DETAILED ACTION
1. Applicant’s amendment filed on December 16, 2025 in which claims 1 and 13 were amended, and claims 8 and 18 were cancelled, has been fully considered and entered, but the arguments are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-2, 6-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alonso et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2020/0157887) in view of Davidson et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2014/0152659), and further in view of Bang et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2018/0023385).
Regrading claims 1 and 13, Alonso discloses a computer system for displaying a well trajectory (See Alonso Fig. 1, items 102, 116 display 118 and [0027]), the computer system comprising: a processor (See Alonso [0005], [0026]-[0027]); a display device coupled to the processor (See Alonso [0027], processor of application 110 connected to display 118); and a memory coupled to the processor, wherein the memory comprises instructions executable by the processor (See Alonso [0005], instructions in [0006] and [0035]) for: generating a downhole display with a view and download data (See Alonso [0192] and [0193]).
It is noted that although Alonso discloses a user input to manipulate the view of the downhole display based on the received user input from the game controller by at least one of changing a location of the view along a borehole or adjusting the view in at least one dimension. (See Alonso [0031] and GUI 950 of Fig. 9, controller 104 of client device 102 of Fig. 1), it is silent about the game controller as input.
However, Davidson teaches a user input device comprising a video game controller, wherein responsive to the user input via the video game controller (See Davidson Fig. 1, game controller 17, [0014] and [0020] “A non-limiting embodiment of the vibration output device is a joy stick controller having the capability to vibrate similar to that of a video game controller.”).
Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying Alonso user input to provide Davidson’s video game controller as input. The motivation for performing such a modification in Alonso is to provide a versatile input wherein three-dimensional images are realized and manipulated easily (See Davidson [0003]).
It is also noted that the combination of Alonso and Davidson is silent about changing the displayed downhole data based on the location of the view along the borehole.
However, Bang teaches changing the displayed downhole data based on the location of the view along the borehole (See Bang Fig. 15, step 1540, [0032]-[0033] “The tortuosity can be presented in a manner that allows decisions to be made about where to install equipment in the wellbore after the wellbore has been created”. “The computer can be used to analyze and present wellbore tortuosity information to a user”). NOTE: The Applicant should note that the decision step will equate to the changing of the displayed of the downhole data.
Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying the combination of Alonso and Davidson to incorporate Bang’s teachings changing the displayed downhole data based on the location of the view along the borehole. The motivation for performing such a modification in the proposed combination od Alonso and Davidson is to allow a user to make vital decisions about the development of a well, and also to help determining where to place one or more pumps in the wellbore.
As per claims 2 and 14, the combination of Alonso, Davidson and Bang further teaches wherein the instructions further comprise instructions executable by the processor for: receiving three-dimensional input from the game controller; and adjusting the view in three dimensions based on the received three-dimensional input (See Alonso [0165]-[0166]).
As per claims 6-7 and 17, most of the limitations of these claims have been noted in the above rejection of claims 1 and 13. In addition, causing distortions in the view of at least one of an X-dimension, a Y-dimension, a Z-dimension, a plane, a formation, or a basin is considered met by the combination of Alonso, Davidson and Bang further teaches (See Alonso [0040], [0137]).
As per claims 9-10 and 19-20, most of the limitations of these claims have been noted in the above rejection of claims 1 and 13. In addition, the combination of Alonso and Calleja further teaches displaying downhole data in the view based on the location of the view along the borehole, displaying in the view one or more of stratigraphic layers, signatures, orientations, or geometry of the borehole, and showing in the view alternative projections of downhole data and/or geological interpretations (See Davidson [0012], [0015], [0016] with shapes of the borehole for the geometrical aspect [0020] with color and decision point as noted in [0020]).
As per claims 11, the combination of Alonso and Calleja further teaches wherein receiving user input from the game controller comprises receiving one or more of an accelerometer of the game controller, a gyroscope of the game controller, a stick of the game controller, or a button of the game controller (See Alonso [0045], [0142]).
As per claim 12, the combination of Alonso and Calleja further teaches receiving user input from a second user input device, wherein the second user input device comprises a foot pedal, a joystick, a mouse, or a touchscreen (See Alonso [0030], and [0165]).
5. Claims 3-5 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alonso et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2020/0157887) in view Davidson et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2014/0152659), and Bang et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2018/0023385) as applied to claim 1 and 13, and further in view of Dvorak et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2006/0079330).
Regarding claims 3-5 and 15-16, most of the limitations of these claims have been noted in the above rejection of claims 1 and 13.
It is noted that the combination of Alonso, Davidson and Bang is silent about generating an alert upon an occurrence of a condition, and wherein generating the alert comprises causing the game controller to vibrate.
However, Dvorak teaches generating an alert upon an occurrence of a condition, and wherein generating the alert comprises causing the game controller to vibrate (See Dvorak [0049]).
Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying the combination of Alonso, Davidson and Bang to incorporate Dvorak’s teachings to generate an alert upon an occurrence of a condition, and wherein generating the alert comprises causing the game controller to vibrate. The motivation for performing such a modification in the proposed above combination is to detect a request from a user to make a call or otherwise to send a communication.
6. 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.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIMS S PHILIPPE whose telephone number is (571)272-7336. The examiner can normally be reached Maxi Flex.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
/GIMS S PHILIPPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424