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 .
Election/Restrictions
1. A response on 05/25/2010 a provisional election was made without traverse (with traverse but with no support or reason for the traversal, MPEP § 818.01(a)) to prosecute the invention of claims 1-9. Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Because these inventions are distinct for the reasons given on action dated 03/12/2026, restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-9 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.
Claim 1, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to an MPD method for drilling a well using a drilling system, comprises: monitoring, using one or more sensors, one or more parameters associated with drilling the wellbore selected from the following: flow-in rate, flow-out rate, density, choke position, and drillstring velocity appears is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of drilling a wellbore, including circulating fluid through the wellbore during drilling are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional elements of determining, using a processor, a threshold for detection of an influx and a detection sensitivity based on quality of data for the one or more parameters; detecting, using the processor, a potential influx using the detection threshold; confirming, using the processor, the detected influx using the detection sensitivity; and responsive to confirming the detected influx, initiating an action in the drilling system appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 1 not eligible.
Claim 2 related to wherein determining a threshold for detection of an influx and a detection sensitivity further comprises: determining stability of the data for each parameter, thereby determining a health score for each parameter based on the corresponding stability; assigning a weight to each parameter; determining an overall health score based on a weighted sum of the health scores for the one or more parameters; and establishing the threshold to detect influx and the detection sensitivity for confirming influx detection based on the overall health score; wherein determining the stability of each parameter comprises calculating standard deviation of the data for each parameter in a timeframe; and 55 wherein establishing the threshold to detect influx and the detection sensitivity is based on comparison of the overall health score to a look-up table which is based upon historical data, appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 2 not eligible.
Claim 3 related to comprising compensating for drillstring movement by subtracting flowrate attributable to drillstring movement from measured fluid flowrate, appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 3 not eligible.
Claim 4 related to providing, to the processor, flow-out rate of drilling fluid exiting an annulus of the well; providing, to the processor, depth data for the drillstring; estimating, using the processor, drillstring velocity based on the depth data ofthe drillstring using a Kalman filter; calculating, using the processor, flow-out rate attributable to drillstring movement based on the estimated velocity of the drillstring; and using, by the processor, the calculated flow-out rate attributable to the drillstring to correct the provided flow-out rate, thereby determining a corrected flow-out rate, appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 4 not eligible.
Claim 5 related to filtering parameter data by applying one or more filtering technique to the data, appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 5 not eligible.
Claim 6 related to using an adaptive moving average technique on the data for each parameter, by determining a time window size to use for the adaptive moving average of each parameter based on the corresponding health score, and then averaging the data for each parameter over the corresponding time window, appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 5 not eligible.
Claim 7 related to responsive to movement of a choke in the drilling system, applying bilateral filtering to the data, appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 7 not eligible.
Claim 8 related to updating and applying baselines relating to flow-in rate and flow-out rate to remove any offset, appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 8 not eligible.
Claim 9 related to detecting potential influx comprises calculating the flow rate difference (DeltaFR) between flow-out rate and flow-in rate, calculating the slope of DeltaFR, and comparing the slope to the detection threshold; and confirming the detected influx comprises determining the size of the influx, and comparing the size of the influx to the detection sensitivity, appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 9 not eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Ameen (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0062635 A1, Date Published: 2021-03-04).
Regarding claim 1:
Ameen described an MPD method for drilling a well using a drilling system, comprises: drilling a wellbore, including circulating fluid through the wellbore during drilling (0030, MPD drilling); monitoring, using one or more sensors, one or more parameters associated with drilling the wellbore selected from the following: flow-in rate (0047, deliver flow to the drillstring), flow-out rate (0035, Returns-Flow-Control), density (0059, density), choke position (0016, position of at least one choke), and drillstring velocity (0086, velocity of drilling); determining, using a processor, a threshold for detection of an influx and a detection sensitivity based on quality of data for the one or more parameters (0030, influx information fluid, 0055, wellbore influxes or losses are detectable at the surface, and the control system).
Regarding claim 2, Ameen further described determining stability of the data for each parameter, thereby determining a health score for each parameter based on the corresponding stability (0067, influxes and losses on a real-time of the system); assigning a weight to each parameter; determining an overall health score based on a weighted sum of the health scores for the one or more parameters (0067, apply adjustments to the surface backpressure (SBP) with the choke manifold); and establishing the threshold to detect influx and the detection sensitivity for confirming influx detection based on the overall health score (0072, drilling window defined as greater than or equal to a minimum threshold, 0059, data are logging); wherein determining the stability of each parameter comprises calculating standard deviation of the data for each parameter in a timeframe (0072, define windows threshold operation leakage pressure); and 55 wherein establishing the threshold to detect influx and the detection sensitivity is based on comparison of the overall health score to a look-up table which is based upon historical data (0080, data including any lookup tables, curves, functions, equations, data sets).
Regarding claim 3, Ameen further described comprising compensating for drillstring movement by subtracting flowrate attributable to drillstring movement from measured fluid flowrate (0137, 0141, compensate drilling movement with fluid flowing).
Regarding claim 5, Ameen further described comprising filtering parameter data by applying one or more filtering technique to the data (fig. 5A, B trap time/SBP, BHP).
Regarding claim 6, Ameen further described using an adaptive moving average technique on the data for each parameter (0072, average of the pore and fracture BHPs with threshold), by determining a time window size to use for the adaptive moving average of each parameter based on the corresponding health score (0075, loss of the returns?), and then averaging the data for each parameter over the corresponding time window (0072, BHP within the window during the drilling operation).
Regarding claim 7, Ameen further described responsive to movement of a choke in the drilling system, applying bilateral filtering to the data (0082, adjustment to be applied to the chokes).
Regarding claim 8, Ameen further described updating and applying baselines relating to flow-in rate and flow-out rate to remove any offset (0034, influxes are adjusted to increase precision, 0082, adjust chokes as needed).
Regarding claim 9, Ameen further described calculating the flow rate difference (DeltaFR) between flow-out rate and flow-in rate (0071, flow-in and the flow-out can involve various types of differences, relationships, decreases, increases), calculating the slope of DeltaFR, and comparing the slope to the detection threshold (fig. 5A, 5B, slope of the detection SBP, BHP); and confirming the detected influx comprises determining the size of the influx, and comparing the size of the influx to the detection sensitivity (0011-0012, adjustment as needed to keep the surface pressure).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ameen (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0062635 A1, Date Published: 2021-03-04) in view of Marx (US Patent Application Publication 20140116776 A1, Date Published: 2014-05-01).
The above references are relevant because they are from the same technology art (logging tools with drilling)
Regarding claim 4, Ameen further described providing, to the processor, flow-out rate of drilling fluid exiting an annulus of the well (0137, 0141, compensate drilling movement with fluid flowing); providing, to the processor, depth data for the drillstring (0078-0081, use computer control drilling); estimating, using the processor, drillstring velocity based on the depth data of the drillstring (0132, velocity dependence from time); calculating, using the processor, flow-out rate attributable to drillstring movement based on the estimated velocity of the drillstring (0127, 0132, velocity of fluid flowing out of the borehole); and using, by the processor, the calculated flow-out rate attributable to the drillstring to correct the provided flow-out rate, thereby determining a corrected flow-out rate (0127, fluid flowing out of the borehole).
Ameen does not describe using a Kalman filter.
Marx using a Kalman filter (0129, combining the features of Kalman filters), for the purpose of optimized rotation speed of the drilling rate to increase productivity by maximized drilling rate (0007).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Ameen to have the use of Kalman filter taught by Marx for the purpose of optimized rotation speed of the drilling rate to increase productivity by maximized drilling rate.
Contact information
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll- free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272- 1000.
/TUNG S LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Technology Center 2800
May 5, 2026
Prosecution Insights