CTFR 18/519,526 CTFR 87423 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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 1-4, 6-15, and 18-27 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. Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites: “A pipeline monitoring system, comprising: at least one collar configured to mount on a pipeline that transports a fluid; a plurality of transducers coupled to the at least one collar and configured to output a plurality of ultrasonic waves that travel through the pipeline in at least one direction parallel to a direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline; at least one pulse receiver electrically coupled to the plurality of transducers and configured to generate electrical power from a power source; and a control system communicably coupled to the pulse receiver and configured to perform operations comprising: operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to the plurality of transducers to output the plurality of ultrasonic waves; receiving, through the plurality of transducers, feedback data that comprises at least one ultrasonic waveform; and determining, based on the at least one ultrasonic waveform, a location on the pipeline that comprises a particular material anomaly ; generating a model of the pipeline that comprises a plurality of locations on the pipeline that each comprise the particular material anomaly; performing successive iterations over a time duration of: operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to a plurality of sets of transducers to output a plurality of ultrasonic waves; receiving, through the plurality of sets of transducers, feedback data that comprises the at least one ultrasonic waveform ; and determining, based on the at least one ultrasonic waveform, the plurality of locations on the pipeline that each comprise the particular material anomaly; and updating the model of the pipeline with each successive iteration .” The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements”. Under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (process). Under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the groupings of subject matter that covers mathematical concepts - mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations. Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claim 13 . Next, under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the above claims that recites a judicial exception are integrated into a practical application. The above claims comprise the following additional elements: In Claim 1: A pipeline monitoring system, comprising: at least one collar configured to mount on a pipeline that transports a fluid; a plurality of transducers coupled to the at least one collar and configured to output a plurality of ultrasonic waves that travel through the pipeline in at least one direction parallel to a direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline; at least one pulse receiver electrically coupled to the plurality of transducers and configured to generate electrical power from a power source; and a control system communicably coupled to the pulse receiver and configured to perform operations comprising: operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to the plurality of transducers to output the plurality of ultrasonic waves; receiving, through the plurality of transducers, feedback data that comprises at least one ultrasonic waveform; operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to a plurality of sets of transducers to output a plurality of ultrasonic waves; receiving, through the plurality of sets of transducers, feedback data that comprises the at least one ultrasonic waveform; In Claim 13: A method of monitoring a pipeline material, comprising: operating at least one pulse receiver to transmit electrical power from a power source to a plurality of transducers coupled to at least one collar mounted on a pipeline that transports a fluid; based on the transmitted electrical power from the at least one pulse receiver to the plurality of transducers, outputting a plurality of ultrasonic waves that travel through the pipeline in at least one direction parallel to a direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline; receiving, through the plurality of transducers, feedback data that comprises at least one ultrasonic waveform; operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to a plurality of sets of transducers to output a plurality of ultrasonic waves; receiving, through the plurality of sets of transducers, feedback data that comprises the at least one ultrasonic waveform. The additional elements in the preambles are recited in generality and represent insignificant extra-solution activity (field-of-use limitations) that is not meaningful to indicate a practical application. The additional elements in the claims such as generically recited at least one collar configured to mount on a pipeline that transports a fluid; a plurality of transducers coupled to the at least one collar and configured to output a plurality of ultrasonic waves that travel through the pipeline in at least one direction parallel to a direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline also correspond to field-of-use limitations of insignificant-extra solution activity. These limitations only tangentially relate to the abstract idea and not meaningful to indicate a practical application The limitation that recite at least one pulse receiver electrically coupled to the plurality of transducers and configured to generate electrical power from a power source; and a control system communicably coupled to the pulse receiver and configured to perform operations comprising: operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to the plurality of transducers to output the plurality of ultrasonic waves; receiving, through the plurality of transducers, feedback data that comprises at least one ultrasonic waveform represent insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data gathering. According to the October update on 2019 SME Guidance such steps are “performed in order to gather data for the (mental) analysis step, and is a necessary precursor for all uses of the recited exception. It is thus extra-solution activity, and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application”. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B. However, the above claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (Step 2B analysis) because these additional elements/steps are well-understood and conventional in the relevant art based on the prior art of record. The independent claims, therefore, are not patent eligible. With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-4, 6-12, 14-15, 18-27 provide additional features/steps which are part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claims (additionally comprising abstract idea steps) and, therefore, these claims are not eligible without meaningful additional elements that reflect a practical application and/or additional elements that qualify for significantly more for substantially similar reasons as discussed with regards to Claim 1. For example, additional elements in Claims 2 and 15 (each collar configured to mount on the pipeline at a unique location), Claim 3 (50 m from adjacent location), Claims 16, and 23 (particular material anomaly), Claims 8 and 20 (characteristic type), Claims 9, 14, and 21 (transducers coupled to particular collar, collars equally spaced radial intervals about the outer circumference), Claims 10, 19, and 22 (wave direction vs. fluid flow direction), Claim 11 (anomaly type), Claims 12 and 24 (fluid type) recite limitations in generality and/or having tangential relationship to the judicial exception, i.e. not meaningful to indicate a practical application and/or qualify for significantly more. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 6-9, 11-13, 18-21, and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arno Willem Frederick Volker et al. (US 9970905), hereinafter ‘Volker’ in view of Thomas Gabriel Rosauro Clarke et al. (US 20230184720), hereinafter ‘Clarke’, in further view of Hui-ting Huan et al. (CN 115201338), hereinafter ‘Huan’ . With regards to Claim 1 , Volker discloses A pipeline monitoring system, comprising: at least one ring configured to mount on a pipeline that transports a fluid; a plurality of transducers coupled to the at least one ring and configured to output a plurality of ultrasonic waves that travel through the pipeline in at least one direction parallel to a direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline (Figs. 1a, 3a-3c; Fig.5; FIG. 1a schematically shows a monitoring system for a pipe 10. The system comprises a first ring 12 of ultrasound transducers, a second ring 14 of ultrasound receivers (which may be ultrasound transducers as well). In an embodiment, pipe 10 has a cross-section that is at least substantially circular, composed of a pipe wall and a hollow interior for transport of fluid. FIG. 1b schematically shows a cross section of pipe 10 at the axial position of first ring 12, with a plurality of ultrasound transducers 120 (only one labelled) in the ring, located at successive circumferential positions on pipe 10. Second ring 14 may have a similar configuration. Furthermore, the monitoring system comprises a processing system 16 coupled to the ultrasound transducers of the first and second ring 12, 14, Col.5, Lines 14-27; The transmitters 54 and receivers 56 may be provided in a linear row, along a direction parallel to the row, Col.13, Lines 41-42) ; at least one pulse receiver electrically coupled to the plurality of transducers and configured to generate electrical power from a power source (FIG. 2 shows a flow chart of operation of operation processing system 16. In a first step 21, processing system 16 causes a transducer 120 (labelled by “i”) in first ring 12 to transmit an ultrasound signal. The signal may be a pulse at containing oscillations at a predetermined ultrasound frequency, multiple frequencies or a band of frequencies, Col.6, Lines 62-67); and a control system communicably coupled to the pulse receiver (processing system 16, Fig.1a) and configured to perform operations comprising: operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to the plurality of transducers to output the plurality of ultrasonic waves (as discussed above) ; receiving, through the plurality of transducers, feedback data that comprises at least one ultrasonic waveform (In operation processing system 16 causes transducers 120 of first ring 12 to transmit ultrasound waves and processing system 16 reads out ultrasound measurements obtained by transducers 120 of first ring 12 and by the receivers of second ring 14. From the measurements processing system 16 computes quantitative information about reflection from defects in pipe 10, Col.5, Lines 45-51; the processing system uses the measurements of signals due to reflected waves to estimate a resulting ultrasound reflected (including scattered) signal at the location 58 of the possible defect, Col.14, Lines 9-13) ; and determining, based on the at least one ultrasonic waveform, a location on the pipeline that comprises a material anomaly (The amplitude of the ratio R0(r1, r), or a corresponding R0 wherein the dependence on r1 has been replaced by a corresponding dependence on a spatial frequency, can be used as an estimate of defect (crack) depth at the location r. In an embodiment a predetermined look up table or proportionality constant may be provided based for a source location r1 or spatial source frequency, for converting the amplitude into an estimated crack depth at the location r. In this way a crack depth image representing estimated crack depth as a function of position r can be computed. Processing system 16 may be configured to generate a warning signal when an estimated depth exceeds a threshold, Col.9, Lines 26-37). However, Volker does not specifically disclose at least one collar configured to mount on a pipeline and correspondingly, at least one transducer coupled to that collar. Clarke discloses at least one collar configured to mount on a pipeline and a plurality of transducers coupled to that collar (collar of acoustic transducers 4, Fig.1; The collar of acoustic transducers 4 is adapted to emit a series of acoustic wave pulses at different frequencies [0028]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Volker in view of Clarke to use a collar to mount a plurality of ultrasonic transducers as known in the art (Clarke) as mechanical alternative to the ring that would similarly hold the transducers that perform similar function of emitting ultrasound waves. Volker also discloses operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to the plurality of sets of transducers to output the plurality of ultrasonic waves; receiving, through the plurality of sets of transducers, feedback data that comprises the at least one ultrasonic waveform; and determining, based on the at least one ultrasonic waveform, the plurality of locations on the pipeline that each comprise the particular material anomaly as discussed above. Volker discloses modeling ultrasound signals (using a model with parameters that define propagation speed and/or thickness of the wall at a plurality of locations on the pipe, Col.13, Lines 1-2) as well as updating the model (eight step 28 may be modified to use a defect model that predicts reflection dependent on the estimated wall thickness at the location of the defect from first added step 41, Col.13, Lines 7-11). Volker is also silent on generating a model of the pipeline that comprises a plurality of locations on the pipeline that each comprise the particular material anomaly; performing successive iterations over a time duration of: operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to a plurality of sets of transducers to output a plurality of ultrasonic waves; and receiving, through the plurality of sets of transducers, feedback data that comprises the at least one ultrasonic waveform. Huan discloses generating a model of the pipeline that comprises the plurality of locations on the pipeline that each comprise the particular material anomaly (building the corresponding simulation model, and exciting the T (0, 1) mode guided wave, analyzing from the simulation result, relative to the longitudinal wave mode, T (0, 1) the sensitivity of the pipeline defect is not high, suitable for pipeline signal transmission, p.2; The invention firstly in the finite element, simulation software model of simulating calculation guided wave detection defect, loading the incident signal in the form of displacement load on the pipeline in a certain manner, so as to excite the specific guided wave mode on the pipeline. by pipeline ultrasonic wave frequency dispersion phenomenon, comprehensive analysis of the multi-mode characteristics and the simulation result to obtain the conclusion, the excited L-mode sensitivity is better for the pipeline defect, so the general L mode is used for detecting the defect of the pipeline, p.4). Huan discloses a machine learning model (In one embodiment, the pipeline health level determination diagnosis unit artificial intelligence the defect identification method, firstly by modifying the different defects in comsol software, to obtain different defect echo, using matlab fitting tool box to perform data fitting to the waveform characteristic and defect size of different shape defects … deep learning, p.4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Volker in view of Clarke, and Huan to generate a model of the pipeline that comprises the plurality of locations on the pipeline that each comprise the particular material anomaly to simulate/learn about material anomaly at locations (detecting the defect of the pipeline. the excited T mode can be learned from the simulation result, Huan, p.4) while performing successive iterations (fitting, Huan, p.4) over a time duration of: operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit/receive waveform data as an iterative process of acquiring new data known (see, for example, Piervincenzo Rizzo et al.,” Defect Classification in Pipes by Neural Networks Using Multiple Guided Ultrasonic Wave Features Extracted After Wavelet Processing”, 2005, Submitted with the IDS dated 3/7/2025, Introduction: “learn from training samples through iterations”, p.295) in the art of artificial intelligence/supervised learning/defect classification to improve model accuracy (taking the oscillogram of different defect echo signals as the data set of the deep learning after the training model, using it as reasoning, testing model, loading an echo wave pattern, locating the pipeline defect and pipeline defect, after successfully testing, pushing for use, for analyzing pipeline defect, Huan, p.4). With regards to Claims 6 and 18 , Volker in view of Clarke, and Huan discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claim 1. With regards to Claim 7 , Volker additionally discloses wherein one or more characteristics of the plurality of ultrasonic waves is selected (The amplitude of the ratio R0(r1, r), or a corresponding R0 wherein the dependence on r1 has been replaced by a corresponding dependence on a spatial frequency, can be used as an estimate of defect (crack) depth at the location r. In an embodiment a predetermined look up table or proportionality constant may be provided based for a source location r1 or spatial source frequency, for converting the amplitude into an estimated crack depth at the location r. In this way a crack depth image representing estimated crack depth as a function of position r can be computed, Col.9, Lines 26-35) to cause the plurality of ultrasonic waves to travel through the pipeline in the at least one direction parallel to the direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline (a row of transmitters 54 is shown (only one labeled), the row extending in parallel with connection line 60. An array of receivers 56 is used. By way of example a row of receivers 56 is shown (only one labeled), the row extending in parallel with connection line 60, Col.13, Line 67- Col.14, line 3; Figs. 1a, 5, 6). However, Volker does not specifically discloses that one or more characteristics of the plurality of ultrasonic waves is selected, based on at least one of a pipeline material or a pipeline size to cause the ultrasonic waves to travel in a direction parallel to the direction of fluid. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Volker in view of Clarke and Huan that one or more characteristics of the plurality of ultrasonic waves is selected, based on at least one of a pipeline material or a pipeline size to cause the ultrasonic waves to travel in a direction parallel to the direction of fluid similarly to selecting amplitude ratio or spacial frequency based on crack size/depth as discussed above to ensure signal to noise ratio sufficient for accurate measurements. With regards to Claim 8 , Volker additionally discloses that the characteristic is amplitude or frequency (defect dependent amplitude but is independent of properties of the defect monitoring system itself, Col.2, Lines 63-64) and as discussed above in Claim 7. With regards to Claim 9 , Volker additionally discloses the at least one collar is configured to mount about an outer circumference of the pipeline, and the plurality of transducers are coupled to the least one collar at equally spaced radial intervals about the outer circumference (A transducer is both an ultrasound transmitter and an ultrasound receiver. The number of transducers 120 in FIG. 1b is shown merely by way of example. For a pipe the number of transducers for a 10 inch (0.25 m) pipe is between thirty and seventy may be used for example. Preferably the transducers are located evenly spaced along the circumference of pipe 10, Col.5, Lines 28-34; Fig.1b). With regards to Claims 11 and 12 , Volker in view of Clarke and Huan discloses the claimed invention as discussed in Claim 1. However, Volker does not specifically disclose that the material anomaly comprises corroded material of the pipeline and wherein the fluid comprises a hydrocarbon fluid. Huan discloses the material anomaly comprises corroded material of the pipeline and the fluid comprises a hydrocarbon fluid. Clarke discloses the material anomaly comprises corroded material of the pipeline (monitoring a material of a piping network, such as with a predictive guided wave ultrasonic scanning system to detect material corrosion [0001]) and t he fluid comprises a hydrocarbon (fluid the fluid 106 includes or is a hydrocarbon fluid (such as oil, gas, or multi-phase hydrocarbon fluid [0040]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Volker in view of Clarke and Huan to inspect hydrocarbon pipelines for material anomalies such as corrosion as known in the art (Clarke [0045]). With regards to Claim 13 , Volker in view of Clarke discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claim 1. With regards to Claims 19, 20, and 21 , Volker in view of Clarke and Huan discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 13 and 7, 8, 9, respectively. With regards to Claims 23 and 24 , Volker in view of Clarke and Huan discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 13 and Claims 11 and 12, respectively. With regards to Claim 25 , Volker in view of Clarke and Huan discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 1 and 7, respectively . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2-4 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, in further view of JIANG, Yin-fang et al. (CN 104965023), hereinafter ‘Jiang’ . With regards to Claim 2 , Volker in view of Clarke and Huan discloses the claimed invention as discussed above with regards to Claim 1. Volker discloses wherein the at least one ring comprises a plurality of rings, each ring configured to mount on the pipeline at a unique location of the pipeline, and the plurality of transducers comprises a plurality of sets of transducers, each set of transducers coupled to one of the plurality of rings (Figs. 1a and 1b; When the structure is a pipeline, a detection arrangement may comprise rings of ultrasound transducers and receivers around the circumference of a pipe, with an axial section of the pipe between the transducers and the receivers. In this case the delay between transmission from the transducers and reception of a reflection at the receivers in the ring provides information about the distance between the ring and a defect in the pipe and the circumferential position of the defect, Col.1, Lines 39-47). However, Volker does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one collar comprises a plurality of collars, each collar configured to mount on the pipeline at a unique location of the pipeline, and the plurality of transducers comprises a plurality of sets of transducers, each set of transducers coupled to one of the plurality of collars. Clarke discloses a collar configured to mount on the pipeline at a unique location of the pipeline (Figs.1 and 2). Jiang discloses sensor array rings (Figs. 4 and 5) with a plurality of sets of transducers, each set of transducers coupled to the ring. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Jiang that the at least one collar would comprise a plurality of collars, each collar configured to mount on the pipeline at a unique location of the pipeline, and the plurality of transducers comprises a plurality of sets of transducers, each set of transducers coupled to one of the plurality of collars as known in the art (Volker, above) to improve defect detection (By means of transducers 120 of first ring 12 and receivers of second ring 14 ultrasound measurements P1(n,i) and P2(n,i) may be obtained or, equivalently, P1′(m2, m1) and P2′(m2, m1) for circumferential frequencies m1, m2, Col.6, Lines 29-32; The normalized reflection and/or transmission coefficients for different locations could be used to form an image, Volker, Col.4, Lines 4-5; In fifth and sixth step 25, 26, processing system 16 performs these computations of P1″ and P2″ for each of a plurality of locations on pipe 10 between first and second ring 12, 14. In spatial domain representation this results in values P1″(r1, r) and P2″(r2, r), wherein r1 and r2 are circumferential positions of the transducers and receivers on the first and second ring from which the estimated (back propagated) signals are computed, and r is the position between the rings for which it is computed, Col.8, Lines 35-44). With regards to Claim 3 , Volker is silent on wherein each unique location of the pipeline is 50 meters from adjacent unique locations of the pipeline. Clarke discloses a predetermined distance of a collar from a joint (a collar of acoustic transducers (4) positioned at a predetermined distance from the joint, Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Jiang that each unique location of the pipeline is 50 meters from adjacent unique locations of the pipeline as an arbitrary choice of the inventors and no information is disclosed why a different, longer or shorter, distance would be less beneficial. With regards to Claim 4 , Volker discloses operating the at least one pulse receiver to transmit the generated electrical power to the plurality of sets of transducers to output the plurality of ultrasonic waves; receiving, through the plurality of sets of transducers, feedback data as discussed in Claim 1. Volker additionally discloses determining, based on the at least one ultrasonic waveform, a plurality of locations on the pipeline that each comprise a particular material anomaly (Similar computations of normalization factors may be performed for a plurality of locations on the wall in the area. This provides more input for the inverse defect parameter determination process, and therefore a possibility to estimate more defect parameters and/or estimate the defect parameters more accurately, Col.3, Line 65-Col.4, Line 3). Jiang also discloses determining, based on the at least one ultrasonic waveform, a plurality of locations on the pipeline that each comprise a particular material anomaly (the sensor array ring whole ring signal and a single sensor signal, by processing the signal to obtain the DAC curve and modal symmetric curve, realizing the real-time location of the defect, quantitatively and qualitatively, p.4). With regards to Claim 14 , Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Jiang discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 13 and 2. With regards to Claim 15 , Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Jiang discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 13 and 2, 3. With regards to Claim 16 , Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Jiang discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 13 and 4. With regards to Claim 26 , Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Jiang discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 13 and 15. With regards to Claim 27 , Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Jiang discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 26 and 9 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, in further view of Wayne S. Hill et al. (CN 1128987), hereinafter ‘Hill’ . With regards to Claim 10 , Volker in view of Clarke and Huan discloses the claimed invention as discussed in Claim 1. Volker discloses at least one direction parallel to the direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline comprises: a first direction parallel to the direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline as discussed in Claim 7. However, Volker is silent on the at least one direction parallel to the direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline comprises: a second direction parallel to the direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline and opposite the first direction. Hill discloses a second direction parallel to the direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline and opposite the first direction (in the sound wave speed measuring technology, a sound wave can be by a sensor through the fluid to the downstream transmission, hold the other one sensor and measuring the propagation time. the second wave propagating to the upstream side to determine propagation time and the opposite flow direction, p. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Hill that at least one direction parallel to the direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline comprises: a second direction parallel to the direction of flow of the fluid in the pipeline and opposite the first direction because of improved measurements of sound speed using two directions (comparing these propagation time, it can determine the effective sound speed in the fluid and the propagation speed thereof, Hill, p.5). With regards to Claim 22, Volker in view of Clarke, Huan, and Hill discloses the claimed limitations as discussed in Claims 13 and 10 . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 5/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. 35 U.S.C. 101 The applicant argues (p. 8-9): Unlike a mere mathematical algorithm, claim 1 recites a specific physical system including a collar, a plurality of transducers, and a pulse receiver. The system according to claim 1 selects wave characteristics based on physical "pipeline material or pipeline size" to ensure waves travel parallel to the direction of fluid flow. This is a functional improvement in the ability to perform, in example aspects, corrosion mapping of an operating pipeline, which constitutes a practical application. The Examiner disagrees. From the argument, it is unclear which additional elements and/or a combination is meaningful to demonstrate a practical application. The elements of “a collar, a plurality of transducers, and a pulse receiver” are necessary to all uses of the judicial exception that determines, based on the obtained data, locations of a material anomaly. However, such improvement is in the abstract idea only which is not sufficient to demonstrate a practical application. The Examiner also notes that Claim 1 does not discuss the argued selection of wave characteristics (“claim 1 selects wave characteristics”). Nevertheless, this feature only nominally/tangentially relates to the abstract idea (insignificant extra-solution activity per MPEP 2106.05(g)). With regards to the “improvement” argument, the Examiner submits that according to MPEP 2106.05(a).II: “it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology … the claim must include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery to qualify as an improvement to an existing technology” 35 U.S.C. 103 The applicant argues (p. 10): Nothing can be found in the Office Action that maps any portion of a cited reference to these features that provide for an iterative model builder as claimed. Indeed, a review of Huan shows that one of ordinary skill in the art would not interpret this reference as teaching or suggesting a model updated in an iterative approach as recited in amended claim 1 … This pre-operation step as described in Huan serves the purpose of simulating wave behavior to determine which modes (L-mode vs. T-mode) are sensitive to defects and to generate a synthetic dataset for training. … This type of pre-field operation is not, however, the same as or analogous to the iterative workflow recited in amended claim 1. The Examiner submits that while Volker discloses updating a model (p.11 of this office action), Huan discloses using artificial intelligence models that use iterative approach to collect more/ additional data to improve models/accuracy as known in the art. Also, Huan discloses using fitting algorithm which by itself inherently iterative as also known in the art. The rationale for combining the references is discussed in the motivation statement (Claim 1). The Examiner additionally submits that it is not necessary for the prior art to have the same or similar utility as in the claimed invention per MPEP 2144 IV (The court held “it is not necessary in order to establish a prima facie case of obviousness . . . that there be a suggestion or expectation from the prior art that the claimed [invention] will have the same or a similar utility as one newly discovered by applicant,” and concluded that here a prima facie case was established because “[t]he art provided the motivation to make the claimed compositions in the expectation that they would have similar properties.” 919 F.2d at 693, 16 USPQ2d at 1901 (emphasis in original)) . Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER SATANOVSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-5819. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9 am-5 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Catherine Rastovski can be reached on (571) 270-0349. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. /ALEXANDER SATANOVSKY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 2 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 3 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 4 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 5 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 6 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 7 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 8 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 9 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 10 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 11 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 12 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 13 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 14 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 15 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 16 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 17 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 18 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 19 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 20 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 21 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 22 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 23 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 24 Art Unit: 2857 Application/Control Number: 18/519,526 Page 25 Art Unit: 2857
Prosecution Insights