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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 10, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Imrie (2022/0365240).
With respect to claim 1, Imrie discloses inducing first acoustic energy in a fluid contained within a pipe network at a predetermined location ([0026], lines 2-6]; [0028], lines 1-2; [0029], lines 37-38); recording, using an array of transducers, second acoustic energy that propagates, in response to the induced first acoustic energy, from the fluid through the pipe network and into a subsurface ([0028], lines 2-4; [0029], lines 40-41); providing the recorded, acoustic energy as an input to a machine learning algorithm ([0053], lines 9-11, 23-25) to generate image data associated with the subsurface ([0053], lines 23-25); and generating, with the machine learning algorithm, a subsurface model that comprises the generated image data for presentation in a graphical user interface ([0053], lines 7-9).
With respect to claim 10, Imrie discloses a non-transitory, computer readable medium storing instructions ([0033], lines 24-25) that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising: inducing first acoustic energy in a fluid contained within a pipe network at a predetermined location ([0026], lines 2-6]; [0028], lines 1-2; [0029], lines 37-38); recording, using an array of transducers, second acoustic energy that propagates, in response to the induced first acoustic energy, from the fluid through the pipe network and into a subsurface ([0028], lines 2-4; [0029], lines 40-41); providing the recorded, acoustic energy as an input to a machine learning algorithm ([0053], lines 9-11, 23-25) to generate image data associated with the subsurface ([0053], lines 23-25); and generating, with the machine learning algorithm, a subsurface model that comprises the generated image data for presentation in a graphical user interface ([0053], lines 7-9).
With respect to claim 19, Imrie discloses one or more processors ([0033], lines 19-20); one or more tangible, non-transitory, media operably connectable to the one or more processors and storing a machine learning model ([0033], lines 24-25) that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising: causing at least one acoustic source to induce first acoustic energy in a fluid contained within a pipe network at a predetermined location ([0026], lines 2-6]; [0028], lines 1-2; [0029], lines 37-38); recording, using an array of transducers, second acoustic energy that propagates, in response to the induced first acoustic energy, from the fluid through the pipe network and into a subsurface ([0028], lines 2-4; [0029], lines 40-41); providing the recorded, acoustic energy as an input to a machine learning algorithm ([0053], lines 9-11, 23-25) to generate image data associated with the subsurface ([0053], lines 23-25); and generating, with the machine learning algorithm, a subsurface model that comprises the generated image data for presentation in a graphical user interface ([0053], lines 7-9).
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.
Claims 2, 5, 6, 11, 14, 15, 20, 23, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imrie in view of Schaeffer (2024/0018866).
With respect to claims 2, 11, and 20, Imrie teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach sensing a pipe network pressure and fluid temperature at the predetermined location; and providing the sensed pipe network pressure and fluid temperature to the machine learning algorithm as input.
Schaeffer teaches sensing a pipe network pressure ([0042], lines 6-18) and fluid temperature ([0039], lines 6-7) at the predetermined location; and providing the sensed pipe network pressure and fluid temperature to the machine learning algorithm as input ([0018], lines 4-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method and apparatus of Imrie with the pressure and fluid temperature detection and input of Schaeffer since such a modification would have led to better evaluation of pipe conditions.
With respect to claims 5, 14, and 23, Imrie teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach performing distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) in one or more fiber optic cables to obtain strain data associated with the cables, wherein the fiber optic cables are in a region comprising the pipe network; and providing the strain data to the machine learning algorithm as input.
Schaeffer teaches performing distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) in one or more fiber optic cables to obtain strain data associated with the cables ([0016], lines 14-15), wherein the fiber optic cables are in a region comprising the pipe network ([0016], lines 15-17); and providing the strain data to the machine learning algorithm as input ([0018], lines 4-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method and apparatus of Imrie with the distributed acoustic sensing of Schaeffer since such a modification would have allowed for finer sensing location spacing using well-known technology.
With respect to claims 6, 15, and 24, Imrie teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach the one or more fiber optic cables are adjacent to one or more pipes of the pipe network.
Schaeffer teaches the one or more fiber optic cables are adjacent to one or more pipes of the pipe network ([0019], lines 2-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method and apparatus of Imrie with the cable placement of Schaeffer since such a modification would have ensured a good connection for accurate readings.
Claims 3, 12, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imrie in view of Stolarczyk (2014/0104979).
With respect to claims 3, 12, and 21, Imrie teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach the predetermined location is identified based on a GPS signal.
Stolarczyk teaches the predetermined location is identified based on a GPS signal ([0041]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method and apparatus of Imrie with the GPS identification of Stolarczyk since such a modification would have allowed for accurate timing calculations.
Claims 4, 9, 13, 18, 22, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imrie in view of Imrie (2016/0216393).
With respect to claims 4, 13, and 22, Imrie teaches the invention as discussed above. It furthermore teaches the predetermined location is one of a plurality of predetermined locations ([0029], lines 4-7), and performing beamforming techniques ([0029], lines 10-13). However, it does not teach the beamforming comprising selecting a predetermined time for each of the plurality of predetermined locations to cause constructive interference in the first acoustic energy from each of the plurality of predetermined locations at a target location; and inducing the first acoustic energy in the fluid at each of a plurality of predetermined locations, each induction occurring at a predetermined time.
Imrie teaches the beamforming comprising selecting a predetermined time for each of the plurality of predetermined locations to cause constructive interference in the first acoustic energy from each of the plurality of predetermined locations at a target location ([0025], lines 4-6; [0037]; [0064-9971]); and inducing the first acoustic energy in the fluid at each of a plurality of predetermined locations, each induction occurring at a predetermined time (claim 2, lines 2-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method and apparatus of Imrie with the beamforming timings of Imrie since such a modification would have allowed for the accurate sensing of a desired target.
With respect to claims 9, 18, and 27, Imrie teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach the meter is configured to both induce the first acoustic energy and record the second acoustic energy.
Imrie teaches the meter is configured to both induce the first acoustic energy and record the second acoustic energy ([0021], lines 11-12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method and systems of Imrie with the transmit and receive combination meter of Imrie since such a modification would reduce equipment costs.
Claims 7, 16, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imrie in view of Ahmad (2019/0271576).
With respect to claims 7, 16, and 25, Imrie teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach the first acoustic energy is induced by a transducer of a meter configured to measure flow in a pipe network.
Ahmad teaches first acoustic energy is induced by a transducer of a meter configured to measure flow in a pipe network ([0021]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the system of Imrie with the transducer of a flowmeter as taught by Ahmad since such a modification would allowed for the collection of additional data relevant to the pipe fluid and surroundings.
Claims 8, 17, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imrie in view of Schaeffer and Stolarczyk.
With respect to claims 8, 17, and 26, Imrie teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach the meter comprises a GPS receiver, a pressure sensor, and a temperature sensor.
Schaeffer teaches a pressure sensor ([0042], lines 6-18) and a temperature ([0039], lines 6-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method and apparatus of Imrie with the pressure and fluid temperature detection and input of Schaeffer since such a modification would have led to better evaluation of pipe conditions.
Stolarczyk teaches the sensor meter comprises a GPS receiver ([0041]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method and apparatus of Imrie with the GPS identification of Stolarczyk since such a modification would have allowed for accurate timing calculations.
Conclusion
The prior art which is cited but not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The references made herein are done so for the convenience of the applicant. They are in no way intended to be limiting. The prior art should be considered in its entirety.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRYSTINE E BREIER whose telephone number is (571)270-7614. The examiner can normally be reached Monday (9:30am-6:30pm); Tuesday & Friday (11:30am-5:30pm).
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.
/KRYSTINE E BREIER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645