see fig. 1A, para [0026] FIGS. 1a-1d show four sections of a flowchart illustrating the processing steps for one embodiment of the method of the invention for analyzing reflection curvature in seismic data volumes. First, at step 101 of FIG. 1a, a three-dimensional volume of seismic data samples is selected. Preferably, the volume contains a plurality of seismic data samples. Each seismic data sample is represented by a data location and a seismic data value. The seismic data is preferably seismic amplitude or seismic attribute data. [0028] Next, in step 102, a first direction is selected in the seismic data volume from step 101. The first direction is selected to be substantially horizontal and will be the direction in which a first curvature estimate will be calculated. Thus, the first direction is preferably selected to be in the primary direction of interest for analyzing curvature in the seismic data. For example, this could be the direction of the maximum change in curvature for the dominant curved structures in the seismic data volume); extracting a respective structure at each of the first plurality of length scales (see fig.1A, para [0029] In step 103, a value for a first length scale is selected. The first length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the first direction selected in step 102 of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume selected in step 101); generating a filtered structural map using the extracted structures for each of the first plurality of length scales (see fig. 1A, para [0034] Returning to the calculation of more curvature volumes at step 110, a second direction is selected in the seismic data volume from step 101. The second direction is selected to be both substantially horizontal and substantially orthogonal to the first direction selected in step 102. In a preferred embodiment, the first and second directions are selected to be the cross-line and in-line directions, respectively, of the seismic survey used to collect the seismic data in the seismic data volume from step 101. Then the first and second directions can be identified with the horizontal x and y directions of a Cartesian coordinate system describing the seismic data locations. [0035] Steps 111, 112, and 113, for generation of the second curvature volume, are substantially similar to steps 103, 104, and 105 for generation of the first curvature volume); determining structural amplitudes of the extracted structures based on a curvature analysis performed on the filtered structural maps (fig.1D, para [0055] In step 147, values for curvature criteria are selected. These criteria are used to identify curvature regions of interest in the combined curvature volumes generated in steps 105 of FIG. 1a, step 119 of FIG. 1b, step 132 of FIG. 1c, or step 144 of FIG. 1d. These curvature criteria include, but are not restricted to, the curvature size and polarity and the amplitude size and polarity of the seismic reflections of interest. Typically, these criteria are expressed as minimums and maximums of the curvature and amplitude values. Typically, negative (concave down) curvature and negative amplitude criteria are input for the extraction of mounded features from the curvature volume.); filtering information included in the well data using a second plurality of length scales determined from the structural amplitudes of the extracted structures (see fig.1D, para [0035] Note that the second length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the second direction of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume, but an appropriate range of length scales can be tested, or the second length scale may be set substantially equal to the first length scale, in alternative embodiments. [0056] In step 148, regions in the combined curvature volume are identified that meet the curvature and amplitude criteria selected in step 147; i.e. filtering the information to remove unwanted data, and In step 149, the curvature regions of interest identified in step 148 are extracted into a moundedness attribute volume. This final resulting volume thus contains independently identified reflectors that meet both the specified geometric and amplitude criteria, and are interpreted as the filtered information. Finally, in an alternative embodiment, at step 150, the moundedness attribute volume containing the curvature regions of interest from step 149 is displayed.); and generating an output representing the integrated seismic mapping data, the subsurface structural maps, and the well data (see fig.1D, para [0056], This final resulting volume thus contains independently identified reflectors that meet both the specified geometric and amplitude criteria. Finally, in an alternative embodiment, at step 150, the moundedness attribute volume containing the curvature regions of interest from step 149 is displayed. [0076] The seismic geometry volume produced can then be used to seismically constrain geologic models, or contribute to a volume-based seismic facies characterization. This is a significant advantage over traditional, manual seismic geometry mapping techniques that result in two-dimensional seismic maps or widely spaced one-dimensional lines that are then used to condition a geologic model). West further provide for a method of the invention for seismic geometry analysis can significantly improve the efficiency and accuracy of seismic facies mapping efforts since seismic geometry is often a large component of the data considered in a seismic facies analysis [0077], including in [0052] at step 144, where the first, second, third, and fourth curvature volumes, are combined to generate a combined curvature volume K. However, he does not expressly teach the steps of determining, for the well data and based on an optimization scheme, one or more structural corrections that: i) account for multi-scale structures of the subsurface region, and ii) ties the seismic mapping data to the well data; based at least on the filtered information, the structural amplitudes, and the structural corrections.
Bo teaches the steps of determining, for the well data and based on an optimization scheme, one or more structural corrections that: i) account for multi-scale structures of the subsurface region, and ii) ties the seismic mapping data to the well data (see para [0048] In an example embodiment, the management components 110 may include features of a framework such as the PETREL seismic to simulation software framework (Schlumberger Limited, Houston, Tex.). The PETREL framework provides components that allow for optimization of exploration and development operations. [0053], various types of data may be processed to provide one or more models (e.g., earth models). For example, consider processing of one or more of seismic data, well data, electromagnetic and magnetic telluric data, reservoir data, etc.); based at least on the filtered information, the structural amplitudes, and the structural corrections, integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data (see para [0048], The PETREL framework includes seismic to simulation software components that can output information for use in increasing reservoir performance, for example, by improving asset team productivity. Through use of such a framework, various professionals (e.g., geophysicists, geologists, and reservoir engineers) can develop collaborative workflows and integrate operations to streamline processes. [0134] Integrated workflows leveraging multi-scale, multi-domain measurements and microseismic interpretation can allow for optimization of hydraulic fracturing treatment for increased production. Such integrated completions planning workflows may use a wide variety of information about the geology (e.g., lithology, stress contrast, natural fracturing, structural or depositional dip, faulting), and the associated rock properties, (e.g., noise, slowness, anisotropy, attenuation) to improve hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production. As an example, microseismic event locations and attributes may be integrated and compared with treatment pressure records, proppant concentration, and injection rate to better perform field operations).
West et al, and Bo are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and that the model analyzes by Bo is similar to that of West et al. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.2 Regarding claims 2 and 15, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach that wherein generating an output representing the integrated seismic mapping data and the well data (see Bo para [0063], As an example, data for modeling may include one or more of the following: depth or thickness maps and fault geometries and timing from seismic, remote-sensing, electromagnetic, gravity, outcrop and well log data. Furthermore, data may include depth and thickness maps stemming from facies variations (e.g., due to seismic unconformities) assumed to following geological events (“iso” times) and data may include lateral facies variations (e.g., due to lateral variation in sedimentation characteristics) comprises: generating an integrated map of subsurface structures with structural information at a user-specified length scale (see West et al. abstract, para [0019], [0029]; Bo para [0134] Integrated workflows leveraging multi-scale, multi-domain measurements and microseismic interpretation can allow for optimization of hydraulic fracturing treatment for increased production. Such integrated completions planning workflows may use a wide variety of information about the geology (e.g., lithology, stress contrast, natural fracturing, structural or depositional dip, faulting), and the associated rock properties, (e.g., noise, slowness, anisotropy, attenuation) to improve hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production. As an example, microseismic event locations and attributes may be integrated and compared with treatment pressure records, proppant concentration, and injection rate to better perform field operations.), wherein the integrated map matches relevant structural depths and orientation information in wells that are located in an area of the subsurface region represented by the integrated map (see Bo para [0134], [0153], [0153] The framework 700 can allow for transforming seismic, electromagnetic, microseismic, and/or vertical seismic profile (VSP) data into actionable information, for example, to perform one or more actions in the field for purposes of resource production, etc. The framework 700 can extend workflows into reservoir characterization and earth modelling. For example, the framework 700 can extend geophysics data processing into reservoir modelling by integrating with the PETREL framework via the Earth Model Building (EMB) tools, which enable a variety of depth imaging workflows, including model building, editing and updating, depth-tomography QC, residual moveout analysis, and volumetric common-image-point (CIP) pick QC. Such functionalities, in conjunction with the framework's depth tomography and migration algorithms, can produce accurate and precise images of the subsurface). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.3 As per claims 3 and 16, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of: obtaining, from the filtered information included in the well data, structural information at a particular vertical length scale associated with a well (see [0029] In step 103, a value for a first length scale is selected. The first length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the first direction selected in step 102 of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume selected in step 101. The first length scale will be used to determine the size in the first direction of the difference operators in the horizontal gradient calculations used to calculate the first curvature volume. If an estimate of the horizontal extent in the first direction of the curved structures of interest is not known, then an appropriate range of length scales can be tried in an alternative embodiment. [0034-0035], [0035] Steps 111, 112, and 113, for generation of the second curvature volume, are substantially similar to steps 103, 104, and 105 for generation of the first curvature volume. Note that the second length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the second direction of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume, but an appropriate range of length scales can be tested, or the second length scale may be set substantially equal to the first length scale, in alternative embodiments.); tying a seismic map of a corresponding horizontal length scale to the well at least by matching an orientation at a position of the well on the seismic map (see West et al. para [0019], abstract, A horizontal gradient is calculated in the first direction in the first apparent dip volume using a specified length scale to generate a first curvature volume. The process may be repeated one or more times, and the individual curvature volumes combined to generate a combined curvature volume for the seismic data volume. [0029] In step 103, a value for a first length scale is selected. The first length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the first direction selected in step 102 of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume selected in step 101. The first length scale will be used to determine the size in the first direction of the difference operators in the horizontal gradient calculations used to calculate the first curvature volume. If an estimate of the horizontal extent in the first direction of the curved structures of interest is not known, then an appropriate range of length scales can be tried in an alternative embodiment. [0035]); and integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data at least by tying the seismic map of the corresponding horizontal length scale to the well (see Bo para [0134] Integrated workflows leveraging multi-scale, multi-domain measurements and microseismic interpretation can allow for optimization of hydraulic fracturing treatment for increased production. Such integrated completions planning workflows may use a wide variety of information about the geology (e.g., lithology, stress contrast, natural fracturing, structural or depositional dip, faulting), and the associated rock properties, (e.g., noise, slowness, anisotropy, attenuation) to improve hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production. Also see West et al. par [0035] Steps 111, 112, and 113, for generation of the second curvature volume, are substantially similar to steps 103, 104, and 105 for generation of the first curvature volume. Note that the second length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the second direction of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume, but an appropriate range of length scales can be tested, or the second length scale may be set substantially equal to the first length scale, in alternative embodiments.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.4 With regards to claims 4 and 17, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of: modifying a depth map derived from seismic interpretation over an area comprising the subsurface region, wherein the depth map is modified using depth and structural orientation information of the well data (see Bo para [0153], The framework 700 can extend workflows into reservoir characterization and earth modelling. For example, the framework 700 can extend geophysics data processing into reservoir modelling by integrating with the PETREL framework via the Earth Model Building (EMB) tools, which enable a variety of depth imaging workflows, including model building, editing and updating, depth-tomography QC, residual moveout analysis, and volumetric common-image-point (CIP) pick QC. Such functionalities, in conjunction with the framework's depth tomography and migration algorithms, can produce accurate and precise images of the subsurface. The framework 700 may provide support for field to final imaging, to prestack seismic interpretation and quantitative interpretation, from exploration to development. [0063] In FIG. 2, the sedimentary basin 210, which is a geologic environment, includes horizons, faults, one or more geobodies and facies formed over some period of geologic time. These features are distributed in two or three dimensions in space, for example, with respect to a Cartesian coordinate system (e.g., x, y and z) or other coordinate system (e.g., cylindrical, spherical, etc.). As shown, the model building method 220 includes a data acquisition block 224 and a model geometry block 228. Some data may be involved in building an initial model and, thereafter, the model may optionally be updated in response to model output, changes in time, physical phenomena, additional data, etc. As an example, data for modeling may include one or more of the following: depth or thickness maps and fault geometries and timing from seismic, remote-sensing, electromagnetic, gravity, outcrop and well log data. Furthermore, data may include depth and thickness maps stemming from facies variations (e.g., due to seismic unconformities) assumed to following geological events (“iso” times) and data may include lateral facies variations (e.g., due to lateral variation in sedimentation characteristics).). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.5 As per claims 5 and 18, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach that wherein the seismic mapping data comprises a mapped geological structure that is intermediate one or more wells (see West et al. para [0076] The seismic geometry volume produced can then be used to seismically constrain geologic models, or contribute to a volume-based seismic facies characterization. This is a significant advantage over traditional, manual seismic geometry mapping techniques that result in two-dimensional seismic maps or widely spaced one-dimensional lines that are then used to condition a geologic model. A further advantage is that although a volume-based approach is the preferred embodiment, it is not required since the gradient calculations are a data value-based calculation and thus can operate on two-dimensional data as well as three-dimensional data. [0077] The method of the invention is capable of calculating and extracting seismic geometries on a single line or throughout a three-dimensional volume. The ability to transform standard seismic amplitude or seismic attribute volumes into seismic geometry volumes will result in significant time reduction, improved accuracy, and reproducibility within the seismic interpretation work process. Seismic geometry-attribute volumes are useful for general analysis of reservoir geometry and continuity and to condition geologic models for use in development planning and reservoir management. In particular, the method of the invention for seismic geometry analysis can significantly improve the efficiency and accuracy of seismic facies mapping efforts since seismic geometry is often a large component of the data considered in a seismic facies analysis.) and the method further comprises: integrating the seismic mapping data and the well data without distorting a true structure of the mapped geological structure (see Bo para [0134] Integrated workflows leveraging multi-scale, multi-domain measurements and microseismic interpretation can allow for optimization of hydraulic fracturing treatment for increased production. Such integrated completions planning workflows may use a wide variety of information about the geology (e.g., lithology, stress contrast, natural fracturing, structural or depositional dip, faulting), and the associated rock properties, (e.g., noise, slowness, anisotropy, attenuation) to improve hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production. As an example, microseismic event locations and attributes may be integrated and compared with treatment pressure records, proppant concentration, and injection rate to better perform field operations.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.6 Regarding claims 6 and 19, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of determining one or more length-scale specific structural orientation corrections (see West et al. fig.1, abstract, A horizontal gradient is calculated in the first direction in the first apparent dip volume using a specified length scale to generate a first curvature volume; para [0019], A first horizontal direction is selected in the seismic data volume. A first length scale is selected for the horizontal gradient operators. An apparent dip value is calculated in the first direction at a plurality of dip locations from the seismic data volume. This generates a first apparent dip volume. A horizontal gradient is calculated in the first direction in the first apparent dip volume using apparent dip values at dip locations horizontally separated by a distance equal to the first length scale. This generates a first curvature volume. [0029]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.7 As per claims 7 and 20, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of performing scale selection analysis on the seismic mapping data (see West et al. para [0019] The invention is a method for analyzing reflection curvature in a seismic data volume. A first horizontal direction is selected in the seismic data volume. A first length scale is selected for the horizontal gradient operators. An apparent dip value is calculated in the first direction at a plurality of dip locations from the seismic data volume. This generates a first apparent dip volume. A horizontal gradient is calculated in the first direction in the first apparent dip volume using apparent dip values at dip locations horizontally separated by a distance equal to the first length scale. [0028]-[0029]); and determining a plurality of dominant length scales based on the scale selection analysis (see West et al. fig.1, para [0028]-[0029], In step 103, a value for a first length scale is selected. The first length scale is preferably selected to match the horizontal size in the first direction selected in step 102 of the curved structures or mounds of interest in the seismic data volume selected in step 101. The first length scale will be used to determine the size in the first direction of the difference operators in the horizontal gradient calculations used to calculate the first curvature volume. If an estimate of the horizontal extent in the first direction of the curved structures of interest is not known, then an appropriate range of length scales can be tried in an alternative embodiment. [0032]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.8 Regarding claims 8 and 21, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of calculating a single representative correction that accounts for the plurality of dominant length scales (see West et al. 1-2; further see Bo para [0250], As an example, results may be combined into a single measure called the F-measure. The F-measure is the weighted harmonic mean of precision and recall (or the Matthews correlation coefficient, which is a geometric mean of the chance-corrected variants). The traditional F-measure or balanced F-score may be given as: F=2.Math.precision.Math.recallprecision+recall where the F-measure is approximately the average between precision and recall when they are close). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.9 As per claims 9 and 22, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of applying a multi-objective optimization scheme to the filtered information derived from the well data (see West et al. fig.1-2, para [0072]- [0074], In a preferred embodiment, all dip locations in the horizontal row are selected. In an alternative embodiment, a plurality of dip locations sufficient to provide desired coverage of the horizontal row are selected. So, if the answer to the question in step 206 is no, then the process returns to step 203 to select another dip location. Steps 203 through 206 are repeated until all desired dip locations in the horizontal row have been selected as the first dip location. Then the answer to the question in step 206 is yes and the process continues to step 207. [0073] At step 207, it is determined whether sufficient horizontal rows have been selected in the vertical cross section selected in step 201. In a preferred embodiment, all horizontal rows in the vertical cross section are selected. In an alternative embodiment, a plurality of horizontal rows sufficient to provide desired coverage of the vertical cross-section are selected. So, if the answer to the question in step 207 is no, then the process returns to step 202 to select another horizontal row. Steps 202 through 207 are repeated until all desired horizontal rows in the vertical cross section have been selected. Then the answer to the question in step 207 is yes and the process continues to step 208. Bo para [0134] Integrated workflows leveraging multi-scale, multi-domain measurements and microseismic interpretation can allow for optimization of hydraulic fracturing treatment for increased production.); and in response to applying the multi-objective optimization scheme, minimizing a correction factor across each of the second plurality of length scales (. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.10 With regards to claims 10 and 23, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach that wherein extracting a respective structure at each of the first plurality of length scales comprises: applying a spatial filtering technique to the seismic mapping data with reference to the first plurality of length scales (see West et al. fig. 1-2, para [0072], In a preferred embodiment, all dip locations in the horizontal row are selected. In an alternative embodiment, a plurality of dip locations sufficient to provide desired coverage of the horizontal row are selected. So, if the answer to the question in step 206 is no, then the process returns to step 203 to select another dip location. Steps 203 through 206 are repeated until all desired dip locations in the horizontal row have been selected as the first dip location. Then the answer to the question in step 206 is yes and the process continues to step 207. [0073] At step 207, it is determined whether sufficient horizontal rows have been selected in the vertical cross section selected in step 201. In a preferred embodiment, all horizontal rows in the vertical cross section are selected. In an alternative embodiment, a plurality of horizontal rows sufficient to provide desired coverage of the vertical cross-section are selected. So, if the answer to the question in step 207 is no, then the process returns to step 202 to select another horizontal row. Steps 202 through 207 are repeated until all desired horizontal rows in the vertical cross section have been selected. Then the answer to the question in step 207 is yes and the process continues to step 208. Also see Bo para [0212], These points may be handled by altering the confidence score threshold or, for example, by geometric filtering. As to geometric filtering, such an approach may utilize a neighborhood exclusion approach a double trace identification exclusion approach, a region selection approach, etc. As to neighborhood exclusion, a boundary may be drawn about an identified surface using extreme points within a depth or time range where points outside of that depth or time range above and/or below may be selected for exclusion (filtering out).); and extracting a respective structure at each of the first plurality of length scales in response to applying the spatial filtering technique to the seismic mapping data (see West et al. fig.1-2, para [0055] In step 147, values for curvature criteria are selected. These criteria are used to identify curvature regions of interest in the combined curvature volumes generated in steps 105 of FIG. 1a, step 119 of FIG. 1b, step 132 of FIG. 1c, or step 144 of FIG. 1d. These curvature criteria include, but are not restricted to, the curvature size and polarity and the amplitude size and polarity of the seismic reflections of interest. Typically, these criteria are expressed as minimums and maximums of the curvature and amplitude values. Typically, negative (concave down) curvature and negative amplitude criteria are input for the extraction of mounded features from the curvature volume. [0056] In step 148, regions in the combined curvature volume are identified that meet the curvature and amplitude criteria selected in step 147. In step 149, the curvature regions of interest identified in step 148 are extracted into a moundedness attribute volume. This final resulting volume thus contains independently identified reflectors that meet both the specified geometric and amplitude criteria. Finally, in an alternative embodiment, at step 150, the moundedness attribute volume containing the curvature regions of interest from step 149 is displayed. These points may be handled by altering the confidence score threshold or, for example, by geometric filtering. As to geometric filtering, such an approach may utilize a neighborhood exclusion approach a double trace identification exclusion approach, a region selection approach, etc. As to neighborhood exclusion, a boundary may be drawn about an identified surface using extreme points within a depth or time range where points outside of that depth or time range above and/or below may be selected for exclusion (filtering out). As to a double trace identification exclusion approach, a criterion can be specified such that a trace is to include a single instance of a surface such that a single trace does not give rise to multiple instances of a desired surface. In such an approach, a neighboring criterion can be utilized to assure that an outlier is excluded rather than a desired surface. As to a region selection approach, a user may interact with the GUI 2100 to select points in space that create a region where surface identifications within the region are kept and those outside the region are excluded.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.11 Regarding claims 11 and 24, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach that wherein the spatial filtering technique comprises a bandpass filter (see Bo para [0212], These points may be handled by altering the confidence score threshold or, for example, by geometric filtering. As to geometric filtering, such an approach may utilize a neighborhood exclusion approach a double trace identification exclusion approach, a region selection approach, etc. As to neighborhood exclusion, a boundary may be drawn about an identified surface using extreme points within a depth or time range where points outside of that depth or time range above and/or below may be selected for exclusion (filtering out). As to a double trace identification exclusion approach, a criterion can be specified such that a trace is to include a single instance of a surface such that a single trace does not give rise to multiple instances of a desired surface. In such an approach, a neighboring criterion can be utilized to assure that an outlier is excluded rather than a desired surface. As to a region selection approach, a user may interact with the GUI 2100 to select points in space that create a region where surface identifications within the region are kept and those outside the region are excluded). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.12 As per claims 12 and 25, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach that wherein: the seismic mapping data comprises a map of subsurface structures in the form of a depth grid that is referenced to x,y spatial coordinates (see West et al. para [0076] The seismic geometry volume produced can then be used to seismically constrain geologic models, or contribute to a volume-based seismic facies characterization. This is a significant advantage over traditional, manual seismic geometry mapping techniques that result in two-dimensional seismic maps or widely spaced one-dimensional lines that are then used to condition a geologic model. A further advantage is that although a volume-based approach is the preferred embodiment, it is not required since the gradient calculations are a data value-based calculation and thus can operate on two-dimensional data as well as three-dimensional data. [0077] The method of the invention is capable of calculating and extracting seismic geometries on a single line or throughout a three-dimensional volume. The ability to transform standard seismic amplitude or seismic attribute volumes into seismic geometry volumes will result in significant time reduction, improved accuracy, and reproducibility within the seismic interpretation work process. Seismic geometry-attribute volumes are useful for general analysis of reservoir geometry and continuity and to condition geologic models for use in development planning and reservoir management. In particular, the method of the invention for seismic geometry analysis can significantly improve the efficiency and accuracy of seismic facies mapping efforts since seismic geometry is often a large component of the data considered in a seismic facies analysis); and the well data comprises well control locations with depth-dependent structures in the form of structural dip and dip direction (see Bo para [0122] As an example, geosteering can include intentional directional control of a wellbore based on results of downhole geological logging measurements in a manner that aims to keep a directional wellbore within a desired region, zone (e.g., a pay zone), etc. As an example, geosteering may include directing a wellbore to keep the wellbore in a particular section of a reservoir, for example, to minimize gas and/or water breakthrough and, for example, to maximize economic production from a well that includes the wellbore. [0123] Referring again to FIG. 4, the wellsite system 400 can include one or more sensors 464 that are operatively coupled to the control and/or data acquisition system 462. As an example, a sensor or sensors may be at surface locations. As an example, a sensor or sensors may be at downhole locations. West et al. abstract, A method of calculating reflection curvature in a seismic data volume wherein an apparent dip value is calculated in a first direction to generate a first apparent dip volume. A horizontal gradient is calculated in the first direction in the first apparent dip volume using a specified length scale to generate a first curvature volume. The process may be repeated one or more times, and the individual curvature volumes combined to generate a combined curvature volume for the seismic data volume. Para [0019], [0030-0031]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.13 With regards to claims 13 and 26, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of: generating an imaging of subsurface geology, for applications in: i) hydrocarbon production using the reservoir, ii) aquifer management and iii) sequestration projects (see Bo para [0053], Such functionalities, in conjunction with the framework's depth tomography and migration algorithms, can produce accurate and precise images of the subsurface. The framework 700 may provide support for field to final imaging, to prestack seismic interpretation and quantitative interpretation, from exploration to development. [0135], a workflow can include acquiring various types of data, which may include seismic data as a type of data and one or more other types of geophysical data, which may include imagery data (e.g., borehole imagery, satellite imagery, drone imagery, etc.), it is noted by the examiner the phrase after the term “for application in… amounts to intended and thus may not be accorded patentable weight). However, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.14 Regarding claim 27, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of performing seismic survey of the subsurface region (see Bo para [0094] As an example, a seismic survey and/or other data acquisition may be for onshore and/or offshore geologic environments. As to offshore, as mentioned, streamers, seabed cables, nodes and/or other equipment may be utilized. As an example, nodes can be utilized as an alternative and/or in addition to seabed cables, which have been installed in several fields to acquire 4D seismic data. Nodes can be deployed to acquire seismic data (e.g., 4D seismic data) and can be retrievable after acquisition of the seismic data. As an example, a 4D seismic survey may call for one or more processes aimed at repeatability of data. A 4D survey can include two phases: a baseline survey phase and a monitor survey phase.); and obtaining the seismic mapping data based the seismic survey (see Bo para [0149] Information from one or more interpretations can be utilized in one or more manners with a system that may be a well construction ecosystem. For example, seismic data may be acquired and interpreted and utilized for generating one or more models (e.g., earth models) for purposes of construction and/or operation of one or more wells.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
6.15 As per claim 28, the combined teaching of West et al. and Bo teach the step of performing well logging at a production site identified from an integrated map that corresponds to the output representing the integrated seismic mapping data and the well data (see Bo para [0122] As an example, geosteering can include intentional directional control of a wellbore based on results of downhole geological logging measurements in a manner that aims to keep a directional wellbore within a desired region, zone (e.g., a pay zone), etc. As an example, geosteering may include directing a wellbore to keep the wellbore in a particular section of a reservoir, for example, to minimize gas and/or water breakthrough and, for example, to maximize economic production from a well that includes the wellbore. [0153] The framework 700 can allow for transforming seismic, electromagnetic, microseismic, and/or vertical seismic profile (VSP) data into actionable information, for example, to perform one or more actions in the field for purposes of resource production, etc.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Bo with that of West et al. because Bo teaches the improvement of hydraulic fracturing operations to lead to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, and well placement and, thereby, improved production (see para [0134]).
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
7.1 Coleou (U.S. Patent No. 7,890,265) teaches a method of filtering at least two series of seismic data representative of the same zone.
8. Claims 1-28 are rejected and THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE PIERRE-LOUIS whose telephone number is (571)272-8636. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:00 PM.
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, EMERSON C PUENTE can be reached at 571-272-3652. 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.
/ANDRE PIERRE LOUIS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187 January 22, 2026