DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to communication filed on 03/09/2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 9, 11, 15-20 have been amended. Entry of this amendment is accepted and made of record.
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 1- 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. A subject matter eligibility analysis is set forth below. See MPEP 2106.
Under Step 1 of the analysis, claim 1, belongs to a statutory category namely a method. Likely claims 9 belongs to a statutory category, namely it is a system, and claim 17 , belongs to a statutory category, namely it is a system.
Under Step 2A, prong 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
The claim(s) 1, 9 and 14 recite(s) concepts related to mathematical algorithms/concepts, and mental processes and concepts performed in the human mind e.g. observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion for performing a fast Fourier transform of the measurements to generate processed signals; determining a presence and type of natural resources proximate the one or more sensor systems from the processed signals (claim 1); compiling the sensor measurements captured by the one or more sensor systems of the gravitational waves to determine a type and location of the natural resources; and processing the sensor measurements to generate processed data including at least a map of the natural resources (claim 9); and analyze the sensor measurements by performing at least a fast Fourier transforms and generates one or more predictions regarding the natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements that have been analyzed (claim 17).
The concepts discussed above can be considered to describe mental processes, namely concepts performed in the human mind or with pen and paper, and/or mathematical concepts, namely a series of calculations leading to one or more numerical results or answers. Although, the claim does not spell out any particular equation or formula being used, the lack of specific equations for individual steps merely points out that the claim would monopolize all possible calculations in performing the steps. These steps recited by the claims, therefore amount to a series of mental or mathematical steps, making these limitations amount to an abstract idea.
Claim 9 is a method, and claim 17 is a system, with substantially similar claim language as the method of claim 1.
Step 2A, prong 2 of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception(s) into a practical application of the exception. This evaluation is performed by (a) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (b) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the abstract idea is not performed by using any particular device and because the “computing device” (claim 17) amounts to the recitation of a general purpose computer used to apply the abstract idea; “measuring gravitational waves utilizing one or more sensor systems…the one or more sensor systems including at least an accelerometer capturing measurements…” (claim 1); “sensor systems” and “performing sensor measurements for gravitational waves at the exploration area utilizing the one or more sensor systems” (claim 9); and “one or more gravitational sensor systems measuring gravitational waves as sensor measurements… the one or more gravitational sensor systems include at least one accelerometer that detects the gravitational waves…”, (claim 17), which is mere data gathering recited at high level of generality generally linking the abstract idea to a field of use and the results of the algorithm are merely output (i.e. generating three dimensional map, claim 1) as part of insignificant post-solution activity and are not used in any particular matter as to integrate the abstract idea in a practical application.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the only additional elements are general purpose computer used to apply the abstract idea and mere data gathering/output recited at a high level of generality and insignificant extra-solution activity that when further analyzed under Step 2B is found to be well-understood, routine and conventional activities as evidenced by MPEP 2106.05(d)(II); and because the data of performing the algorithm must necessarily be “obtained” and the use of a general purpose computer to implement the abstract idea for performing the algorithm does not amount to significantly more than the recitation of the abstract idea itself.
Therefore, claims 1, 9, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Dependent claims 2-8, 10-16 18 and 20 merely expand on the abstract idea by appending additional steps to the mathematical algorithm on their respective independent claim 1.
Dependent claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18- 20 merely expands on the abstract idea by reciting additional steps related to mathematical algorithms/concepts, and mental processes and concepts performed in the human mind e.g. observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion to “performing filtering of the measurements of the gravitational waves; and converting the measurements from an analog signal to a digital signal” (claim 2), “truncating the processed signals above 0.01 Hz to cut-off at least an earth frequency and a moon frequency” (claim 3), “determining natural resource frequencies associated with the processed signals” (claim 4), “determining an amplitude from the processed signals for each natural resource of interest; and triangulating the natural resource of interest using the amplitude of the processed signals to determine locations for the natural resources of interest” (claim 5), “generating a map of the natural resources utilizing locations associated with the natural resources of the processed signals” (claim 7), “converting the sensor measurements from an analog signal to a digital signal; performing a fast Fourier transform of the digital signal to generate the processed data; and performing filtering for the processed data” (claim 10), “generating one or more predictions regarding the natural resources within the exploration area, wherein the one or more predictions include at least one or more types of natural resources and a location of the natural resources in three dimensions” (claim 13), “generating one or more predictions regarding natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements” (claim 14), “performing triangulation of the sensor measurements to generate the prediction of the natural resources” (claim 16), “wherein the computing device performs a fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the sensor measurements, determines natural resources proximate the exploration area in response to frequencies from the FFT, and triangulates the natural resources in response to an amplitude associated with each of the natural resources” (claim 20) and mere data characterization of the data acquired and applied for performing the abstract idea (claims 8, 11, 14).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application in claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 because the abstract idea is not performed by using any particular device and because the “central system” recited in claims 14 and “computing device” recited in claims 18 and 20, amounts to the recitation of a general purpose computer used to apply the abstract idea; and because the recitation of “one or more sensor systems”, “one or more gravitational sensor systems” and “gravitational sensor systems” recited in claims 6, 12, 14, 15, and 18-19, and “recording sensor locations of the one or more sensor systems”, recited in claim 15, amounts to mere data gathering recited at a high level of generality, the limitations merely add further details as to the type of data, the means of collecting data being received/input and used with the mental process and/or math steps recited in the independent claims, also further calculations and math, so they are properly viewed as part of the recited abstract idea; and the results of the algorithm are merely output as part of insignificant post-solution activity (i.e. locations of the natural resources are determined automatically in response to characteristics of the exploration area (claim 11), transmitting the sensor measurements (claim 14), recording sensor locations and saving sensor measurements (claim 15), database storing sensor measurements (claim 18), memory for storing sensor measurements (claim 19)) and are not used in any particular matter as to integrate the abstract idea in a practical application.
The claim(s) 2-8, 10-16 18 and 20 does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the only additional elements are general purpose computer used to apply the abstract idea and mere data gathering/output recited at a high level of generality and insignificant extra-solution activity that when further analyzed under Step 2B is found to be well-understood, routine and conventional activities (i.e. transmitting, storing data) as evidenced by MPEP 2106.05(d)(II); and because the data of performing the algorithm must necessarily be “obtained” and the use of a general purpose computer to implement the abstract idea for performing the algorithm does not amount to significantly more than the recitation of the abstract idea itself.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 8, 9, 11-14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez US 20130226493 A1 (hereinafter Martinez) in view of Clark US 2015/0177272A1 (hereinafter Clark) in further view of Mumelter US2016/0047939 A1 (hereinafter Mumelter).
Regarding claim 1, Martinez discloses a method for detecting for detecting natural resources (see para. 0001), comprising:
measuring acceleration data utilizing one or more sensor systems associated with an exploration area (see abstract, para. 0036-0037, 0045, 0062), the one or more sensor systems including at least an accelerometer capturing measurements (see para. 0036-0037, 0045,0062 wherein MEMS accelerometers are disclosed which have a response from very low to very high frequencies) that are stored in a memory in communication with the accelerometer (see abstract, para. 0098);
performing a fast Fourier transform of the measurements to generate processed signals (see para. 0063, 0065, 0068, 0070, wherein Fast Fourier transform is used to extract components of different frequencies);
determining a presence and type of natural resources proximate the one or more sensor systems from the processed signals (see para. 0001, 0003-0004, wherein prospecting techniques are disclosed for finding an extracting valuable mineral resources i.e. hydrocarbon deposits, oil and natural gas, and wherein accurate characterization of geologic subsurface facilitate geophysical prospecting of petroleum accumulations or other mineral deposits; para. 0066, 0071 wherein the particle displacement data may be used in conjunction with other seismic data to estimate the properties of the Earth’s subsurface from the reflected seismic waves, para. 0113-0114, wherein certain seismic characteristics of recorded seismic data are indicative of oil and/or gas reservoirs).
Although Martinez discloses that the MEMS accelerometers have a response from very low frequencies (see para. 0036-0037, 0045,0062 wherein MEMS accelerometers are disclosed which have a response from very low to very high frequencies), however, Martinez do not expressly or explicitly discloses that the signals measured are gravitational waves and that the accelerometer is capturing measurements in a range of 1 microhertz to 100 microhertz; and generating a three-dimensional map of the exploration area indicating location of natural resources determined from the processed signals.
Clark discloses a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) gravimeters device, wherein the MEMS include accelerometers measuring signals (see abstract, para. 0003, 0107, para. 0109-0111, 0224, 0244-0245), and further discloses MEMS gravimeters for measuring gravitational fields/waves for oil exploration, etc. (see para. 0196-0197, 0199-0200, 0244-0245) and wherein precisions of such gravimetry with a resolution in the ranges from 0 to 1.2 microhertz (para. 0219, Fig. 7A), of 1-1.2 microhertz and suggests that a resolution of about 1 to 10 microhertz can be used in a particular test case in order to achieve the a certain resolution (see para. 0219-0220, Figs. 7A-7B).
Therefore, given the teachings of Martinez of MEMS that can measure acceleration ranges from very low frequencies and the teachings of Clark of a MEMS gravimeters including accelerometers, for measuring gravitational waves, and which suggests a resolution of 0 to 1.2 micro hertz or about 1 to 10 microhertz in a particular test case it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the measurements in a range of 1 microhertz to 100 microhertz since this would be the best engineering design choice for that system in particular in order to achieve the desired measurement resolution. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
However the combination of Martinez and Clark do not expressly or explicitly disclose generating a three-dimensional map of the exploration area indicating location of natural resources determined from processed signals.
Mumelter disclose a detection system for detection of natural resources beneath a target surface that can indicate the type of the searched natural resource including the type of gas or fluid, in particular hydrocarbons, oil or water (see abstract; para. 0046 “detection system 1 for detection of natural resources”) and further disclose generating a three-dimensional map of the exploration area indicating location of natural resources determined from processed signals (para. 0046, 0055, 0063-0064, wherein the exploration map is disclosed and wherein the map can comprise three-dimensional data modeling the location of natural resources beneath the target surface).
Therefore given the teachings of Mumelter discussed above it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark for generating a three-dimensional map of the exploration area indicating location of natural resources determined from the processed signals for the benefit of accurately characterizing a subsurface and detecting natural resources beneath a target surface of an area under investigation for detection of hydrocarbons (see abstract, para. 001) and to significatively diminish the exploration time for finding deposits of a natural resource beneath a surface (see para. 0011).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above. Martinez further discloses the one or more sensor systems include four or more sensor systems (see para. 0001, 0003, claim 26, wherein one or more sensors is disclosed, and wherein spatially distributed array of source elements is disclosed and wherein sensor arrays are disclosed which may be deployed together in a seismic survey, collocated in pairs or pairs of array, since pairs of sensor arrays collocated in pairs of arrays, therefore it meets the at least one or more sensor systems that include four or more sensor systems it meets the one or more sensor systems that include four or more sensor systems).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Martinez Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above. Martinez further discloses the natural resources include water, minerals, and hydrocarbons (see para. 0002, wherein water, hydrocarbons and mineral resources are disclosed).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above. Martinez further disclose the apparatus is configured to automatically determine a damping factor based on the received particle acceleration data (see para. 0032, 0056, 0062) in order to find and extract valuable mineral resources, particularly hydrocarbon deposits such as oil and natural gas (see para. 0001). However, the combination of Martinez and Clark is silent as to explicitly disclosing that discloses the locations of the natural resources are determined automatically in response to characteristics of the exploration area.
Mumelter further discloses the locations are determined automatically in response to characteristics of the exploration area (see abstract; para. 0009, 013, 0019, 0033, 0046, 0051, wherein calculating an exploration map of likely locations of natural resources beneath the target surface of said investigated area by superimposing generated analytical maps is disclosed; para. 0056, wherein the automated SLARD process it is possible to find such zones and through statistical-formal analysis to define such structures; 0063-0064).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the teachings of Mumelter discussed above to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark such that the locations are determined automatically in response to characteristics of the exploration area for the benefit of providing an enhanced system providing more accurate data and accurately characterizing a subsurface and detecting natural resources beneath a target surface of an area under investigation for detection of hydrocarbons (see abstract, para. 0001).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Martinez Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above. Martinez further discloses the signals/waves are detected by one or more accelerometers utilized by each of the one or more sensor systems, and wherein at least four sets of sensor measurements are performed and recorded by the one or more sensor systems (see para. 0001, 0003, claim 26, wherein one or more sensors is disclosed, and wherein spatially distributed array of source elements is disclosed and wherein sensor arrays are disclosed which may be deployed together in a seismic survey, collocated in pairs or pairs of array, since pairs of sensor arrays collocated in pairs of arrays, therefore it meets the at least one or more sensor systems that include four or more sensor systems it meets the one or more sensor systems that include four or more sensor systems).
However Martinez do not expressly or explicitly discloses that the gravitational waves are detected by one or more accelerometers.
Clark discloses a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) gravimeters device, wherein the MEMS include accelerometers measuring signals (see abstract, para. 0003, 0107, para. 0109-0111, 0224, 0244-0245), and further discloses MEMS gravimeters for measuring gravitational fields/waves for oil exploration, etc. (see para. 0196-0197, 0199-0200, 0244-0245).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the given the teachings of Martinez of MEMS that can measure acceleration ranges from very low frequencies to configure the system of Martinez with gravimeters including accelerometers disclosed by Clark of a MEMS, for detecting gravitational waves by one or more accelerometers utilized by each of the one or more sensor systems for the benefit of providing an enhanced characterization of a subsurface of the investigated area, and to provide an enhanced system that improves reliability, accuracy and resolution to increase confidence in measurement (see para. 0197).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Martinez Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above.
Martinez further disclose geophysical prospecting used to aid in the search for an evaluation of subterranean formation and geophysical prospecting techniques that yield knowledge of the subsurface structure on the earth, which is useful for finding and extracting valuable mineral resources, particularly hydrocarbon deposits such as oil an natural gas (see para. 0001, 0004).
However the combination of Martinez and Clark do not expressly or explicitly disclose generating one or more predictions regarding the natural resources within the exploration area, wherein the one or more predictions include at least one or more types of natural resources and a location of the natural resources in three dimensions.
Mumelter further discloses generating one or more predictions regarding the natural resources within the exploration area, wherein the one or more predictions include at least one or more types of natural resources and a location of the natural resources in three dimensions (see para. 0057, wherein prediction of natural resource deposits is disclosed; para. 0002, 0046, 0048, wherein location of natural resources i.e. water, gas hydrocarbons, mineral resources metals, etc. is disclosed and wherein the exploration map can comprise three dimensional data modeling the location of natural resources beneath the surface).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the teachings of Mumelter discussed above to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark for generating one or more predictions regarding the natural resources within the exploration area, wherein the one or more predictions include at least one or more types of natural resources and a location of the natural resources in three dimensions for the benefit of providing an enhanced system providing more accurate data and accurately characterizing a subsurface and detecting natural resources beneath a target surface of an area under investigation for detection of hydrocarbons (see abstract, para. 001).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Martinez Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above.
Martinez further discloses transmitting the sensor measurements from the one or more sensor systems to a central system (see para. 0105-0106, wherein computer system 1600 can receive the data and wherein computer system 1600 includes a communication interface coupled to bus 1602 which provides a two-way data communication). However the combination of Martinez and Clark do not expressly or explicitly disclose generating one or more predictions regarding natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements.
Mumelter disclose transmitting the sensor measurements from the one or more sensor systems to a central system (see para. 0003-0004, 0020, wherein a base station connected to at least one calculation unit adapted to process the received satellite images to generate the independent maps is disclosed, para. 0047, wherein calculation unit is adapted to derive control data to control exploration sensors at the investigated area); and generating one or more predictions regarding natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements (see para. 0057, wherein prediction of natural resource deposits is disclosed; para. 0002, 0046, 0048, wherein location of natural resources i.e. water, gas hydrocarbons, mineral resources metals, etc. is disclosed and wherein the exploration map can comprise three dimensional data modeling the location of natural resources beneath the surface).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the teachings of Mumelter discussed above to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark for generating one or more predictions regarding natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements for the benefit of providing an enhanced system providing more accurate data and accurately characterizing a subsurface and detecting natural resources beneath a target surface of an area under investigation for detection of hydrocarbons (see abstract, para. 001).
Regarding claim 9, Martinez discloses a method for finding natural resources utilizing gravitational waves, the method comprising:
determining locations for one or more sensor system at an exploration area (see para. 0001, 0003, wherein sensors/receivers are located at or near the surface of the earth or in an overlying body of water or at known depths in boreholes, therefore a location is determined, and wherein prospecting techniques are disclosed for finding/locating and extracting valuable mineral resources i.e. hydrocarbon deposits, oil and natural gas, and wherein accurate characterization of geologic subsurface facilitate geophysical prospecting of petroleum accumulations or other mineral deposits; para. 0066, 0071 wherein the particle displacement data may be used in conjunction with other seismic data to estimate the properties of the Earth’s subsurface from the reflected seismic waves, para. 0113-0114, wherein certain seismic characteristics of recorded seismic data are indicative of oil and/or gas reservoirs);
activating the one or more sensor systems (see para. 0002, 0062);
performing sensor measurements for gravitational waves at the exploration area utilizing the one or more sensor systems. (see abstract, para. 0036-0037, 0045, 0062), the one or more sensor systems including at least an accelerometer capturing measurements (see para. 0036-0037, 0045,0062 wherein MEMS accelerometers are disclosed which have a response from very low to very high frequencies); and
compiling the sensor measurements captured by the one or more sensor systems (see abstract, para. 0066, 0098, wherein information associated with acceleration measurements and temporary variables are stored) to determine a type and location of the natural resources (see para 0001, 0003-0004, prospecting techniques are disclosed for finding/locating and extracting valuable mineral resources i.e. hydrocarbon deposits, oil and natural gas; 0066, 0071, wherein properties of earth surface from reflected seismic waves are estimated, para. 0113-0114, wherein certain characteristics of recorded seismic data are indicative of oil and/or gas reservoirs); and
processing the sensor measurements to generate processed data (see para. 0063, 0065, 0068, 0070, wherein Fast Fourier transform is used to extract components of different frequencies).
Although Martinez discloses that the MEMS accelerometers have a response from very low frequencies (see para. 0036-0037, 0045,0062 wherein MEMS accelerometers are disclosed which have a response from very low to very high frequencies), however, Martinez do not expressly or explicitly discloses that the signals measured are gravitational waves and that the accelerometer is capturing measurements in a range of 1 microhertz to 100 microhertz, and the processed data including at least a map of natural resources.
Clark discloses a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) gravimeters device, wherein the MEMS include accelerometers measuring signals (see abstract, para. 0003, 0107, para. 0109-0111, 0224, 0244-0245), and further discloses MEMS gravimeters for measuring gravitational fields/waves for oil exploration, etc. (see para. 0196-0197, 0199-0200, 0244-0245) and wherein precisions of such gravimetry with a resolution in the ranges from 0 to 1.2 microhertz (para. 0219, Fig. 7A), of 1-1.2 microhertz and suggests that a resolution of about 1 to 10 microhertz can be used in a particular test case in order to achieve the a certain resolution (see para. 0219-0220, Figs. 7A-7B).
Therefore, given the teachings of Martinez of MEMS that can measure acceleration ranges from very low frequencies and the teachings of Clark of a MEMS gravimeters including accelerometers, for measuring gravitational waves, and which suggests a resolution of 0 to 1.2 micro hertz or about 1 to 10 microhertz in a particular test case it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the measurements in a range of 1 microhertz to 100 microhertz since this would be the best engineering design choice for that system in particular in order to achieve the desired measurement resolution. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
However the combination of Martinez and Clark do not expressly or explicitly disclose the processed data including at least a map of the natural resources.
Mumelter disclose a detection system for detection of natural resources beneath a target surface that can indicate the type of the searched natural resource including the type of gas or fluid, in particular hydrocarbons, oil or water (see abstract; para. 0046 “detection system 1 for detection of natural resources”) and further disclose processing the sensor measurements to generate processed data including at least a map of the natural resources (para. 0046, 0055, 0063-0064, wherein the exploration map is disclosed and wherein the map can comprise three-dimensional data modeling the location of natural resources beneath the target surface).
Therefore given the teachings of Mumelter discussed above it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark for disclose processing the sensor measurements to generate processed data including at least a map of the natural resources for the benefit of accurately characterizing a subsurface and detecting natural resources beneath a target surface of an area under investigation for detection of hydrocarbons (see abstract, para. 001) and to significatively diminish the exploration time for finding deposits of a natural resource beneath a surface (see para. 0011).
Regarding claim 17, Martinez discloses a system for performing geological exploration for natural resources, the system comprising:
one or more sensor systems measuring acceleration signals (see abstract, para. 0036-0037, 0045, 0062, 0068) as sensor measurements for an exploration area to detect the natural resources, the one or more sensor systems include at least one accelerometer that detects (see para. 0036-0037, 0045,0062 wherein MEMS accelerometers are disclosed which have a response from very low to very high frequencies);
a computing device in communication with the one or more sensor systems that receives the sensor measurements from the one or more sensors (see abstract, para. 0001, 0031, 0105, 0108, claim 8), wherein the computing device analyzes the sensor measurements by performing at least a Fast Fourier Transforms (see para. 0063, 0065, 0068, 0070, wherein Fast Fourier transform is used to extract components of different frequencies),
Although Martinez discloses that the MEMS accelerometers have a response from very low frequencies (see para. 0036-0037, 0045,0062 wherein MEMS accelerometers are disclosed which have a response from very low to very high frequencies), however, Martinez do not expressly or explicitly discloses that the signals measured are gravitational waves and that the system is a gravitational system and that the accelerometer is capturing measurements in a range of 1 microhertz to 100 microhertz and generates one or more predictions regarding the natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements that have been analyzed.
Clark discloses a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) gravimeters/gravitational system device, wherein the MEMS include accelerometers measuring signals (see abstract, para. 0003, 0107, para. 0109-0111, 0224, 0244-0245), and further discloses MEMS gravimeters for measuring gravitational fields/waves for oil exploration, etc. (see para. 0196-0197, 0199-0200, 0244-0245) and wherein precisions of such gravimetry with a resolution in the ranges from 0 to 1.2 microhertz (para. 0219, Fig. 7A), of 1-1.2 microhertz and suggests that a resolution of about 1 to 10 microhertz can be used in a particular test case in order to achieve the a certain resolution (see para. 0219-0220, Figs. 7A-7B).
Therefore, given the teachings of Martinez of MEMS that can measure acceleration ranges from very low frequencies and the teachings of Clark of a MEMS gravimeters including accelerometers, for measuring gravitational waves, and which suggests a resolution of 0 to 1.2 micro hertz or about 1 to 10 microhertz in a particular test case it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the measurements in a range of 1 microhertz to 100 microhertz since this would be the best engineering design choice for that system in particular in order to achieve the desired measurement resolution. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
However the combination of Martinez and Clark do not expressly or explicitly disclose generates one or more predictions regarding the natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements that have been analyzed.
Mumelter discloses generates one or more predictions regarding the natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements that have been analyzed (see para. 0057, wherein prediction of natural resource deposits is disclosed; para. 0002, 0046, 0048, wherein location of natural resources i.e. water, gas hydrocarbons, mineral resources metals, etc. is disclosed and wherein the exploration map can comprise three dimensional data modeling the location of natural resources beneath the surface).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the teachings of Mumelter discussed above to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark for generates one or more predictions regarding the natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements that have been analyzed for the benefit of providing an enhanced system providing more accurate data and accurately characterizing a subsurface and detecting natural resources beneath a target surface of an area under investigation for detection of hydrocarbons (see abstract, para. 001).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez US 20130226493 A1 (hereinafter Martinez) in view of Clark US 2015/0177272A1 (hereinafter Clark) in further view of Mumelter US2016/0047939 A1 (hereinafter Mumelter) in further view of Lambert et al. WO2009027822 (hereinafter Lambert).
Regarding claim 15, combination of Martinez Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above.
Martinez further disclose positioning the one or more sensor systems at the exploration area (see para. 0003, 0112, wherein hydrophones and/or geophones are deployed below the ocean’s surface) and further disclose a storage media to store data (See para. 0103).
Clark further disclose a data storage system 5440 communicatively connected with one or more tangible non-transitory computer-readable storage medium configured to store information, including the information needed to execute processes according to various aspects (see para. 0406, 0408-0409).
However Martinez do not specifically disclose recording locations of the one or more sensor systems, and saving the sensor measurements compiled by the one or more sensor systems.
Mumelter further discloses positioning the one or more sensor systems at the exploration area (see para. 0003, wherein a series of sensitive receivers comprising geophones or seismometers on land or hydrophones submerged in water is disclosed); recording the locations of the one or more sensor systems (see para. 0003, 0013, 0019, 0022, 0030, 0047, 0063); and saving the sensor measurements compiled by the one or more sensor systems (see para. 0003, 0034-0035, 0037, wherein the data is stored).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention given the teachings of Mumelter discussed above to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark for generating one or more predictions regarding natural resources of the exploration area utilizing the sensor measurements for the benefit of providing an enhanced system providing more accurate data and accurately characterizing a subsurface and detecting natural resources beneath a target surface of an area under investigation for detection of hydrocarbons (see abstract, para. 001).
However the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter do not expressly or explicitly disclose recording the sensor locations of the one or more sensor systems.
Lambert further disclose recording the sensor locations of the one or more sensor systems (see para. 0024, “recording of a plurality of locations (a sensor array)”) and saving the sensor measurements compiled by the one or more sensor systems (see para. 0024, “recorded signal”; para. 0056, wherein seismic data may be stored as program data).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date for the claimed invention given the teachings of Lambert to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark and Mumelter for recording the sensor locations of the one or more sensor systems and saving the sensor measurements compiled by the one or more sensor systems for the benefit of providing an enhanced system capable of providing accurate data interpretation and correlation ensuring that signals measured recorded at the exact location can be correctly mapped to subsurface features in order to accurately and precisely characterize the subsurface, and preserving location data in order to allow reproducibility and revisiting of the sites being explored.
Claim(s) 2, 4 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez US 20130226493 A1 (hereinafter Martinez) in view of Clark US 2015/0177272A1 (hereinafter Clark) in further view of Mumelter US2016/0047939 A1 (hereinafter Mumelter) in further view of Liszicasz et al. US 20150101407 A1 (hereinafter Liszicasz).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above. Martinez further teaches performing filtering of the measurements of the acceleration data (processing the acceleration data using a filter that uses one or more damping factors to provide stability in the presence of noise in the acceleration data (see abstract, para. 0031, 0033, 0050); and that the data may be digitized (para. 0111) and further discloses
Clark further teaches a low-pass filter to attenuate noise in the output signal. (see Clark, para. 0135, 0137, 0142, 0314, 0326, 0329-0331).
Although Martinez suggests the data may be digitized and using a filter and although Clark discloses a low-pass filter to attenuate noise in the output signal of the gravimeter. However, the combination of Martinez and Clark do not explicitly discloses performing filtering of measurements of gravitational waves; and converting the measurements from an analog signal to a digital signal.
Liszicasz discloses a gravity transducer for use in hydrocarbon exploration to provide information on areas conducive to fluid entrapment in the sedimentary column for mineral exploration i.e. oil and gas prospecting (abstract, para. 0059) and collecting and digitizing sensor data accelerometer data and GPS data which includes analog-digital converters which digitize the analog outputs of the sensors and accelerometer (para. 0049). Liszicasz further discloses that constant gravitational acceleration background can be filtered out (para. 0079, 0093, 0288).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark and Mumelter with the teachings of Liszicasz for performing filtering of measurements of gravitational waves; and converting the measurements from an analog signal to a digital signal for the benefit of removing unwanted frequencies providing more accurate and precise signals in order to accurate characterize the subsurface and to providing a more robust system against noise, efficient error detection and correction of the signals and allowing for the signals to be stored and transmitted easily by digitizing the signals.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Martinez, Clark, in further view of Mumelter and Liszicasz teaches the materials as applied above. Martinez further teach determining natural resource frequencies associated with the processed signals (see Martinez, para. 0062-0066, wherein frequency domain from the acceleration signal and wherein displacement data in the frequency domain are used to characterize subterranean geological features associated with the acceleration measurements to estimate the properties of Earth’s subsurface and which are indicative of oil and/or gas reservoirs, para. 0114).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials discussed above. Martinez further teaches that the data may be digitized (para. 0111), performing a fast Fourier transform of the measurements to generate processed signals (see para. 0063, 0065, 0068, 0070, wherein Fast Fourier transform is used to extract components of different frequencies); and further discloses processing the acceleration data using a filter that uses one or more damping factors to provide stability in the presence of noise in the acceleration data (see abstract, para. 0031, 0033, 0050).
Clark further teaches a low-pass filter to attenuate noise in the output signal. (see Clark, para. 0135, 0137, 0142, 0314, 0326, 0329-0331).
Although Martinez suggests the data may be digitized and using a filter and although Clark discloses a low-pass filter to attenuate noise in the output signal of the gravimeter.
However, the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter do not explicitly discloses performing filtering of measurements of gravitational waves; and converting the measurements from an analog signal to a digital signal.
Liszicasz discloses a gravity transducer for use in hydrocarbon exploration to provide information on areas conducive to fluid entrapment in the sedimentary column for mineral exploration i.e. oil and gas prospecting (abstract, para. 0059) and collecting and digitizing sensor data accelerometer data and GPS data which includes analog-digital converters which digitize the analog outputs of the sensors and accelerometer (para. 0049). Liszicasz further discloses that constant gravitational acceleration background can be filtered out (para. 0079, 0093, 0288).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark and Mumelter with the teachings of Liszicasz for converting the sensor measurements from an analog signal to a digital signal; performing a fast Fourier transform of the digital signal to generate the processed data; and performing filtering for the processed data for the benefit of removing unwanted frequencies providing more accurate and precise signals in order to accurate characterize the subsurface and to providing a more robust system against noise, efficient error detection and correction of the signals and allowing for the signals to be stored and transmitted easily by digitizing the signals.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez US 20130226493 A1 (hereinafter Martinez) in view of Clark US 2015/0177272A1 (hereinafter Clark) in further view of Mumelter US2016/0047939 A1 (hereinafter Mumelter) in further view of Liszicasz et al. US 20150101407 A1 (hereinafter Liszicasz) in further view of Tenghamn et al. US 2009/0279387A1.
Examiner Note: the recitation “to cut-off at least an earth frequency and a moon frequency” in claim 3 is being interpreted as intended use and have not been given patentable weight.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Martinez, Clark, Mumelter and Liszicasz teaches the materials as discussed above.
However, the combination do not expressly or explicitly discloses the filtering comprises: truncating the processed signals above 0.01 Hz to cut-off at least an earth frequency and a moon frequency.
Tenghamn discloses a seismic method for hydrocarbon detection in which the processed signals are truncated above 0.01 Hz (see Tenghamn, “to be able to detect energy at least below 0.1Hz”,see para. 0037).
Therefore, given the teachings of Tenghamn of detecting signals/energy at least below 0.1Hz truncating Earth frequency which ranges of about 0.1 to 0.35 hz (see para. 0037) it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to truncate the processed signals above 0.01Hz to cut-off at least an earth frequency and a moon frequency since this would be the best engineering design choice for that system in particular in order to achieve the desired measurement resolution. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Furthermore, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2d 1647 (1987).
Claim(s) 5, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez US 20130226493 A1 (hereinafter Martinez) in view of Clark US 2015/0177272A1 (hereinafter Clark) in further view of Mumelter US2016/0047939 A1 (hereinafter Mumelter) in further view of Liszicasz et al. US 20150101407 A1 (hereinafter Liszicasz) in further view of Cobbs et al. US Patent 5,206,840 (hereinafter Cobbs).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Martinez, Clark, Mumelter and Liszicasz teaches the materials as applied above. Martinez further teaches determining an amplitude from the processed signals for each natural resource of interest (see Martinez, para. 0036-0037, wherein an amplitude response from very low to very high frequencies of acceleration measurements recorded by MEMS accelerometers; 0049-0051, 0057 and wherein high amplitude low frequency components are disclosed).
However, the combination is silent as to disclosing triangulating the natural resource of interest using the amplitude of the processed signals to determine locations for the natural resources of interest.
Cobbs discloses a system for seismic exploration for oil and gas in which amplitude measurements and triangulation within an array of sensors is used in order to determine the location of seismic events and for seismic exploration or exploration for minerals (see Cobbs, col. 1, ll. 45-57, col. 1, ll. 61-67; col. 4, ll. 27-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark Mumelter and Liszicasz for triangulating the natural resource of interest using the amplitude of the processed signals to determine locations for the natural resources of interest for the benefit of providing an enhanced and accurate characterization of the subsurface that would allow to determine a precise location of the minerals when exploration for minerals/natural resources is being conducted.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Martinez, Clark, Mumelter and Liszicasz teaches the materials as applied above. Martinez further discloses generating a map of the natural resources utilizing locations associated with the natural resources of the processed signals (see para. 0009, 013, 0019, 0033, 0046, 0051-0052, 0063-0064, calculating an exploration map of likely locations of natural resources beneath the target surface of said investigated area by superimposing generated analytical maps).
Liszicasz further teaches generating a map of the natural resources utilizing locations associated with the natural resources of the processed signals (see Liszicasz, abstract, para. 0037-0038, 0044, 0154, wherein a prospectivity map which shows recommendation boxes that describe the spatial extent of the reservoir portion of the geological anomaly within the area of the sensor survey for detection of potential hydrocarbon deposits is disclosed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to generating a map of the natural resources utilizing locations associated with the natural resources of the processed signals for the benefit of providing accurate characterization of the subsurface and more effective prospecting and exploration of the subsurface in order to accurately locate natural resources beneath the target surface.
Claim(s) 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez US 20130226493 A1 (hereinafter Martinez) in view of Clark US 2015/0177272A1 (hereinafter Clark) in further view of Mumelter US2016/0047939 A1 (hereinafter Mumelter) in further view of Cobbs et al. US Patent 5,206,840 (hereinafter Cobbs).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter, teaches the materials as applied above. Martinez further discloses generate the prediction of the natural resources (see para. 0057, wherein prediction of natural resource deposits is disclosed; para. 0002, 0046, 0048, wherein location of natural resources i.e. water, gas hydrocarbons, mineral resources metals, etc. is disclosed and wherein the exploration map can comprise three dimensional data modeling the location of natural resources beneath the surface).
However the combination is silent as to disclosing triangulation of the sensor measurements to generate the prediction.
Cobbs discloses a system for seismic exploration for oil and gas in which amplitude measurements and triangulation within an array of sensors is used in order to determine the location of seismic events and for seismic exploration or exploration for minerals (see Cobbs, col. 1, ll. 45-57, col. 1, ll. 61-67; col. 4, ll. 27-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark and Mumelter for performing triangulation of the sensor measurements to generate the prediction of the natural resources for the benefit of providing an enhanced and accurate characterization of the subsurface that would allow to determine a precise location of the minerals when exploration for minerals/natural resources is being conducted.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Martinez, Clark, Mumelter and Cobbs, teaches the materials as applied above. Martinez further discloses
performing a fast Fourier transform of the measurements to generate processed signals (see para. 0063, 0065, 0068, 0070, wherein Fast Fourier transform is used to extract components of different frequencies);
determining natural resources proximate the exploration area in response to frequencies from FFT (see para. 0001, 000,, wherein prospecting techniques are disclosed for finding an extracting valuable mineral resources i.e. hydrocarbon deposits, oil and natural gas, and wherein accurate characterization of geologic subsurface facilitate geophysical prospecting of petroleum accumulations or other mineral deposits; para. 0066, 0071 wherein the particle displacement data may be used in conjunction with other seismic data to estimate the properties of the Earth’s subsurface from the reflected seismic waves, para. 0113-0114, wherein certain seismic characteristics of recorded seismic data are indicative of oil and/or gas reservoirs).
However, Martinez, Clark and Mumelter is silent as to disclosing triangulates the natural resources in response to an amplitude associated with each of the natural resources.
Cobbs discloses a system for seismic exploration for oil and gas in which amplitude measurements and triangulation within an array of sensors is used in order to determine the location of seismic events and for seismic exploration or exploration for minerals (see Cobbs, col. 1, ll. 45-57, col. 1, ll. 61-67; col. 4, ll. 27-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the system of Martinez as modified by Clark and Mumelter for triangulates the natural resources in response to an amplitude associated with each of the natural resources for the benefit of providing an enhanced and accurate characterization of the subsurface that would allow to determine a precise location of the minerals when exploration for minerals/natural resources is being conducted.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez US 20130226493 A1 (hereinafter Martinez) in view of Clark US 2015/0177272A1 (hereinafter Clark) in further view of Mumelter US2016/0047939 A1 (hereinafter Mumelter) in further view of DEVANI, D., “THE QUANTUM WORLD: FROM LABORATORY TO INDUSTRY,” ARMMS 2019, 12 PAGES (hereinafter Devani).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter discloses the materials as discussed above. Martinez further teaches a database in communication with the computing device (see para. 0034-0037, wherein a database connected to the calculation unit is disclosed), the database configured to store the sensor measurements and the sensor measurements that have been analyzed (see para. 0034-0037, 0046-0047, wherein a database is disclosed storing the geophysical data of the investigated data).
Martinez do not expressly or explicitly teaches the gravitational sensor systems include a transceiver for communicating directly or indirectly with the computing device.
Clark discloses one or more gravitational sensor systems (Clark discloses a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) gravimeters device, see abstract, para. 0003, 0107, para. 0109-0111, 0224, 0244-0245), and further discloses MEMS gravimeters for measuring gravitational fields/waves for oil exploration, etc. (see para. 0196-0197, 0199-0200, 0244-0245).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the given the teachings of Martinez of MEMS that can measure acceleration ranges from very low frequencies to configure the system of Martinez with gravimeters including accelerometers disclosed by Clark of a MEMS, for detecting gravitational waves by one or more accelerometers utilized by each of the one or more sensor systems for the benefit of providing an enhanced characterization of a subsurface of the investigated area.
However the combination of Martinez, Clark and Mumelter do not expressly or explicitly discloses that the one or more gravitational sensor systems include a transceiver for communicating directly or indirectly with the computing device.
Devani teaches one or more gravitational sensor systems include a transceiver for communicating directly or indirectly with the computing device. Devani discloses a data transceiver, capable of receiving gravitational data from a set of quantum gravimeters; and the gravitational processor capable of communicating with the data transceiver and generate analyzed gravitational parameters and one or more subterranean formation parameters (see abstract, pages 2-3 and Figs 2 and 5).
Therefore It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Devani into the system of Martinez as modified by Clark and Mumelter for the benefit of generating more accurate measurement results and allowing for an increase in accuracy of navigation and positioning to determine changes in underground structures which can lead to oil deposits.
Reasons for Overcoming the Prior Art
Regarding claims 19, currently rejected under 35 USC 101 the closest prior art of made of record either in singularly or in combination fails to teach, disclose or suggest the features set forth by dependent claims 19, without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by the amendments.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record cited in form PTOL-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YARITZA H PEREZ BERMUDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1520. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at (571) 272-6334. 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.
/YARITZA H. PEREZ BERMUDEZ/
Examiner
Art Unit 2857
/SHELBY A TURNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights