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 .
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.
DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
Claims 1-12 are pending as the applicant filed Preliminary Amendment on 03/21/2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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 1-12 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.
Regarding claims 1-12, the term “live crude” is vague and a relative term that renders the claim indefinite. The term “live crude” 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 appraised of the scope of the invention. An artisan doing measuring and testing would not know at what point “live crude” within the scope of the claim had been accomplished because nothing within the disclosure establishes when a sufficient “live crude” occurs.
Note: In view of the PTO compact prosecution, the Examiner notes that due to the indefiniteness issues described above all consideration of the merits of the claims in view of prior art is as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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 1-12 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.
Claim 1, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method of estimating a formation fluid property comprising: generating multinomial expansions from the training sets of data to form expanded sets of data; developing a correlation prediction function by performing a regression on the training sets of data and the expanded sets of data, estimating a density of the sample fluid based on the sound speed from the acoustical analysis and the correlation prediction function which is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of obtaining training sets of data that each comprise a corresponding sound speed, temperature, pressure, and density value of a live crude oil sampleare recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional elements of collecting fluid from the formation to define a sample fluid; obtaining a value of sound speed of the sample fluid by acoustically analyzing the sample fluid inside of an evaluation flow cell appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 1 not eligible.
Claim 11, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method of estimating a formation fluid property comprising: generating multinomial expansions from the sets of data to form expanded sets of data; developing a correlation prediction function by performing a regression on the sets of data and the expanded sets of data; estimating a density of the sample fluid based on the sound speed from the acoustical analysis and the correlation prediction function.which is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of obtaining training sets of data that each comprise corresponding values of a sound speed and at least one of a condition or property of a live crude oil sample are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional elements of collecting fluid from the formation to define a sample fluid; obtaining a value of sound speed of the sample fluid by acoustically analyzing the sample fluid inside of an evaluation flow cell appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 11 not eligible.
Claim 2 related to obtaining values of a reverberation decay rate by acoustically analyzing the sample fluid inside of an evaluation flow cell, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 2 not eligible.
Claim 3 related to in then form of:
PNG
media_image1.png
117
595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 3 not eligible.
Claim 4 related to wherein predictions of fluid viscosity are made from the calculated fluid density, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 4 not eligible.
Claim 5 related to wherein predictions of brine salinity are made from the calculated fluid density, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 5 not eligible.
Claim 6 related to wherein predictions of multiple fitting equations are generated, a median is taken, which defines the outliers, and predictions, which are not outliers are averaged, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 6 not eligible.
Claim 7 related to wherein known density fluids are used to correct the correlation prediction functions to individualize the correlation prediction functions optimized for each individual serialized flow cell using a bias and skew correction, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 7 not eligible.
Claim 8 related to wherein the step of collecting is performed within a wellbore that intersects the formation, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 8 not eligible.
Claim 9 related to conducting wellbore operations in the wellbore based on a value of the sample fluid density, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 9 not eligible.
Claim 10 related to wherein the step of acoustically analyzing is performed in the wellbore, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 10 not eligible.
Claim 12 related to wherein the live crude oil sample condition is selected from the group consisting of temperature and pressure and wherein the live crude oil sample property is selected from the group consisting of viscosity and density, its recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 12 not eligible.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by DiFoggio (US Patent Application Publication 2009/0292474 A1, Date Published: Nov. 26, 2009, Assignee: Baker Hughes Incorporated).
Regarding claim 1:
DiFoggio described a method of estimating a formation fluid property comprising (abstract, desired property of a fluid downhole):
obtaining training sets of data that each comprise a corresponding sound speed, temperature, pressure, and density value of a live crude oil sample (0002-0005, 0011, 0026, temperature, pressure, and density of oil, 0011-0014, fig. 4, 5, sound speed, density of oil);
generating multinomial expansions from the training sets of data to form expanded sets of data (0013, regression, correlation);
developing a correlation prediction function by performing a regression on the training sets of data and the expanded sets of data (0013, regression, correlation GOR);
collecting fluid from the formation to define a sample fluid; obtaining a value of sound speed of the sample fluid by acoustically analyzing the sample fluid inside of an evaluation flow cell (0011-0014, sound speed stock-tank cruel oil); and
estimating a density of the sample fluid based on the sound speed from the acoustical analysis and the correlation prediction function (0011-0014, fig. 4, 5, sound speed, density of oil).
Regarding claim 11:
DiFoggio described a method of estimating a formation fluid property comprising (abstract, desired property of a fluid downhole):
obtaining training sets of data that each comprise corresponding values of a sound speed and at least one of a condition or property of a live crude oil sample (0002-0005, 0011, 0026, temperature, pressure, and density of oil, 0011-0014, fig. 4, 5, sound speed, density of oil);
generating multinomial expansions from the sets of data to form expanded sets of data (0013, regression, correlation); developing a correlation prediction function by performing a regression on the sets of data and the expanded sets of data (0013, regression, correlation GOR);
collecting fluid from the formation to define a sample fluid; obtaining a value of sound speed of the sample fluid by acoustically analyzing the sample fluid inside of an evaluation flow cell (0011-0014, sound speed stock-tank cruel oil); and
estimating a density of the sample fluid based on the sound speed from the acoustical analysis and the correlation prediction function (0011-0014, fig. 4, 5, sound speed, density of oil).
Regarding claim 2, DiFoggio further described obtaining values of a reverberation decay rate by acoustically analyzing the sample fluid inside of an evaluation flow cell (0011-0014, sound speed stock-tank cruel oil , 0054, decay rate of within-wall pulse echo reverberations).
Regarding claim 4, DiFoggio further described wherein predictions of fluid viscosity are made from the calculated fluid density (0054, density of fluid).
Regarding claim 5, DiFoggio further described predictions of brine salinity are made from the calculated fluid density (0009, brine ratios, 0054, density of fluid).
Regarding claim 6, DiFoggio further described wherein predictions of multiple fitting equations are generated, a median is taken, which defines the outliers, and predictions, which are not outliers are averaged (0019, model fits the simultaneous Batzle equations from which the synthetic data were derived, 0028, gas averages).
Regarding claim 7, DiFoggio further described wherein known density fluids are used to correct the correlation prediction functions to individualize the correlation prediction functions optimized for each individual serialized flow cell using a bias and skew correction (fig. 8, 38, 32 serial skew correlation).
Regarding claim 8, DiFoggio further described collecting is performed within a wellbore that intersects the formation (0020, fig. 6, in wellbore).
Regarding claim 9, DiFoggio further described conducting wellbore operations in the wellbore based on a value of the sample fluid density (0020, fig. 6, in wellbore, 0054, density of fluid).
Regarding claim 10, DiFoggio further described of acoustically analyzing is performed in the wellbore (0011-0014, 0024, sound speed stock-tank cruel oil, desired property of fluid condition)
Regarding claim 12, DiFoggio further described wherein the live crude oil sample condition is selected from the group consisting of temperature (0026, temperature) and pressure (0005, pressure) and wherein the live crude oil sample property is selected from the group consisting of viscosity (0002-0003, viscosity) and density (0005, gas density).
Contact information
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
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, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 571-272-6334. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/TUNG S LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Technology Center 2800
July 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights