Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/503,846

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR IMPLEMENTING FULL WAVEFORM INVERSION USING ANGLE GATHERS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 07, 2023
Examiner
PREVIL, DANIEL
Art Unit
2685
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
BP CORPORATION NORTH AMERICA INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
1326 granted / 1547 resolved
+23.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1585
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.6%
+15.6% vs TC avg
§102
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
§112
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1547 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. Claims 1, 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pires De Vasconcelos (US 2016/0327668) in view of Iranpour et al. (US 2010/0067326). Regarding claims 1, 6, 9, Pires De Vasconcelos discloses a method for implementing a full waveform inversion (FWI) process using angle gathers (Fig. 1; page 3, [0037]), the method comprising: receiving observed seismic data associated with a subsurface region (page 3, [0037]) and (b) constructing, based on the observed seismic data (page 6, [0068]), a scalar velocity model and one or more vector velocity model partitions (fig. 1A; page 6, [0069]), wherein the one or more vector velocity model partitions correspond to one or more unique seismic angles (fig. 1; page 6, [0068-0069]); determining one or more vector gradients using the scalar velocity model and the (c) observed seismic data (page 6, [0068-0069]). Pires De Vasconcelos discloses all the limitations set forth above but fails to explicitly disclose captured by one or more seismic receivers; updating the one or more vector velocity model partitions using the one or more vector gradients. However, Iranpour discloses captured by one or more seismic receivers (page 3, [0027]); updating the one or more vector velocity model partitions using the one or more vector gradients (page 2, [0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was first filed to incorporate the features of Iranpour within the system of Pires De Vasconcelos in order to establish a metric to indicate the accuracy of the model thereby improving the reliability of the system. Regarding claim 4, Pires De Vasconcelos discloses wherein the one or more unique seismic angles (fig. 1A) comprises at least one of a reflection angle and an azimuth angle (fig. 1A). Regarding claim 5, Pires De Vasconcelos wherein the one or more unique seismic angles comprises both a reflection angle and an azimuth angle (fig. 1A). Regarding claim 7. Pires De Vasconcelos discloses generating synthetic data from the scalar velocity model (page 3, [0036-0037]). Regarding claim 8, Pires De Vasconcelos discloses determining residual data by comparing the synthetic data with the observed (f) seismic data (page 3, [0036-0037]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10-20 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In combination with all the limitations in the claims, the prior arts fail to teach or make obvious: wherein the one or more vector velocity model partitions correspond to one or more unique seismic angles; generate, based on the scalar velocity model, synthetic data; determine residual data by comparing the synthetic data with the observed seismic data; determine a one or more vector gradient using the scalar velocity model and the observed seismic data; and update the one or more vector velocity model partitions using the one or more vector gradients. Claims 2-3 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In combination with all the limitations in the claims, the prior arts fail to teach or make obvious: determining residual data by comparing synthetic data produced by the scalar (e) velocity model with the observed seismic data; and migrating the residual data backwards through time to determine the one or more (f) vector gradients. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Roberts (US 2018/0059276) discloses system………images. Mallet et al. (US 8,600,708) discloses systems………..subsurface. Magerlein (US 9,058,302) discloses combined…matrix. Asgedom et al. (US 2017/0234998) discloses methods Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL PREVIL whose telephone number is (571)272-2971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:30 AM -6:00 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, Wang Quan-Zhen can be reached at 571 272 3114. 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. DP January 26, 2026 /DANIEL PREVIL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 07, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602985
Crash Severity Detection System and Related Methods
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594951
AUDIBLE CUE SYSTEM FOR A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589195
HLM PUMP STOP REACTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12572322
Voice Prompt System, Voice Prompt Method for Bridge Girder Erection Unit, Computing Device, and Medium
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570212
OCCUPANT-LEFT-UNATTENDED WARNING DEVICE, OCCUPANT-LEFT-UNATTENDED WARNING SYSTEM, AND OCCUPANT-LEFT-UNATTENDED WARNING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+12.6%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1547 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month