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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 15 December 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
Figures 1 and 3-11: Numbers, letters, and reference characters must be at least .32 cm (1/8 inch) in height. See 37 C.F.R. 1.84(p)(3).
Figures 13-15 and 17: Lines, numbers and letters not uniformly thick and well defined, clean, durable, and black (poor line quality). See 37 C.F.R. 1.84(l).
The numerals/text within the graphs and the flowchart are blurry as they have a dot matrix background, which distorts the view.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 1, text line 14: A – comma – should be inserted prior to the term “such.”
Page 2, text lines 10 and 12: A – comma – should be inserted after the abbreviation “e.g.”
Page 2, text line 16: A – comma – should be inserted after the term “position.”
Page 3, text line 27: A – comma – should be inserted after the abbreviation “e.g.”
Page 7, text line 4: A – comma – should be inserted prior to the term “such” and after the term “transducer.”
Page 7, text lines 8 and 12: A – comma – should be inserted after the abbreviation “i.e.”
Page 10, text line 15: A – comma – should be inserted prior to the term “such.”
Page 12, text lines 7 and 23: A – comma – should be inserted after the abbreviation “i.e.”
Page 13, text line 27: A – comma – should be inserted after the abbreviation “i.e.”
Page 14, text line 5: A – comma – should be inserted after the abbreviation “e.g.”
Page 14, text line 6: A – comma – should be inserted prior to the term “such.”
Page 14, text line 7: Some conjunction should be inserted prior to the term “phase.”
Page 16, text lines 21, 23, and 29: A – comma – should be inserted after the abbreviation “e.g.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 20, claim line 1: The article “The” should be corrected to read – A – as this claim is the first to introduce a fluid sensing apparatus rather than a method.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Re claim 1, claim lines 4 and 5: The term “sufficiently” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “sufficiently” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the term is vague and lacks meaning in the context it is being used.
Re claim 3, claim lines 1-3: It is unclear how the power of the through-fluid acoustic wave, which is generated using “high” power has the same magnitude of power (i.e., one) as the power of the reflected acoustic wave generated using “low power.” This does not appear to make sense, given that claim 1 appears to suggest that these powers (high and low) are different from each other because the characteristics/functionality of the waves are based on their power of the transducer producing them.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9, 13-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 5,130,950 (Orban et al.).
With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Orban et al. disclose a method for determining a property of a volume of fluid (properties of borehole drilling fluid – col. 4, lines 4-27), the method comprising:
driving one or more transducers (45, 46) to generate i) a through-fluid acoustic wave having sufficiently high power to traverse into the volume of fluid (part of sonic pulse (1) travels through the volume of fluid (10) as depicted by arrow (5) – col. 17, lines 28-31 and Figures 4) (Figures 6A, 7A, 8A, and 9A show a through-fluid acoustic wave (3)), and ii) a reflective acoustic wave having sufficiently low power to be reflected at a reflection location located in between the volume of fluid and the one or more transducers generating the reflective acoustic wave (some part of sonic pulse (1) is reflected towards a ceramic disk (54) of transceiver (45) as depicted by arrow (2) – col. 17, lines 32-33 and Figure 4) (Figures 6A, 7A, 8A, and 9A also show a reflective acoustic wave (2));
receiving, by the one or more transducers, both of the through-fluid acoustic wave and the reflective acoustic wave (ceramic disk (54) of transceiver (45) receives both the through-fluid acoustic wave (pulse (5) is reflected back to transceiver as pulse echo (6) – col. 17, line 55 through col. 18, line 2); and the reflective acoustic wave (reflected sonic pulse or echo (2) strikes and excites ceramic disk (54) - col. 17, lines 37-54)) (Figures 6A, 7A, 8A, and 9A show both the reflective acoustic wave (2) and the through-fluid acoustic wave (3)) being returned to the ceramic disk (54) of the transceiver (45));
converting the received waves into one or more corresponding electrical signals (mechanical excitation of the ceramic disk (54) generates an electrical signal representative of the amplitude and time delay of the sonic echo – col.17, lines 38-40); and
processing the one or more electrical signals to determine a property of the fluid (properties, such as amount of cuttings and gas concentration within the drilling fluid, density, and sonic impedance, are determined - col. 5, lines 34-38, col. 11, lines 44-45, col. 17, lines 33-36, and col. 18, lines 9-22 and col. 23, line 61 through col. 25, line 53 and Figures 3B, 5, 6B, 7B, 8B, 9B, 9D, 10-12).
With respect to the limitation of claim 2, Orban et al. further disclose that the acoustic waves are ultrasonic waves (ultrasonic transceiver (45) – col. 5, line 11 and title of patent).
With respect to the limitation of claim 3, Orban et al. further disclose that the power of the through-fluid acoustic wave is at least one, two, or three times the order of magnitude of the power of the reflective acoustic wave (power of the through-fluid acoustic wave is at least one times the order of magnitude of the power of the reflective acoustic wave as the transceiver (45) generates a plurality of pulses some of which reflect and some pass through the drilling fluid (10).
With respect to the limitation of claim 4, Orban et al. further disclose the reflection location is a boundary of the volume of fluid (reflection location is a boundary of the volume of fluid (10) with the boundary of a delay line (70) – Figures 4, 6A, 7A, 8A, 9A, and 9C).
With respect to the limitation of claim 5, Orban et al. further disclose that the reflective acoustic wave is generated within a solid volume, and wherein the boundary of the volume of fluid is a fluid-solid boundary between the volume of fluid and the solid volume (reflective acoustic wave is generated within a solid volume, i.e., a delay line (70) (col. 13, lines 34-36), and boundary of the volume of fluid (10) is a fluid-solid boundary between the volume of fluid (10) and the solid volume (70) – Figures 4, 6A, 7A, 8A, 9A, and 9C).
With respect to the limitation of claim 6, Orban et al. further disclose that the processing comprises: determining a reflection coefficient based on the electrical signal corresponding to the reflective acoustic wave; and determining a time of flight based on the electrical signal corresponding to the through-fluid acoustic wave (col. 22, lines 17 through col. 23, line 9).
With respect to the limitation of claim 7, Orban et al. further disclose that the property of the fluid is an amount and/or volume of particles and/or bubbles located within a liquid phase of the fluid (volume of cuttings and gas concentration within the drilling fluid are measured - col. 23, line 43 through col. 24, line 37 and Figures 7A-9D).
With respect to the limitation of claim 8, Orban et al. further disclose that the property of the fluid is density and/or acoustic impedance (col. 5, lines 34-38, col. 11, lines 44-45, col. 17, lines 33-36, and col. 18, lines 9-12).
With respect to the limitation of claim 9, Orban et al. further disclose that driving the one or more transducers comprises: driving a first transducer of the one or more transducers to generate the through-fluid acoustic wave; and driving a second transducer of the one or more transducers to generate the reflective acoustic wave (tool (20) includes at least one transceiver, but preferably also a second transceiver (46) – col. 9, lines 61-65 and Figures 1 and 1A).
With respect to the limitation of claim 13, Orban et al. further disclose sending an electronic pulse, by an electronic circuit of a controller, to drive the one or more transducers (electric circuits and microprocessors, memories, etc. are used to control transceivers (45, 46), such that an electrical voltage is applied across the surfaces of the ceramic disk (54) changes the thickness of the disk, which causes a pulse to be emitted from the disk – col. 10, lines 21-21; and col. 12, lines 25-38).
With respect to the limitation of claim 14, Orban et al. further disclose that driving the one or more transducers comprises: driving the one or more transducers to transmit and/or receive the waves through a delay line configured to provide a time delay region for an acoustic wave to traverse between the transducer and the volume of fluid (a delay line (70) is provided between the ceramic disk (54) of the transceiver (45,46) and the volume of fluid (10) such that the transmitted and reflected pulses pass through the delay line (70) - Figures 4, 6A, 7A, 8A, 9A, and 9C).
With respect to the limitation of claim 15, Orban et al. further disclose that the delay line is directly in contact with the fluid, or a barrier surrounding the volume of fluid (delay line (70) is directly in contact with a barrier (borehole wall (9)) surrounding the volume of fluid (10) - Figures 4, 6A, 7A, 8A, 9A, and 9C) .
With respect to the limitation of claim 16, Orban et al. further disclose that driving the one or more transducers comprises: driving the one or more transducers to transmit and/or receive waves directly into the fluid, or into a barrier directly surrounding the volume of fluid (delay line (70) is directly in contact with a barrier (borehole wall (9)) surrounding the volume of fluid (10) - Figures 4, 6A, 7A, 8A, 9A, and 9C).
With respect to the limitation of claim 19, Orban et al. further disclose that
driving the one or more transducers comprises: driving the one or more transducers to generate and receive waves during a time period (waves are generated during a period of time), and at a frequency of at least multiple times per second (high frequency pulses are transmitted), and wherein the property of the fluid is determined based on a variation of the received waves during the time period (different properties of the fluid are influenced based on the variations of the received waves).
With respect to the limitation of claim 19, Orban et al. disclose a fluid sensing apparatus for monitoring a volume of fluid, the fluid sensing apparatus, comprising:
one or more transducers (45, 46) configured to:
generate a through-fluid acoustic wave having sufficiently high power to traverse into the volume of fluid (part of sonic pulse (1) travels through the volume of fluid (10) as depicted by arrow (5) – col. 17, lines 28-31 and Figures 4) (Figures 6A, 7A, 8A, and 9A show a through-fluid acoustic wave (3)),
generate a reflective acoustic wave having sufficiently low power to be reflected at a reflection location located in between the volume of fluid and the one or more transducers generating the reflective acoustic wave (some part of sonic pulse (1) is reflected towards a ceramic disk (54) of transceiver (45) as depicted by arrow (2) – col. 17, lines 32-33 and Figure 4) (Figures 6A, 7A, 8A, and 9A also show a reflective acoustic wave (2)),
receive both of the through-fluid acoustic wave and the reflective acoustic wave, and
convert the received waves into one or more corresponding electrical signals (mechanical excitation of the ceramic disk (54) generates an electrical signal representative of the amplitude and time delay of the sonic echo – col.17, lines 38-40) ; and
a controller configured to process the one or more electrical signals to determine a property of the fluid (properties, such as amount of cuttings and gas concentration within the drilling fluid, density, and sonic impedance, are determined - col. 5, lines 34-38, col. 11, lines 44-45, col. 17, lines 33-36, col. 18, lines 9-22 and col. 23, line 61 through col. 25, line 53 and Figures 3B, 5, 6B, 7B, 8B, 9B, 9D, 10-12).
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 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5,130,950 (Orban et al.).
With respect to the limitations of claim 10-12, Orban et al. disclose using one or two transceivers (45, 46) to transmit and receive reflected waves through a delay line (70) or the fluid (10). Orban et al. fail to expressly disclose the specific positioning and excitation of the first and/or second transceivers (45, 46); however, the Examiner argues that positioning transceivers with respect to each other and exciting particular transceivers are well within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art as Orban et al. teach the basics of transmitting a through acoustic wave through a fluid (10) whose properties are to be measured, as well as a reflective wave through a delay line (70).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5,130,950 (Orban et al.) in view of WO 2020/154399 (Hori et al.).
With respect to the limitation of claim 18, Orban et al. disclose all of the limitations of the base claim, but fail to expressly disclose that driving the one or more transducers comprises driving the one or more transducers to generate waves at different frequencies.
Hori et al. disclose an ultrasonic pulse-echo device for acquiring ultrasonic echo data of a borehole by utilizing transducers to generate wave at different frequencies (paragraphs [00190-). Modifying Orban et al. to utilize different frequencies would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention because spatial resolution can be dependent of wavelength, which is related to frequency; and one would be motivated to cover different frequency bands to attain best results.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art was not relied upon to reject claim 17 as the prior art of record fails to teach the limitation of claim 17 in combination with all of the limitations of the base claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL SEAN LARKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 5:30 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, Laura Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/DANIEL S LARKIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855