DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final Rejection
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/14/2024 and 06/11/2025 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 19 states “A computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions” and does not claim a non-transitory embodiment. Examiner Note; Applicant can amend to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments by adding the limitation “non-transitory” to the claim (i.e. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions …”), such an amendment would not raise the issue of new matter, even when the specification is silent, unless the specification does not support a non-transitory embodiment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-2, 4, 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang (CN 115240397 A, all citations provided from machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Yang teaches a self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool (data collecting device 200 also needs to perform self-burying operation), comprising: a navigator (203), implemented by a processor (204), configured to determine a course to a target destination within a subsurface formation, the course being based on a current location received from one or more sensors (motion control unit 204 is used for monitoring the current position information of the data collecting device 200, and according to the current position information and the preset target position information generating control signal). (Page.6, Paragraphs 5-6, Page.6, Paragraph 4, Page.7, Paragraph 3, Figs.1-3)
Yang also teaches a burrower (206), implemented by the processor, configured to operate a burrowing device to reach the target destination based on the course (driving member 206 for driving the pressure member 207 according to the working state for spiral motion and linear motion, to control the data acquisition device 200 buried preset depth). (Page.6, Paragraphs 4-6, Fig.3)
Yang also teaches a data acquisition unit (marine seismic monitoring function, 208), implemented by the processor (209), configured to generate seismic data based on seismic waves received at the target destination (the vibration sensor 208 for generating corresponding electric signal according to the seabed vibration, a data processing unit 209 for converting the analogue electric signal into a digital signal to store). (Page.7, Paragraph 3, Figs.2-3)
Regarding claim 2, Yang teaches a command unit, implemented by the processor, configured to receive one or more commands or operational errors and to determine one or more operation modes based upon the one or more commands or operational errors. (Page.7, Paragraph 5-Page.8, Paragraph 1, Claim 6)
Regarding claim 4, Yang teaches wherein the data acquisition unit acquires data in response to the one or more operation modes indicating to begin seismic data acquisition, and wherein the data acquisition unit ceases acquiring data in response to the one or more operation modes indicating to cease seismic data acquisition. (Page.8, Paragraph 5-Page.9, Paragraph 2, Fig.4)
Regarding claim 7, Yang teaches a computer-implemented method for a self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool, comprising: determining a course to a target destination within a subsurface formation from a surface location. (Page.6, Paragraphs 5-6, Page.6, Paragraph 4, Page.7, Paragraph 3, Figs.1-3)
Yang also teaches operating a burrowing device to the target destination based on the course; and generating seismic data based on seismic waves received at the target destination. (Page.6, Paragraphs 4-6, Page.7, Paragraph 3, Figs.2-3)
Regarding claim 18, Yang teaches receiving the target destination; and navigating to a delivery site associated with the target destination. (Page.6, Paragraphs 5-6, Page.6, Paragraph 4, Page.7, Paragraph 3, Figs.1-3)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3, 5-6, 8-12 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Brizard (US 20150316675 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Yang does not explicitly teach wherein the burrower causes the burrowing device to descend within the subsurface formation in response to the one or more operation modes indicating descent, and wherein the burrower causes the burrowing device to ascend within the subsurface formation in response to the one or more operation modes indicating ascent.
Brizard teaches wherein the burrower causes the burrowing device to descend within the subsurface formation in response to the one or more operation modes indicating descent, and wherein the burrower causes the burrowing device to ascend within the subsurface formation in response to the one or more operation modes indicating ascent. (Paragraphs 43, 46-47, Figs.8, 11)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate wherein the burrower causes the burrowing device to descend within the subsurface formation in response to the one or more operation modes indicating descent, and wherein the burrower causes the burrowing device to ascend within the subsurface formation in response to the one or more operation modes indicating ascent in order to position the burrowing device at a desired location and retrieve the burrowing device to the surface for data collection, charging and/or repair.
Regarding claim 5, Yang does not explicitly teach wherein the command unit causes a transceiver to transmit a signal in response to the one or more operation modes indicating the self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool is waiting for retrieval.
Brizard teaches wherein the command unit causes a transceiver to transmit a signal in response to the one or more operation modes indicating the self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool is waiting for retrieval. (Paragraph 52)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate wherein the command unit causes a transceiver to transmit a signal in response to the one or more operation modes indicating the self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool is waiting for retrieval in order to retrieve the burrowing device to the surface for data collection, charging and/or repair.
Regarding claim 6, Yang does not explicitly teach a wireless communication unit configured to facilitate underground communication with wireless communication units of adjacent self-burrowing seismic-sensing tools.
Brizard teaches a wireless communication unit configured to facilitate underground communication with wireless communication units of adjacent self-burrowing seismic-sensing tools. (Paragraphs 30, 32, Fig.8)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate a wireless communication unit configured to facilitate underground communication with wireless communication units of adjacent self-burrowing seismic-sensing tools in order to communicate data to for example stop burring when desired depth is reached.
Regarding claim 8, Yang does not explicitly teach receiving an indication to cease collection of the seismic data; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location.
Brizard teaches receiving an indication to cease collection of the seismic data; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location. (Paragraphs 52, 35, Figs.8, 11)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate receiving an indication to cease collection of the seismic data; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location in order to retrieve the burrowing device to the surface for data collection, charging and/or repair.
Regarding claim 9, Yang does not explicitly teach descending from the surface location to the target destination via a first course; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location via a second course, wherein the first course and the second course are different courses.
Brizard teaches descending from the surface location to the target destination via a first course; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location via a second course, wherein the first course and the second course are different courses. (Paragraphs 35, 38-39, 43, 46-47, Figs.8, 11)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate descending from the surface location to the target destination via a first course; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location via a second course, wherein the first course and the second course are different courses position the burrowing device at a desired location and retrieve the burrowing device to the surface for data collection, charging and/or repair.
Regarding claim 10, Yang does not explicitly teach receiving an indication of an operational error; determining that the operational error indicates a navigational error; and performing a maneuver to correct for the navigational error.
Brizard teaches receiving an indication of an operational error; determining that the operational error indicates a navigational error; and performing a maneuver to correct for the navigational error. (Paragraphs 41)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate receiving an indication of an operational error; determining that the operational error indicates a navigational error; and performing a maneuver to correct for the navigational error in order to account for an encounter with an unexpected object, e.g., fish, debris, etc.
Regarding claim 11, Yang does not explicitly teach determining that the operational error indicates a system error; determining one or more measurements between a current location and the surface location; and determining the second course to navigate from the current location to the surface location.
Brizard teaches determining that the operational error indicates a system error; determining one or more measurements between a current location and the surface location; and determining the second course to navigate from the current location to the surface location. (Paragraphs 41, 38, 57, Fig.8)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate determining that the operational error indicates a system error; determining one or more measurements between a current location and the surface location; and determining the second course to navigate from the current location to the surface location in order to account for an encounter with an unexpected object, e.g., fish, debris, etc.
Regarding claim 12, Yang does not explicitly teach determining one or more measurements between the surface location and the target destination; and determining the course based upon the one or more measurements.
Brizard teaches determining one or more measurements between the surface location and the target destination; and determining the course based upon the one or more measurements. (Paragraphs 41, 38, 57, Fig.8)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate determining one or more measurements between the surface location and the target destination; and determining the course based upon the one or more measurements in order to compute its own updated position and velocity by integrating (and optionally filtrating) information received from its motion sensors.
Regarding claim 19, Yang teaches to determine a course to a target destination within a subsurface formation, the course based on a current location received from one or more sensors; operate a burrowing device to the target destination based on the course; and collect seismic data based on seismic waves received at the target destination. (Page.6, Paragraphs 4-6, Page.7, Paragraph 3, Figs.1-3)
Yang does not explicitly teach a computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions, which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to execute instructions.
Brizard teaches a computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions, which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to execute instructions. (Paragraph 57)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate a computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions, which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to execute instructions in order to perform basic processing on the collected seismic data and enabling real-time data processing, improving operational efficiency, providing enhanced situational awareness through faster analysis of large datasets.
Regarding claim 20, Yang does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further operable to: determine one or more operation modes based upon one or more commands or operational errors received; cause the burrowing device to descend in response to the one or more operation modes indicating descent; cause the burrowing device to ascend in response to the one or more operation modes indicating ascent; and cause a transceiver to transmit a signal in response to the one or more operation modes indicating that a self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool is waiting for retrieval.
Brizard teaches wherein the processor is further operable to: determine one or more operation modes based upon one or more commands or operational errors received; cause the burrowing device to descend in response to the one or more operation modes indicating descent; cause the burrowing device to ascend in response to the one or more operation modes indicating ascent; and cause a transceiver to transmit a signal in response to the one or more operation modes indicating that a self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool is waiting for retrieval. (Paragraphs 41, 43, 46-47, 52, Figs.8, 11)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate wherein the processor is further operable to: determine one or more operation modes based upon one or more commands or operational errors received; cause the burrowing device to descend in response to the one or more operation modes indicating descent; cause the burrowing device to ascend in response to the one or more operation modes indicating ascent; and cause a transceiver to transmit a signal in response to the one or more operation modes indicating that a self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool is waiting for retrieval in order to position the burrowing device at a desired location and retrieve the burrowing device to the surface for data collection, charging and/or repair.
Claim(s) 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Brizard and Nicholas (“Controlling subterranean forces enables a fast, steerable, burrowing soft robot”, all citations provided from machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 13, Yang teaches determining a current location within the subsurface formation at periodic intervals and comparing the current location determined at each periodic interval to the course. (Page.6, Paragraphs 4-5, Claims 2, 9-10)
Yang does not explicitly teach re-positioning the burrowing device based on the comparison indicating that the current location deviates from the course by a specified threshold
Nicholas teaches re-positioning the burrowing device based on a comparison indicating that the current location deviates from the course by a specified threshold. (Section. “Robot Performance”, Figs.6-7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate re-positioning the burrowing device based on a comparison indicating that the current location deviates from the course by a specified threshold in order to quickly and accurately transverse the subterrain environment avoiding buried obstacles.
Regarding claim 14, Yang teaches comparing the current location determined at each interval to the target destination; and triggering collection of the seismic data. (Page.6, Paragraphs 4-5, Claims 2, 9-10)
Yang does not explicitly teach ceasing descent based on the comparison indicating that the current location is the target destination.
Nicholas teaches ceasing descent based on the comparison indicating that the current location is the target destination. (Section. “Robot Performance”, Figs.6-7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate ceasing descent based on the comparison indicating that the current location is the target destination in order to quickly and accurately transverse the subterrain environment avoiding buried obstacles.
Regarding claim 15, Yang teaches determining one or more measurements between the target destination and the surface location. (Page.6, Paragraphs 4-5, Claims 2, 9-10)
Yang does not explicitly teach determining a second course to navigate from the target destination to the surface location; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location based on the second course.
Nicholas teaches determining a second course to navigate from the target destination to the surface location; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location based on the second course. (Section. “Robot Performance”, Figs.6-7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate determining a second course to navigate from the target destination to the surface location; and ascending from the target destination to the surface location based on the second course in order to quickly and accurately transverse the subterrain environment avoiding buried obstacles.
Regarding claim 16, Yang does not explicitly teach comparing the current location determined at each interval to the second course; and re-positioning based on the comparison indicating that the current location deviates from the second course by the specified threshold.
Nicholas teaches comparing the current location determined at each interval to the second course; and re-positioning based on the comparison indicating that the current location deviates from the second course by the specified threshold. (Section. “Robot Performance”, Figs.6-7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate comparing the current location determined at each interval to the second course; and re-positioning based on the comparison indicating that the current location deviates from the second course by the specified threshold in order to quickly and accurately transverse the subterrain environment avoiding buried obstacles.
Regarding claim 17, Yang does not explicitly teach comparing the current location determined at each interval to the surface location; ceasing ascent based on the comparison indicating that the current location is the surface location; and triggering retrieval of the self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool.
Nicholas teaches comparing the current location determined at each interval to the surface location; ceasing ascent based on the comparison indicating that the current location is the surface location; and triggering retrieval of the self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool. (Section. “Robot Performance”, Figs.6-7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Yang to incorporate comparing the current location determined at each interval to the surface location; ceasing ascent based on the comparison indicating that the current location is the surface location; and triggering retrieval of the self-burrowing seismic-sensing tool in order to quickly and accurately transverse the subterrain environment avoiding buried obstacles.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDALLAH ABULABAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-3:00pm 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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/ABDALLAH ABULABAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645