DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application
This action is a Non-Final Rejection. This action is in response to the application filed on May 23, 2023.
Claims 1-7 have been canceled.
Claims 8-25 have been added.
Claims 8-25 are pending and rejected.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 23, 2023 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to for the following reason: Claim 8 recites “wherein, for at least one of the physical properties of the sedimentary basin, performing at least steps of: … F) from the analytical model with improved accuracy of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property, uncertainties relative to the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property of the sedimentary basin model are determined.” Limitation “F” is not written as a step. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 25 recites “A method for exploiting hydrocarbons in a sedimentary basin comprising determining uncertainties relative to at least one physical property of a sedimentary basin as claimed in claim 8….” Claim 25 references claim 8, but states that it is a “method for exploiting hydrocarbons in a sedimentary basin.” It is not clear whether claim 25 is a dependent claim that depends from claim 8 and includes all of the limitations of claim 8. Applicant should amend claim 25 or provide a statement as to how claim 25 is to be interpreted. For purposes of examination, claim 25 is being treated as depending from claim 8 and including all of claim 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. § 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 8-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Does the Claim Fall within a Statutory Category? (see MPEP 2106.03)
Yes, with respect to claims 8-23 and 25, which recite a method and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of process.
No, with respect to claim 24, which recites “[a] computer program product downloadable from at least one of a communication network, a recording on a tangible computer-readable medium which stores non-transient program code instructions for implementing the method of claim 8 when the non-transient instructions are executed by a processor.” The broadest reasonable interpretation of “computer program product” that is downloadable includes software. Therefore, claim 24 is directed to software per se. Because software is not a statutory category, this claim is ineligible. Additionally, the claimed ”computer program product” may include signals and, therefore, is directed to signals per se. To overcome this rejection, the claim should positively recite hardware or a non-transitory computer readable medium. Although this claim is ineligible at step 1, it is being analyzed below with respect to the other steps.
Step 2A, Prong One: Is a Judicial Exception Recited? (see MPEP 2106.04(a))
The following claims identify the limitations that recite the abstract idea in regular text and that recite additional elements in bold:
8. A method for determining uncertainties relative to at least one physical property of a sedimentary basin using a numerical simulation which is a computer-implemented stratigraphic simulation or basin simulation, carried out with simulation parameters comprising steps of:
A) measuring with sensors physical quantities relative to the basin and determining at least values of the simulation parameters;
B) selecting uncertain simulation parameters and defining combinations of possible values of the uncertain simulation parameters;
C) determining grid representations of the basin using cells by using the numerical simulation, each of the grid representations being obtained for one of the combinations of possible values of the uncertain parameters, each of the cells of the grid representations comprising at least one value allowing the at least one physical property to be determined,
wherein, for at least one of the physical properties of the sedimentary basin, performing at least steps of:
D) for each of the grid representations determining a realization of a spatial distribution of the at least one physical property, applying a principal component analysis to the realization of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property, selecting principal components having a sum of associated eigenvalues greater than a predefined threshold, and determining an analytical model of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property by constructing an analytical model for each of the selected principal components;
E) constructing, as long as a stopping criterion is not satisfied, an analytical model of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property iteratively with improved accuracy by determining for each iteration, at least one additional combination of possible values of the uncertain parameters by using an adaptive sequential planning method applied to the analytical models of the selected principal components, by considering the selected principal components in a descending order of their eigenvalues until an accuracy indicator relative to at least the selected principal component of a current iteration is reached, and by repeating steps C) to E); and
F) from the analytical model with improved accuracy of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property, uncertainties relative to the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property of the sedimentary basin model are determined.
9. A method as claimed in claim 8, wherein the at least one stopping criterion depends on at least one accuracy indicator of the analytical model for each of the selected principal components.
10. A method as claimed in claim 8, wherein the analytical model for each of the selected principal components is determined by using a Gaussian process regression.
11. A method as claimed in claim 9, wherein the analytical model is determined by using a Gaussian process regression.
12. A method as claimed in claim 8, wherein the adaptive sequential planning method is selected from a method of estimating a maximum kriging variance, a method of a cross validation error-weighting by estimating a maximum kriging variance, a method of kriging variance integration, and an hierarchical design of experiments.
13. A method as claimed in claim 9, wherein the adaptive sequential planning method is selected from a method of estimating a maximum kriging variance, a method of a cross validation error-weighting by estimating a maximum kriging variance, a method of kriging variance integration, and an hierarchical design of experiments.
14. A method as claimed in claim 10, wherein the adaptive sequential planning method is selected from a method of estimating a maximum kriging variance, a method of a cross validation error-weighting by estimating a maximum kriging variance, a method of kriging variance integration, and an hierarchical design of experiments.
15. A method as claimed in claim 11, wherein the adaptive sequential planning method is selected from a method of estimating a maximum kriging variance, a method of a cross validation error-weighting by estimating a maximum kriging variance, a method of kriging variance integration, and an hierarchical design of experiments.
16. A method as claimed in claim 8 wherein steps C) to F) are applied to each of the physical properties of the basin.
17. A method as claimed in claim 9 wherein steps C) to F) are applied to each of the physical properties of the basin.
18. A method as claimed in claim 10 wherein steps C) to F) are applied to each of the physical properties of the basin.
19. A method as claimed in claim 11 wherein steps C) to F) are applied to each of the physical properties of the basin.
20. A method as claimed in claim 12 wherein steps C) to F) are applied to each of the physical properties of the basin.
21. A method as claimed in claim 13 wherein steps C) to F) are applied to each of the physical properties of the basin.
22. A method as claimed in claim 14 wherein steps C) to F) are applied to each of the physical properties of the basin.
23. A method as claimed in claim 15 wherein steps C) to F) are applied to each of the physical properties of the basin.
24. A computer program product downloadable from at least one of a communication network, a recording on a tangible computer-readable medium which stores non-transient program code instructions for implementing the method of claim 8 when the non-transient instructions are executed by a processor.
25. A method for exploiting hydrocarbons in a sedimentary basin comprising determining uncertainties relative to at least one physical property of a sedimentary basin as claimed in claim 8, wherein, from at least one analytical model of improved accuracy of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property and uncertainties relative to at least the physical property determining for the basin, a development scheme is constructed comprising selecting at least one site for at least one of an injection well and at least one of a production well and exploiting hydrocarbons in the basin by drilling the wells on the site and providing the at least production wells with exploitation infrastructures.
Yes. But for the recited additional elements as shown above in bold, the remaining limitations of the claims recite mental processes. The claims are directed to a method for determining uncertainties relative to at least one physical property of a sedimentary basin. But for the computer, this method is a mental process because it could be performed mentally or with a pen and paper. For example, step A of claim 8 includes observation, step B includes evaluation, step C includes evaluation and judgment, step D includes evaluation and judgment, step E includes evaluation and judgment, and step F includes judgment and opinion. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Is the Abstract Idea Integrated into a Practical Application? (see MPEP 2106.04(d))
No. The claims as a whole merely use a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. The computing components (i.e., additional elements that are in bold above) are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as a tool to implement the steps. For example, only a programmed general purpose computing device is needed to implement the claimed process. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Additionally, there is no improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology. Regarding claim 25, the drilling of the wells and providing of the wells with exploitation infrastructures do not integrate the abstract idea because these features are recited at a high level and do not provide any technological improvement. Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the Claim Provide an Inventive Concept? (see MPEP 2106.05)
No. As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong 2, the additional elements in the claims, both individually and in combination, amount to no more than tools to perform the abstract idea. Merely performing the abstract idea using a computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claims do not provide an inventive concept.
As such, the claims are not patent eligible.
35 USC §§ 102 and 103
The claims are determined to be novel and nonobvious because the combination of claim limitations was not found in or made obvious by the prior art. Independent claim 8, for example and as shown below, recites several limitations that, when combined, are novel and nonobvious.
8. A method for determining uncertainties relative to at least one physical property of a sedimentary basin using a numerical simulation which is a computer-implemented stratigraphic simulation or basin simulation, carried out with simulation parameters comprising steps of:
A) measuring with sensors physical quantities relative to the basin and determining at least values of the simulation parameters;
B) selecting uncertain simulation parameters and defining combinations of possible values of the uncertain simulation parameters;
C) determining grid representations of the basin using cells by using the numerical simulation, each of the grid representations being obtained for one of the combinations of possible values of the uncertain parameters, each of the cells of the grid representations comprising at least one value allowing the at least one physical property to be determined,
wherein, for at least one of the physical properties of the sedimentary basin, performing at least steps of:
D) for each of the grid representations determining a realization of a spatial distribution of the at least one physical property, applying a principal component analysis to the realization of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property, selecting principal components having a sum of associated eigenvalues greater than a predefined threshold, and determining an analytical model of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property by constructing an analytical model for each of the selected principal components;
E) constructing, as long as a stopping criterion is not satisfied, an analytical model of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property iteratively with improved accuracy by determining for each iteration, at least one additional combination of possible values of the uncertain parameters by using an adaptive sequential planning method applied to the analytical models of the selected principal components, by considering the selected principal components in a descending order of their eigenvalues until an accuracy indicator relative to at least the selected principal component of a current iteration is reached, and by repeating steps C) to E); and
F) from the analytical model with improved accuracy of the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property, uncertainties relative to the spatial distribution of the at least one physical property of the sedimentary basin model are determined.
Relevant Prior Art
The following references are relevant to Applicant’s invention:
Skripkin, U.S. Patent Number 11,636,240 B2. This reference teaches a reservoir performance system. Simulation models are generated and used.
Prange et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2015/0153476 A1. This reference teaches hydrocarbon reservoir characterization and recovery.
Cacas et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2009/0265152 A1. This reference teaches using basin modeling for seeking hydrocarbons in a geologically complex basin.
Williams, U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2007/0032955 A1. This reference teaches a method for combining seismic data and basin modeling.
Mezghani et al., U.S. Patent Number 10,713,398 B2. This reference teaches iterative workflow for data and processes integration for petroleum exploration and production assessments.
Hacquard, Pierre "New Generation of Uncertainty Analysis in Basin Modeling." Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, USA, September 2018. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/195655-STU. This reference teaches uncertainty analysis in basin modeling.
“Basin Modeling,” SEG wiki, https://wiki.seg.org/wiki/Basin_modeling (May 15, 2020). This reference discusses basin modeling.
Email Communications
Per MPEP 502.03, Applicant may authorize email communications by filing Form PTO/SB/439, available at https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf, via the USPTO patent electronic filing system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH H ROSEN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1850 and email address is elizabeth.rosen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 AM ET - 7 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, Michael Anderson, can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/ELIZABETH H ROSEN/Primary Examiner, 3693
Prosecution Insights