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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the optical fiber is optically connected to at least one scintillator bar photodetector element at least at one of the first end and the second end for a detection of scintillation light from the scintillator bar as claimed in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a first photodetector element and a second photodetector element as claimed in claim 2 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, an opposing scintillator fiber photodetector element as claimed in claim 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
(Proposed Amendments) A longitudinally extending borehole muon detector, the longitudinally extending borehole muon detector comprising:
a plurality of scintillator fibers locatable in a borehole and wound helically about a longitudinal axis to form a helical bundle of scintillator fibers of n windings around the longitudinal axis, where n is greater than one, each scintillator fiber from among the plurality of scintillator fibers optically connected to a corresponding photodetector element for a detection of scintillation light propagating through the scintillator fiber and a detection time associated with [[the]] scintillation light from the scintillator fiber; and
a plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars locatable in the borehole arranged circumferentially about the longitudinal axis, each scintillator bar from among the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars comprising an optical fiber extending from a first end of the scintillator bar to a second end of the scintillator bar,
wherein the optical fiber is optically connected to at least one scintillator [[bar]] fiber photodetector element (see claim 9) at least at one of the first end and the second [[ends]] end for a detection of scintillation light from the scintillator bar.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 4-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
4. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 3, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the estimated location along the helical length of the at least one scintillator fiber with an uncertainty that is less than a distance along the helical length of the at least one scintillator fiber between a number N of candidate crossing positions along the helical length of the at least one scintillator fiber, where N = floor(n).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 5-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
5. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 4,
wherein the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars is arranged such that a muon that traverses a scintillator fiber from among the plurality of fibers, and
wherein, in response to the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars of the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars:
corresponding scintillator [[bar]] fiber photodetector elements are operative to detect scintillation light from the pair of scintillator bars; and
the processor is further configured to determine an azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars of the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars based at least in part on Birk's law, which relates an amount of scintillation light produced by each of the pair of scintillator bars to a path length of the muon through each of the pair of scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 6 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
6. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 5, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars of the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars with an uncertainty that is less than a circumferential dimension of either of the pair of scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
7. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 6, wherein the processor is further configured to determine a location of the muon traversing the scintillator fiber from among the plurality of scintillator fibers and the pair of scintillator bars of the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars based on the estimated location along the helical length of the at least one scintillator fiber traversed by the muon and the azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars of the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 10-14 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
10. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 9, further comprising:
a processor; and
in response to a muon traversing the plurality of scintillator fibers, the plurality of oppositely wound scintillator fibers, and a pair of scintillator bars from among the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars, the processor is configured to resolve an ambiguity between a number of candidates crossing points at which the muon could have traversed the plurality of scintillator fibers and the plurality of oppositely wound scintillator fibers, where each of the number of candidates crossing points comprises a crossing point of a fiber pair consisting of one scintillator fiber from among the plurality of scintillator fibers and one scintillator fiber from among the plurality of oppositely wound scintillator fibers, based on a combination of:
unique azimuthal positions of the number of candidates crossing points; and
an azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
11. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 10, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars with an uncertainty that is less than a distance along an azimuthal direction of the borehole muon detector between the number of candidates crossing points along the azimuthal direction.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
12. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 10, wherein, in response to the muon traversing the plurality of scintillator fibers, the plurality of oppositely wound scintillator fibers, and the pair of scintillator bars from among the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars:
corresponding scintillator [[bar]] fiber photodetector elements are operative to detect scintillation light from the pair of scintillator bars; and
the processor is further configured to determine the azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars from among the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars based at least in part on Birk's law, which relates an amount of scintillation light produced by each of the pair of scintillator bars to a path length of the muon through each of the pair of scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
13. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 10, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars with an uncertainty that is less than a circumferential dimension of either of the pair of scintillator bars from among the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 15-17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
15. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 1,
wherein each scintillator bar from among the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars has a triangular cross section, which includes a base and two side and the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars includes a plurality of first scintillator bars and a plurality of second scintillator bars, and
wherein the plurality of first scintillator bars alternates (refers to the plurality) with the plurality of second scintillator bars such that bases of the plurality of first scintillator bars delineate an outer circumference of the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars and bases of the plurality of second scintillator bars delineate an inner circumference of the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 16 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
16. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 15 further comprising:
a processor, and
wherein, in response to a muon traversing a pair of scintillator bars comprising one of the plurality of first scintillator bars and one of the plurality of second scintillator bars,
the processor is configured to use an output from the at least one scintillator [[bar]] fiber photodetector element corresponding to the one of the plurality of first scintillator bars and the at least one scintillator [[bar]] fiber photodetector element corresponding to the one of the plurality of second scintillator bars to determine an azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars based at least in part on Birk's law, which relates an amount of light produced by each of the pair of scintillator bars to a path length of the muon through each of the pair of scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
17. (Proposed Amendments) The borehole muon detector according to claim 16, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of scintillator bars by an interpolation to determine a barycenter, which has a precision that is finer than a circumferential dimension of either of the pair of [[the]] scintillator bars.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 21 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
21. (Proposed Amendments) The method according to claim 20, further comprising the steps of:
in response to the muon traversing the at least one scintillator fiber and also traversing a pair of longitudinally extending scintillator bars of a plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator bars arranged circumferentially about the longitudinal axis:
detecting scintillation light from the pair of longitudinally extending scintillator bars; [[and,]] and
determining an azimuthal coordinate of the muon traversing the pair of longitudinally extending scintillator bars based at least in part on Birk's l which relates an amount of scintillation light produced by each of the pair of scintillator bars to a path length of the muon through each of the pair of longitudinally extending scintillator bars.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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.
Claim 1 recites a limitation “the scintillator fiber” in lines 12-13, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites a limitation “the scintillator fiber” in line 14, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites a limitation “the scintillator bar” in lines 19-20, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites a limitation “the scintillator bar” in line 20, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites a passive limitation “at least one scintillator bar photodetector element” in lines 22-23, which renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the longitudinally extending borehole muon detector further comprises at least one scintillator bar photodetector element. See transitional phrases in MPEP § 2111.03.
Claim 1 recites a limitation “the scintillator bar” in line 26, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites a passive limitation “a first photodetector element” in line 6, which renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the longitudinally extending borehole muon detector further comprises a first photodetector element. See transitional phrases in MPEP § 2111.03.
Claim 2 recites a limitation “the scintillator fiber” in line 7, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites a passive limitation “a second photodetector element” in lines 8-9, which renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the longitudinally extending borehole muon detector further comprises a second photodetector element. See transitional phrases in MPEP § 2111.03.
Claim 2 recites a limitation “the scintillator fiber” in line 10, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites a limitation “the plurality of longitudinally extending scintillator fibers” in lines 4-5, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites a limitation “the scintillator fiber” in lines 3-4, which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites a passive limitation “an opposing scintillator fiber photodetector element” in lines 11-12, which renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the longitudinally extending borehole muon detector further comprises an opposing scintillator fiber photodetector element. See transitional phrases in MPEP § 2111.03.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claims 20-22, the prior art failed to disclose or fairly suggested a method for detecting muons in a borehole as claimed.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed 11 May 2026 with respect to the drawings have been fully considered. The objections of the drawings have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 11 May 2026 with respect to the specification have been fully considered. The objections of the specification have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 11 May 2026 with respect to the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the drawings has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Suhami (U. S. Patent No. 8,063,379 B2) disclosed a radiation camera.
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 Allen C. Ho, whose telephone number is (571) 272-2491. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10AM - 6PM.
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, David J. Makiya, can be reached at (571) 272-2273. 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.
Allen C. Ho, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/Allen C. Ho/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884 Allen.Ho@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights