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 .
This action is in response to the communication filed 12/22/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the arguments on pages 4 and 5,
No specific arguments have been presented against the 112 rejections. As such, those that have been overcome by way of amendment are withdrawn, and those that have not are repeated below.
Applicant argues that Tenghamn (GB 2589011A) does not mention prop wash or the problems associated with prop wash, but the Examiner respectfully notes that there is no requirement that the prior art recognize any solution, problem, or benefit as identified by applicant. Instead, what is required is that the prior art disclose the actual features recited in the claim.
Applicant argues that Tenghamn (GB 2589011A) does not disclose two magnetic sensors on opposite sides of the prop wash and both outside the prop wash, as applicant believes the sensors 122 are in the prop wash. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
A prop wash is a disturbance in the water due to the propellers of the boat. However, such a wash only extends so far, is of different sizes depending on how hard the propeller(s) turn.
PNG
media_image1.png
894
521
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As seen above, the sensors are on opposite sides of any prop wash that would exist, as the prop wash would primarily be located behind the boat. Second, applicant’s solution to this problem is to position the sensors beyond the width of the boat and substantially far behind the boat, as seen in applicant’s Figure 2 where sensors 46 are located. Tenghamn discloses a substantially similar arrangement, where the sensors are also positioned beyond the width of the boat and substantially behind the boat. As explained in paragraph [0061], the long offset lead-in lines 418 are 20 km long, and the long offset streamers 430 are 50 km long. It is reasonable to conclude that the sensors towards the end of streamer 430 at the bottom of the streamer are out of any prop wash of the boat, given how far they are from the boat and how offset they are from the boat. This is especially reasonable when the propeller is on at low speed. Note MPEP 2112.02(I) explaining “Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device.” Here, during the normal and usual operation of the boat and sensors, the sensors will reasonably not be in a prop wash when the motor/propeller is at low speed or at a low enough speed such that the prop wash does not extend far enough to influence or reach the sensors or buoys. As such, the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
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.
Claim 18 is 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.
As to Claim 18,
The phrase “the first magnetic data the second magnetic data comprises less or no magnetic noise compared to magnetic data from a magnetic sensor in a prop wash” on lines 1-3 is indefinite.
At issue here is that applicant recites “the first magnetic data the second magnetic data” but where as worded, the relationship between the first and second magnetic data is unclear. It is unclear if applicant meant to state that the first and second magnetic sensor data comprises less noise, or another interpretation. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner is interpreting that applicant meant to include an “and” between the first and second magnetic data.
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)(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 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tenghamn (GB 2589011A).
As to Claim 14,
Tenghamn discloses A method for magnetic data acquisition in marine environment in parallel with towed streamer seismic data acquisition, comprising: towing a plurality of seismic sources (116) behind a survey vessel (Figure 3), (Paragraph [0042]); the vessel creating a prop wash behind the vessel (Figure 3 / note that this is a property of the system as a prop wash must be present when the motor/propeller are operating), towing a plurality of streamers (430) coupled to a spreader line (425) that connects to lead-ins connection (418) (Figure 3), (Paragraph [0061]); towing a first buoy (427) with the survey vessel on a first side of the prop wash and outside the prop wash (Figure 3), (Paragraph [0065] / note the leftmost 427 buoy is on the left side of the prop wash, and when the propellers are on at very low speed, they will be reasonably be outside any prop wash), towing a second buoy (427) with the survey vessel on a second side of the prop wash and outside the prop wash, the second side opposite the first side (Figure 3 / note the right side buoy 427 is on the right side of the prop wash, and when the propellers are on at very low speed, they will be reasonably be outside any prop wash), towing a first magnetic sensor attached to the first buoy (Figure 3 / note any of the left side sensors (122) (Figure 3), (Paragraph [0044],[0065] / note the buoy must include a rope/line to couple to the lead-in line, such as by way of the disclosed winch); towing a second magnetic sensor attached to the second buoy (Figure 3 / note any of the right side sensors (122)), (Paragraph [0044],[0065] / note the buoy must include a rope/line to couple to the lead-in line, such as by way of the disclosed winch); powering the first magnetic sensor by the first buoy which is equipped with a first power generator and battery box to be self-sufficient (Paragraphs [0056],[0065] / note the winch, which is part of the buoy, has power from a battery that can reasonably be used to power the sensor making the sensor self-sufficient from the power of the winch); powering the second magnetic sensor by the second buoy which is equipped with a second power generator and battery box to be self-sufficient (Paragraphs [0056],[0065] / note the winch, which is part of the buoy, has power from a battery that can reasonably be used to power the sensor making the sensor self-sufficient from the power of the winch), transmitting first magnetic data from the first magnetic sensor to a recorder on board of the survey vessel by a first radio link (Paragraph [0065] / note the buoy communicates by way of the radio on the winch).; and transmitting second magnetic data from the second magnetic sensor to the recorder on board of the survey vessel by a second radio link (Paragraph [0065] / note the buoy communicates by way of the radio on the winch), (Paragraph [0069 / note data recording requires a recorder).
As to Claim 18,
Tenghamn discloses the first magnetic data the second magnetic data comprises less or no magnetic noise compared to magnetic data from a magnetic sensor in a prop wash (Figure 3), (Paragraph [0061] / note the lead-in lines 418 are 20km long, and the receivers 122 on lines 430 are therefore reasonably towed far the a sail line to have less noise than any sensors measuring in the prop wash).
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID M. SCHINDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2112. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
DAVID M. SCHINDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2858
/DAVID M SCHINDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858