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.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, the sub steps for step 1 are numbered as 2.8 to 2.14.
For the purpose of consistency and clarity in numbering of claimed steps, Examiner suggests the above sub steps for step 1 be numbered as 1.1, 1.2 and so on.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 because the claimed invention is directed to judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Specifically, claim 1 recites:
A multi-phase wavefield inversion method considering both body waves and surface waves in half-space of rock media, comprising the following steps:
step 1: extending the forward modeling and inversion theory of body waves to Rayleigh waves based on the normalized inner product (NIP) method, and extracting Rayleigh wave components that satisfy standard elliptic polarization characteristics in half-space of rock media according to Snell's Law of complex angles, thereby inverting the surface wavefields; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
the specific process of step 1 is as follows:
2.8. extracting an initial radial component UR(t) and vertical component WR(t) of Rayleigh waves using the NIP method and transferring into frequency-domain UR(ω) and WR(ω) with the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) technology to apply the body-wave inversion formula (1); (is considered to be a mathematical step)
A
p
A
s
v
=
M
l
x
m
x
4
l
x
s
t
1
+
s
2
2
µ
+
λ
2
m
x
t
1
+
s
2
1
-
t
2
2
µ
+
λ
-
2
l
x
s
1
+
t
2
λ
+
2
µ
s
2
+
λ
s
2
-
4
µ
m
x
s
t
1
+
t
2
^
-
1
U
R
W
R
wherein AP and ASV are displacement amplitudes of incident P-waves and SV-waves, respectively; λ and μ are Lame constants of a half-space; lx and mx are sine values of incident angle θP of P-waves and incident angle θSV of SV-waves, respectively; s and t are cotangent values of θP and θSV, respectively; M is a parameter associated with the site parameters of the half-space and incident angles of θP and θSV.
2.9 calculating an oblique incident complex angle φSV required for generating Rayleigh waves with inhomogeneous SV-waves as an incident wave source by the expression φSV=π/2+iarccosh(κ), wherein κ is a coefficient associated with the Poisson's ratio of the half-space and is greater than “1”. (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.10. calculating a reflected complex angle φP of inhomogeneous P-waves caused by polarization exchange of incident inhomogeneous SV-waves according to Snell's Law of complex angles of formula (2), (is considered to be a mathematical step)
S
i
n
φ
S
V
'
c
o
s
h
φ
S
V
'
'
+
i
c
o
s
φ
S
V
'
s
i
n
h
φ
S
V
"
V
s
v
=
S
i
n
φ
p
'
c
o
s
h
φ
p
"
+
i
c
o
s
φ
p
'
s
i
n
h
φ
p
"
V
s
v
wherein φP′ and φSV′ are the real part of the reflected complex angle op of inhomogeneous P-waves and the incident complex angle φSV of inhomogeneous SV-waves, respectively; φP″ and φSV″ are the imaginary part of the reflected complex angle φP of inhomogeneous P-waves and the incident complex angle φSV of inhomogeneous SV-waves, respectively; VSV and VP are propagation velocities of SV-waves and P-waves in the half-space of rock media, respectively;
2.11. calculating parameters of lx, mx, s, t, and M that relate to the incident complex angle φSV and the reflected complex angle φP, and implementing an inversion algorithm to calculate excitation wave sources AP(ω) and ASV(ω); (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.12. implementing a forward modeling algorithm to eliminate the perturbations of P-waves to Rayleigh waves: substituting the inverted ASV(ω) and the incident complex angle φSV into body-wave forward modeling formula (3), meanwhile setting AP(ω) =0 to calculate ground Rayleigh components UR′(ω) and WR′(ω) controlled only by SV-waves; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
U
R
^
t
W
R
^
t
=
l
x
m
x
M
4
l
x
s
t
1
+
s
2
2
µ
+
λ
2
m
x
t
1
+
s
2
1
-
t
2
2
µ
+
λ
-
2
l
x
s
1
+
t
2
λ
+
2
µ
s
2
+
λ
s
2
-
4
µ
m
x
s
t
1
+
t
2
A
p
A
s
v
2.13. transferring frequency-domain components U R′(ω) and W R′(ω) of ground Rayleigh waves obtained with the above forward modeling process into the time-domains UR′(t) and WR′(t) using the Inverse Fast Fourier Transform (IFFT) technology, where UR′(t) and WR′(t) maintain in the same phase as the initial Rayleigh components UR(t) and WR(t) and carry the same spectral characteristics as the original waveforms to the greatest extent; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.14. calculating peak ratios of UR(t) to UR′(t) and WR(t) to WR′(t), and denoting as k1 and k2, respectively; selecting the smaller value between the two ratios min{k1, k2} as a final amplitude modulation coefficient K; and multiplying UR′(t) and WR′(t) by the modulation coefficient K respectively to obtain UR*(t) and WR*(t) for the same amplitudes, where the modified UR*(t) and WR*(t) are exactly Rayleigh wave components following strict elliptic polarization characteristics in the half-space; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
step 2: based on the difference between propagation velocities of P-waves and S-waves, iterating ground body-wave components before S-wave arrival with the forward modeling and inversion theory, and then determining an optimal oblique incident angle of P-waves with the least-square target function, thereby inverting the body wavefields; the specific process of step 2 is as follows: (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.1. determining the arrival times of P-Phase and S-Phase from the ground motions using the P/S-Phase arrival-time picker, respectively; calculating their time difference Δt and truncating the body-wave recordings within this time interval as pre-arrival components of S-waves, denoted as UΔt(t) and WΔt(t) controlled only by incident wave source P-waves theoretically and independent of SV-waves; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.2. setting the incident angle of P-waves θP=0° to implement the first iterative inversion: substituting parameter lx, mx, s, t, and M related to the angle θP into the body-wave inversion formula (1), and calculating incident wave sources ApΔt(ω) and AsvΔt(ω) that cause the pre-arrival components of S-waves; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.3. implementing the first forward modeling iteration with obtained wave source ApΔt(ω) to calculate the ground displacements UΔt′(ω) and WΔt′(ω) controlled by P-waves alone, meanwhile setting AsvΔt(ω)=0 to eliminate the perturbations of S-waves; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.4. calculating the least-square error of UΔt(t) and UΔt′(t) in the time domain with formula (4) based on the sensitivity of the horizontal component to the incident angle θP, the optimal solution of which corresponds to the minimum least-square error in theory;
wherein n is the discrete point of time-domain records UΔt(t) and UΔt′(t), and N is the total number of discrete points; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
e= (1/N) √(∑Nn=1 (UΔt(t) - UΔt′(t))^2)
2.5. increasing the incident angle θ.sub.P with a step of 1° within the range of 0-90° to repeat steps 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4, and exporting least-square errors corresponding to all incident angles within the iteration range; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.6. selecting θP corresponding to the minimum absolute value of least-square error and defining as an optimal oblique incident angle of P-waves; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
2.7. calculating an optimal solution of the incident angle of SV-waves based on the principle of equal horizontal apparent wave velocities in Snell's Law, and calculating an optimal solution of the incident angle of SH-waves based on the principle of equal vertical apparent wave velocities; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
step 3: implementing the respective single-phase wavefield inversion for body waves and Rayleigh waves, respectively; (is considered to be a mathematical step)
step 4: based on approximate linear elastic characteristics of the half-space of rock media, superimposing single-phase body wavefields and single-phase Rayleigh wavefields to form the total multi-phase wavefields through the linear superposition principle. (is considered to be a mathematical step)
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above.
Under the step 1 of the eligibility analysis, it is determined whether the claims are drawn to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter fall 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 the statutory category of (process).
Under the step 2A, prong one, it is considered 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 groupings of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that cover mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations) and mental process – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion.
These mental steps represent that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind.
Next, under the step 2A, prong two, it is considered whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In this step, it is evaluated whether the claim recites meaningful additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. The claim1 does not contain any additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application.
In conclusion, considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements do not reflect an improvement to other technology or technical field, and, therefore, do 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.
Considering the claim as a whole, one of ordinary skill in the art would not know the practical application of the present invention since the claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in some meaningful way.
The independent claim 1, therefore, is not patent eligible.
Prior arts:
Meza et al “Identification and Extraction of Surface Waves from Three-Component Seismograms Based on the Normalized Inner Product” 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, 1-4 November 2015. Was found to teach some limitations as mentioned below.
A multi-phase wavefield inversion method considering both body waves and surface waves in half-space of rock media, comprising the following steps:
step 1: extending the forward modeling and inversion theory of body waves to Rayleigh waves based on the normalized inner product (NIP) method, and extracting Rayleigh wave components that satisfy standard elliptic polarization characteristics in half-space of rock media according to Snell's Law of complex angles, thereby inverting the surface wavefields (page 3, line 1. The proposed method to detect and extract surface waves from three-component recorded seismograms overcomes these difficulties. We exploit the advantage of the absolute phase preservation of the Stockwell Transform (Stockwell et al. 1996), and we construct time-frequency filters to extract waves based on the ‘Normalized Inner Product’ (NIP). Since the NIP is the time-frequency counterpart of the correlation, Rayleigh and Love waves can be identified based on the value of the NIP between the Stockwell Transforms of the horizontal and vertical displacement components.);
the specific process of step 1 is as follows:
2.8. extracting an initial radial component UR(t) and vertical component WR(t) of Rayleigh waves using the NIP method (page 6-7. The Normalized Inner Product… page 7, line 11. The results are shown in Figure 7 (left). The waves in the Radial and Vertical components have an appearance strongly suggesting they are Rayleigh waves.), and transferring into frequency-domain UR(ω) and WR(ω) with the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) technology to apply the body-wave inversion formula (1) (page 3, line 26, The inverse Stockwell transform is exactly obtained in two steps: the Fourier Transform is obtained by integrating the Stockwell transform over time, and then Fourier Transform is inverted (Stockwell et al. 1996).);
Examiner is unable to find the prior arts alone or in combination teaching or suggesting the equations and other limitations in claim 1.
Following prior arts were found to generally discuss the inversion of seismic waves.
Meza et al “Identification and Extraction of Surface Waves from Three-Component Seismograms Based on the Normalized Inner Product” 6th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, 1-4 November 2015.
Halliday et al US 20250258310 A1,
Kazinnik et al US 20160341839 A1,
Almuhaidib et al US 20160320506 A1,
Lui et al CN 114185093 B.
Allowable Subject Matter
There is no Prior arts rejection for claim 1. However, examiner cannot comment on their allowability until the rejection under 101 is adequately addressed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARAD TIMILSINA whose telephone number is (571)272-7104. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at 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 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.
/SHARAD TIMILSINA/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights