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 .
Response to Amendment
In the amendments filed June 30th, 2026, the following occurred: claims 1, 9, and 17 have been amended; claims 1-20 remain pending in this application.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-12, 17-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saeed et al. (US 20220065058 A1, “Saeed”) in view of Glasgow et al. (US 20190100992 A1, “Glasgow”), Cunningham et al. (US 20190011304 A1, “Cunningham”), and Hustava et al. (US 20180031701 A1, “Hustava”).
Regarding claim 1, Saeed discloses a system, comprising:
a first transducer configured to move in a first direction towards an object, to transmit a first sonic pulse only in the first direction towards an object, to receive a first echo of the first sonic pulse from the object, and to generate a first time-of-flight value A of the first sonic pulse([0049],Fig. 7 and Fig. 8 (76) illustrates three time of flight sensors at the end of housing (72) of the mobile body) ([0052], TOF may emit ultrasonic signals. TOF sensors operate as a range sensor and transmit signals in a forward direction as the mobility platform moves through the downhole environment in order to estimate the width of the environment in front of the platform and determine the presence of objects such as an XN-Nipple.);
a second transducer configured to move in the first direction towards the object, to generate a second sonic pulse (76) illustrates three time of flight sensors at the end of housing (72) of the mobile body) ([0052], TOF may emit ultrasonic signals. TOF sensors operate as a range sensor and transmit signals in a forward direction as the mobility platform moves through the downhole environment in order to estimate the width of the environment in front of the platform and determine the presence of objects such as an XN-Nipple.),
a controller configured to receive the distance value D, and responsive to the distance value D to generate a control signal to control movement of a mobile device; (Fig. 1 (10)). ([0042], when moving from one downhole size to another, the platform, using one or more sensors detects the transition and issues control signals to the computing module to retract or extend the treads on the arms depending on the transition type) ([0052], TOF may emit ultrasonic signals. TOF sensors operate as a range sensor and transmit signals in a forward direction as the mobility platform moves through the downhole environment in order to estimate the width of the environment in front of the platform and determine the presence of objects such as an XN-Nipple.)([0049],Fig. 7 and Fig. 8 (76) illustrates three time of flight sensors at the end of housing (72) of the mobile body)( the ultrasonic time of flight sensors would implicitly generate a first and second time of flight value and be moving in a first direction which is the same as the direction of the transmitted ultrasonic signals)
Saeed fails to teach
wherein the second transducer is physically offset from the first transducer by an offset distance Δd along the first direction;
a processor including code executed therein configured to receive the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, to generate a speed-of-sound value S, and to determine a distance value D of the object from at least one of the first and second transducers using the speed-of-sound value S and at least one of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, respectively;
a first transducer configured to generate a first sonic pulse having a first center frequency,
a second transducer configured to generate a second sonic pulse having a second center frequency different from the first center frequency.
A second transducer configured to transmit the second sonic pulse parallel to the first sonic pulse
Glasgow teaches
wherein the second transducer is physically offset from the first transducer by an offset distance Δd along the first direction ([0022] acoustic transducers as part of an array are axially spaced from one another at a predetermined distance from each other along a longitudinal axis)([0046], time of flight values are measured for an acoustic wave to travel from the acoustic transducer to the wellbore wall and back);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Saeed to include the teachings of Glasgow, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by using shifted positions between multiple transducers which allows the frequency shifts between emitted and receive waves to be more substantial to prevent cross-talk or interference between the transducers that may degrade the measurement quality. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow fails to teach
a processor including code executed therein configured to receive the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, to generate a speed-of-sound value S, and to determine a distance value D of the object from at least one of the first and second transducers using the speed-of-sound value S and at least one of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, respectively;
a first transducer configured to generate a first sonic pulse having a first center frequency,
a second transducer configured to generate a second sonic pulse having a second center frequency different from the first center frequency.
A second transducer configured to transmit the second sonic pulse parallel to the first sonic pulse
Cunningham teaches
a processor including code executed therein configured to receive the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, to generate a speed-of-sound value S, and to determine a distance value D of the object from at least one of the first and second transducers using the speed-of-sound value S and at least one of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, respectively ([0045], control computer is configured to determine time of flight values for multiple acoustic signals based on known speed of sound values in order to calculate a distance travelled by the acoustic signals)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, to further include the teachings of Cunningham, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by compensating the measured distance values and times-of-flight based on the speed of sound of the propagation medium, which prevents inaccuracies associated with how fast sound travels in a given environment surrounding the mobile body so that collisions can be avoided. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow and Cunningham, fails to teach
a first transducer configured to generate a first sonic pulse having a first center frequency,
a second transducer configured to generate a second sonic pulse having a second center frequency different from the first center frequency.
A second transducer configured to transmit the second sonic pulse parallel to the first sonic pulse
Hustava teaches
a first transducer configured to generate a first sonic pulse having a first center frequency(Fig. 2 , [0021] the obstacle monitoring system (200) includes two transducers (202) which send chirps (204) towards an obstacle (206). One transducer obtains a first distance measurement using an up-chirp. The second transducer operates concurrently with the first transducer and obtains a second distance measurement using a down-chirp. The down-chirp has a different center frequency when compared with the up-chirp),
a second transducer configured to generate a second sonic pulse having a second center frequency different from the first center frequency(Fig. 2 , [0021] the obstacle monitoring system (200) includes two transducers (202) which send chirps (204) towards an obstacle (206). One transducer obtains a first distance measurement using an up-chirp. The second transducer operates concurrently with the first transducer and obtains a second distance measurement using a down-chirp. The down-chirp has a different center frequency when compared with the up-chirp).
A second transducer configured to transmit the second sonic pulse parallel to the first sonic pulse(Fig. 2 illustrates both transducers (202) transmitting their respective pulses (204) in a direction parallel with one another)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the mobile device of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow and Cunningham, to further include the teachings of Hustava, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by utilizing multiple different center operating frequencies between different transducers for transmissions, thus improving the minimum and maximum detection distances, signal to noise ratio, and time of flight accuracy and resolution in the direct path of travel of the mobile vehicle in order to make better informed decisions regarding movement of the mobile body. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 2, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the system of claim 1. Saeed further teaches
wherein the mobile device includes the controller ([0046], computing module includes the motor controller and core processing unit).
Regarding claim 3, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the system of claim 1. Saeed further teaches
wherein the controller is external to the mobile device. ([0054]-[0055], present invention also includes the mobility platform as well as a control apparatus (Fig. 13 (94)) which includes a hand-held controller mounted in a housing with an antenna and is configured to instruct the mobility platform to move)
Regarding claim 4, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the system of claim 1. Cunningham further teaches
wherein the speed-of-sound value S corresponds to the speed of sound of a medium in an environment of the mobile device.([0030] speed of sound corresponds to the speed of sound through the medium in which the acoustic wave is travelling)
Regarding claim 9, Saeed discloses a mobile device, comprising:
a chassis ([0026] the various modules are interconnected and have respective housings which give the mobility platform its overall shape so that the mobility platform can be defined as a generally cylindrical object);
a propulsion subsystem having an end section and configured (Fig. 3 (14), responsive to a control signal, to propel the chassis in a first direction towards an object ([0047], motor can be controlled by receiving control signals from the computing module)([0007], computing module further configured to control drive module to drive the mobility platform to and within the upcoming portion of the downhole environment);
a first transducer disposed in the end section and configured to move in the first direction towards the object , transmit a first sonic pulse only in a first direction towards the object, to receive a first echo of the first sonic pulse from the object, and to generate a first time-of-flight value A of the first sonic pulse(Fig. 2 (12) illustrates a sensor module at an end section of the propulsion subsystem (14))([0049] sensor module includes at least one ToF sensor)([0052] ToF sensors may be ultrasonic) [0049],Fig. 7 and Fig. 8 (76) illustrates three time of flight sensors at the end of housing (72) of the mobile body)(the ultrasonic time of flight sensors would implicitly generate a first and second time of flight value and be moving in a first direction which is the same as the direction of the transmitted ultrasonic signals);
a second transducer disposed in the end section and configured to move in the first direction towards the object, to generate a second sonic pulse
wherein a controller is configured to receive the distance value D, and is responsive to the distance value D to generate the control signal to control movement of a mobile device by the propulsion subsystem ([0042], when moving from one downhole size to another, the platform, using one or more sensors detects the transition and issues control signals to the computing module to retract or extend the treads on the arms depending on the transition type) ([0052], TOF may emit ultrasonic signals. TOF sensors operate as a range sensor and transmit signals in a forward direction as the mobility platform moves through the downhole environment in order to estimate the width of the environment in front of the platform and determine the presence of objects such as an XN-Nipple).
Saeed fails to teach
wherein the second transducer is physically offset from the first transducer by an offset distance Δd along the first direction;
and a processor including code executed therein configured to receive the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, to generate a speed-of-sound value S, and to determine a distance value D of the object from at least one of the first and second transducers using the speed-of-sound value S and at least one of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, respectively.
a first transducer configured to generate a first sonic pulse having a first center frequency,
a second transducer configured to generate a second sonic pulse having a second center frequency different from the first center frequency.
A second transducer configured to transmit the second sonic pulse parallel to the first sonic pulse.
Glasgow teaches
wherein the second transducer is physically offset from the first transducer by an offset distance Δd along the first direction; ([0022] acoustic transducers as part of an array are axially spaced from one another at a predetermined distance from each other along a longitudinal axis)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the mobile device of Saeed to include the teachings of Glasgow, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by using shifted positions between multiple transducers which allows the frequency shifts between emitted and receive waves to be more substantial to prevent cross-talk or interference between the transducers that may degrade the measurement quality. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, fails to teach
and a processor including code executed therein configured to receive the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, to generate a speed-of-sound value S, and to determine a distance value D of the object from at least one of the first and second transducers using the speed-of-sound value S and at least one of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, respectively.
a first transducer configured to generate a first sonic pulse having a first center frequency,
a second transducer configured to generate a second sonic pulse having a second center frequency different from the first center frequency.
A second transducer configured to transmit the second sonic pulse parallel to the first sonic pulse
Cunningham further teaches
a processor including code executed therein configured to receive the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, to generate a speed-of-sound value S, and to determine a distance value D of the object from at least one of the first and second transducers using the speed-of-sound value S and at least one of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B, respectively. ([0045], control computer is configured to determine time of flight values for multiple acoustic signals based on known speed of sound values in order to calculate a distance travelled by the acoustic signals)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the mobile device of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, to further include the teachings of Cunningham, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by compensating the measured distance values and times-of-flight based on the speed of sound of the propagation medium, which prevents inaccuracies associated with how fast sound travels in a given environment surrounding the mobile body so that collisions can be avoided. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow and Cunningham fails to teach
a first transducer configured to generate a first sonic pulse having a first center frequency,
a second transducer configured to generate a second sonic pulse having a second center frequency different from the first center frequency.
A second transducer configured to transmit the second sonic pulse parallel to the first sonic pulse
Hustava teaches
a first transducer configured to generate a first sonic pulse having a first center frequency(Fig. 2 , [0021] the obstacle monitoring system (200) includes two transducers (202) which send chirps (204) towards an obstacle (206). One transducer obtains a first distance measurement using an up-chirp. The second transducer operates concurrently with the first transducer and obtains a second distance measurement using a down-chirp. The down-chirp has a different center frequency when compared with the up-chirp),
a second transducer configured to generate a second sonic pulse having a second center frequency different from the first center frequency (Fig. 2 , [0021] the obstacle monitoring system (200) includes two transducers (202) which send chirps (204) towards an obstacle (206). One transducer obtains a first distance measurement using an up-chirp. The second transducer operates concurrently with the first transducer and obtains a second distance measurement using a down-chirp. The down-chirp has a different center frequency when compared with the up-chirp)
A second transducer configured to transmit the second sonic pulse parallel to the first sonic pulse(Fig. 2 illustrates both transducers (202) transmitting their respective pulses (204) in a direction parallel with one another)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the mobile device of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow and Cunningham, to further include the teachings of Hustava, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by utilizing multiple different center operating frequencies between different transducers for transmissions, thus improving the minimum and maximum detection distances, signal to noise ratio, and time of flight accuracy and resolution in the direct path of travel of the mobile vehicle in order to make better informed decisions regarding movement of the mobile body. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 10, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the mobile device of claim 9. Saeed further teaches
wherein the chassis includes the controller ([0046], the computing module, which is positioned intermediately amongst the other modules, includes the controller).
Regarding claim 11, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the mobile device of claim 9. Saeed further teaches
wherein the controller is external to the chassis. Saeed further teaches wherein the controller is external to the chassis ([0054]-[0055], present invention also includes the mobility platform as well as a control apparatus (Fig. 13 (94)) which includes a hand-held controller mounted in a housing with an antenna and is configured to instruct the mobility platform to move)
Regarding claim 12, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the mobile device of claim 9. Cunningham further teaches
wherein the speed-of-sound value S corresponds to the speed of sound of a medium in an environment of the mobile device.([0030] speed of sound corresponds to the speed of sound through the medium in which the acoustic wave is travelling)
Regarding claim 17, the claim is a method claim corresponding to claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 18, the method corresponding to claim 4 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 20, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the method of claim 17. Saeed further teaches
wherein the mobile device includes the processor, the first transducer, and the second transducer. ([0028], sensor module includes the processor and the time of flight sensor)([0049], sensor module includes at least one ToF sensor) ([0052], reflected signals from ToF sensors are converted into distance values. ToF signals may be ultrasound)
Claim(s) 5, 13, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saeed in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, Hustava, and Han (US 7587936 B2, “Han”).
Regarding claim 5, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the system of claim 1. Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava fails to teach
wherein the processor is configured to determine the speed-of-sound value S according to S = Δd / |A-B|, wherein the value |A-B| is the absolute value of a difference of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B.
Han teaches
wherein the processor is configured to determine the speed-of-sound value S according to S = Δd / |A-B|, wherein the value |A-B| is the absolute value of a difference of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B. ([column 9, lines 6-27], teaches a method for calculating the speed of sound in a borehole, with equation 1 teaching that the speed of sound (v) being equal to the radial offset (Lo) between transducers divided by the difference in round-trip time of flight between the transducers)(speed is a scalar value and would implicitly be positive, meaning it would include the absolute value of the travel time difference, even in an instance where the travel time difference was negative).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava to further include the teachings of Han, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by utilizing multiple different time of flight values in order to calculate a speed of sound within a wellbore that is based on an average and is therefore more reliable in the event one of the time-of-flight measurements is flawed. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 13, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hutava teaches the mobile device of claim 9. Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava fails to teach
wherein the processor is configured to determine the speed-of-sound value S according to S = Δd / |A-B|, wherein the value |A-B| is the absolute value of a difference of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B.
Han teaches
wherein the processor is configured to determine the speed-of-sound value S according to S = Δd / |A-B|, wherein the value |A-B| is the absolute value of a difference of the first time-of-flight value A and the second time-of-flight value B. ([column 9, lines 6-27], teaches a method for calculating the speed of sound in a borehole, with equation 1 teaching that the speed of sound (v) being equal to the radial offset (Lo) between transducers divided by the difference in round-trip time of flight between the transducers)(speed is a scalar value and would implicitly be positive, meaning it would include the absolute value of the travel time difference, even in an instance where the travel time difference was negative).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the mobile device of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava to further include the teachings of Han, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by utilizing multiple different time of flight values in order to calculate a speed of sound within a wellbore that is based on an average and is therefore more reliable in the event one of the time-of-flight measurements is flawed. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 19, the claim is a method claim corresponding to claim 5 and is therefore indicated as allowable for similar reasons
Claim(s) 6-8 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saeed in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, Hustava, and Norli et al. (WO 2015020530 A2, “Norli”).
Regarding claim 6, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham and Hustava teaches the system of claim 1, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham and Hustava fails to teach
wherein the processor is configured to determine the distance D according to D = S × A, wherein A > B.
Norli teaches
wherein the processor is configured to determine the distance D according to D = S × A, wherein A > B ([pg. 6], time-of-flight, divided by 2 and multiplied by the propagation speed of sound in the medium, gives an estimate of the distance between the transducers and the casing wall)(in the event that A>B, the distance calculation is still completed for all transducers to get the distance measurements, including a distance measurement that is D= S x A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava to further include the teachings of Norli, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements between the transducers and any obstructions in the direction of travel of the mobile device caused by variations in annular space of the casing or borehole wall by taking multiple time-of-flight measurements that are compensated for variation in the speed of sound and attributing the distance measured to the greater distance value such that the control of the mobile device is based on detected object further away from the mobile device to give the mobile device more time to make necessary adjustments. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar System in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 7, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham and Hustava teaches the system of claim 1. Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham and Hustava fails to teach
the processor is configured to determine the distance D according to D = S × B, wherein B > A.
Norli teaches
wherein the processor is configured to determine the distance D according to D = S × A, wherein B > A ([pg. 6], time-of-flight, divided by 2 and multiplied by the propagation speed of sound in the medium, gives an estimate of the distance between the transducers and the casing wall)(in the event that B>A, the distance calculation is still completed for all transducers to get the distance measurements including a distance measurement that is D= S x B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava to further include the teachings of Norli, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements between the transducers and any obstructions in the direction of travel of the mobile device caused by variations in annular space of the casing or borehole wall by taking multiple time-of-flight measurements that are compensated for variation in the speed of sound and attributing the distance measured to the greater distance value such that the control of the mobile device is based on detected object further away from the mobile device to give the mobile device more time to make necessary adjustments. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 8, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham and Hustava teaches the system of claim 1. Saeed, as modified in view of Cunningham and Hustava fails to teach
wherein the first and second transducers are spaced apart by a length L in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction.
Norli teaches
wherein the first and second transducers are spaced apart by a length L in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction. (Fig. 7 (110) illustrates transducers spaced apart by a length L in a first direction and a second direction L, which is perpendicular to the first direction)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava to further include the teachings of Noerli, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by distributing multiple different time of flight measurements across the device in a lateral direction in order to measure the casing circumference ahead of the sensors more completely so that any obstacles in the direction of travel can be more reliably determined. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 14, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the mobile device of claim 9. Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava fails to teach
wherein the processor is configured to determine the distance D according to D = S × A, wherein A > B.
Norli teaches
wherein the processor is configured to determine the distance D according to D = S × A, wherein A > B ([pg. 6], time-of-flight, divided by 2 and multiplied by the propagation speed of sound in the medium, gives an estimate of the distance between the transducers and the casing wall)(in the event that A>B, the distance calculation is still completed for all transducers to get the distance measurements, including a distance measurement that is D= S x A)(Additionally , See 112b rejection for claim 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the mobile device of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava to further include the teachings of Norli, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements between the transducers and any obstructions in the direction of travel of the mobile device caused by variations in annular space of the casing or borehole wall by taking multiple time-of-flight measurements that are compensated for variation in the speed of sound and attributing the distance measured to the greater distance value such that the control of the mobile device is based on detected object further away from the mobile device to give the mobile device more time to make necessary adjustments. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 15, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the mobile device of claim 9. Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava fails to teach
wherein the processor is configured to determine the distance D according to D = S × B, wherein B > A.
Norli teaches
wherein the processor is configured to determine the distance D according to D = S × B, wherein B > A ([pg. 6], time-of-flight, divided by 2 and multiplied by the propagation speed of sound in the medium, gives an estimate of the distance between the transducers and the casing wall)(in the event that B>A, the distance calculation is still completed for all transducers to get the distance measurements including a distance measurement that is D= S x B) (Additionally , See 112b rejection for claim 15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava to further include the teachings of Norli, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements between the transducers and any obstructions in the direction of travel of the mobile device caused by variations in annular space of the casing or borehole wall by taking multiple time-of-flight measurements that are compensated for variation in the speed of sound and attributing the distance measured to the greater distance value such that the control of the mobile device is based on detected object further away from the mobile device to give the mobile device more time to make necessary adjustments. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 16, Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava teaches the mobile device of claim 9. Saeed, as modified in view of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava fails to teach
wherein the first and second transducers are spaced apart in the end section by a length L in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction.
Norli teaches
wherein the first and second transducers are spaced apart in the end section by a length L in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction. (Fig. 7 (110) illustrates transducers spaced apart by a length L in a first direction and a second direction L, which is perpendicular to the first direction)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the mobile device of Saeed, as modified in view of the teachings of Glasgow, Cunningham, and Hustava to further include the teachings of Norli, in order to yield an mobile body comprising an ultrasonic time of flight distance and ranging system that is capable of more accurate distance and ranging measurements by distributing multiple different time of flight measurements across the device in a lateral direction in order to measure the casing circumference ahead of the sensors more completely so that any obstacles in the direction of travel can be more reliably determined. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks, filed June 30th, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 9, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Saeed et al. (US 20220065058 A1, “Saeed”) in view of Glasgow et al. (US 20190100992 A1, “Glasgow”), Cunningham et al. (US 20190011304 A1, “Cunningham”), and Hustava et al. (US 20180031701 A1, “Hustava”).
On pg. 4-6 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that due to the alleged allowability of claims 1, 9, and 17, dependent claims 2-8, 10-16, and 18-20 are therefore in condition for allowance. As noted in the response to arguments with respect to claims 1, 9, and 17, the claims stand rejected under a new grounds, as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to the claims. Therefore the rejections of claims 2-8, 10-16, and 18-20 are also maintained.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record though not relied upon in the present basis of rejection are noted in the attached PTO 892 and include:
Manders et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11644441) which discloses methods and systems for acoustic surface imaging using time of flight
Luu et al. (U.S. Patent Application No. 20210142515) which discloses techniques using acoustic devices to identify external apparatuses mounted to a tubular using time of flight measurements
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 CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6136. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at 571-270-3603. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights