DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of claims 1-20 have been considered but are not persuasive.
The limitations of “generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation” and “drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem.” Do not overcome the rejection under 35 USC § 101for several reasons.
The limitation of “generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation” does not suggest a physical transformation to the drilling operation/drilling system. This limitation itself is an abstract idea because a human can perform the step of “generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem…” in the mind or using pen and paper. An operator can decide, in their mind, the possible outputs/solutions to mitigate the identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point OR they can write down the output response using pen and paper. This step does not actually require a step of “adjusting…”, “accelerating...” or “delaying…” but merely requires the idea of performing these steps. The claim should recite a step of actually performing a step which results in a physical transformation.
Additionally, even if the claims required the step of “(i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters”, this step is so broad that it can amount to merely adjusting a threshold of a parameter, e.g. adjusting a maximum/minimum WOB, which does not necessarily result in a physical transformation of the drilling operation. This step would amount to “apply it” because this step merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea which is analogous to “A method of assigning hair designs to balance head shape with a final step of using a tool (scissors) to cut the hair”. See In re Brown, 645 Fed. App'x 1014, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2016) as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f)(2).
Furthermore, the steps of “(ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation” are not significantly more than the judicial exception because these steps don’t constitute a physical change as they're based on a comparison that doesn't really exist. These steps essentially require starting drilling sooner/later than a hypothetical starting time that has not been recited in the claim.
The limitation of “drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem.” is merely “apply it” because this step merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea which is analogous to “A method of assigning hair designs to balance head shape with a final step of using a tool (scissors) to cut the hair”. See In re Brown, 645 Fed. App'x 1014, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2016) as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f)(2). This step merely applies the abstract concept of “generating an output response to mitigate or avoid…” and amounts to just “drilling” without improving the drilling operation/drilling system.
For the above reasons, the rejection to claims 1-20 will be maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, the amendments overcame the prior art rejection of record. However, upon further search and consideration, the claims have been rejected under new grounds below. As such, Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of claims 1, 9 and 15 are moot.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 of the USPTO’s eligibility analysis entails considering whether the claimed subject
matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Claims 1-8 are directed to a method (process), claims 9-14 are directed to a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (machine) and claims 15-20 are directed to a system (machine). As such, the claims are directed to statutory categories of invention.
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis
in Step 2A. Step 2A of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance is a two prong inquiry. In Prong One, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception.
Claims 1, 9 and 15 recite abstract limitations including:
“providing a plurality of device indicators on a user interface, each device indicator corresponding to a drill string component along a drill string located in the borehole during drilling of the borehole; determining a position of each of a plurality of drill string components relative to at least one corresponding interest point of the borehole, wherein the at least one interest point is a location with at least one characteristic that(i) will impede movement of at least one drill string component, (ii) will increase friction on the drill string, or (iii) will cause the drill string to change direction when at least one component is proximal the interest point; and controlling a characteristic of each device indicator based on the position of the particular drill string component relative to the at least one interest point” and “generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation” (claim 1), “displaying a plurality of device indicators on a user interface, each device indicator corresponding to a drill string component along a drill string located in a borehole during drilling of the borehole; determining a position of each of a plurality of drill string components relative to at least one interest point of the borehole, wherein the interest point is a location with at least one characteristic that (i) will impede movement of at least one drill string component, (ii) will increase friction on the drill string, or (iii) will cause the drill string to change direction; and controlling a characteristic of each device indicator based on the position of the particular drill string component relative to the at least one interest point.” and “generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation” (claim 9) and “identifying a plurality of drill string components along a drill string located in a borehole during drilling of the borehole; identifying at least one corresponding interest point of the borehole, wherein the at least one interest point is a location with at least one characteristic that (i) will impede movement of at least one drill string component, (ii) will increase friction on the drill string, or (iii) will cause the drill string to change direction; tracking each drill string component within the borehole and relative to the corresponding at least one interest point; tracking each drill string component within the borehole and relative to the corresponding the at least one interest point; and generating an output response based on the tracking of each drill string component relative to the corresponding at least one interest point along the borehole and to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation” (claim 15).
These limitations, as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable
interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind, or by a human using pen and
paper, and therefore recite mental processes. For example, regarding claim 1, the limitation of "providing a plurality of device indicators on a user interface, each device indicator corresponding to a drill string component along a drill string located in the borehole during drilling of the borehole" is an abstract idea because under BRI this limitation can be interpreted as an operator writing down symbols on a piece of paper, where each symbol corresponds to a drill string component. Furthermore, the step of “determining a position of each of a plurality of drill string components relative to at least one corresponding interest point of the borehole, wherein the at least one interest point is a location with at least one characteristic that(i) will impede movement of at least one drill string component, (ii) will increase friction on the drill string, or (iii) will cause the drill string to change direction when at least one component is proximal the interest point;” can be performed in the mind because an operator can look at positional data and determine a position of each drill string component. The mere recitation of generic computing elements does not take the claim out of the mental process grouping. Mental processes cover concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) as well as decision-making steps which encompass the limitations listed above. The claims do not require any action as currently worded. Thus, the claims recite abstract ideas.
If the claim recites a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea enumerated in Section I of
the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, a law of nature, or a natural
phenomenon), the claim requires further analysis in Prong Two. In Prong Two, examiners
evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a
practical application of that exception.
Claims 1, 9 and 15 recite the additional element of (or substantially similar to) “drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem”. Claim 9 recites the additional element of “a plurality of instructions executable by one or more processors”. Claim 15 similarly recites the additional element of “non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising a plurality of instructions executable by the processor”.
The recitations of “drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem.” and “processor” amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity.
Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract ideas into practical applications because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself).
Regarding the recitation of “drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem.”, this limitation amounts to “apply it” because this step merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea which is analogous to “A method of assigning hair designs to balance head shape with a final step of using a tool (scissors) to cut the hair”. See In re Brown, 645 Fed. App'x 1014, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2016) as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f)(2).
Regarding the recitation of a “processor”, this element merely amounts to “apply it.” The “processor” contains mere instructions to implement the abstract ideas on a computer, e.g., a limitation indicating that a particular function such as creating and maintaining electronic records is performed by a computer. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 225-26, 110 USPQ2d at 1984.
Thus, even when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims amount to
significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) than the abstract ideas.
Regarding claims 2-8, 10-14 and 16-20, these claims recite limitations that further add to the abstract ideas recited in claims 1, 9 and 15. Nothing in the claims preclude the limitations of the claims from practically being performed in the human mind, or by a human using pen and paper. For example, the limitation of “predicting a status of the drill string component over a projected interval and providing an indication of the predicted status.” (claim 2) is abstract because an operator can perform the step of “predicting a status…” in the mind and step of “providing an indication” with symbols using pen and paper. Furthermore, the limitation of “mapping the plurality of device indicators corresponding to placement of the drill string components along the drill string” (claim 8) can be a drawing of the drillstring components using pen and paper. Finally, the limitation of “providing an alert on a user interface of a current position of each drill string component relative to the one or more interest points.” (claim 19) can be interpreted as indicating on a mapped drawing of the drilling system where the current position of each drill string component is relative to the one or more interest points (e.g. the surface). Therefore, similar to claims 1, 9 and 15, these claims recite limitations that do not provide a practical application of the abstract idea and are not significantly more.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whalley (U.S. Publication No. 20150193126) in view of Dursun et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20170191359).
Regarding claim 1, Whalley teaches a method for drilling a borehole, the method comprising:
providing a plurality of device indicators (320 and 324; Fig.3-6) on a user interface (226), each device indicator corresponding to a drill string component (list of drill string component 318; Fig. 3, 4) along a drill string (drill string as shown; Fig. 3, pp[0014]) located in the borehole during drilling of the borehole (drill string is located in the borehole 310 during drilling of the borehole 310; Fig. 3);
determining a position of each of a plurality of drill string components (measured depth 316; Fig. 3) relative to at least one corresponding interest point of the borehole (“interest point” are regions/depths with drill string failure such as fatigue, 90% yield stress, 100% yield stress, sinusoidal buckling, helical buckling, lockup, and/or torque failure; pp[0021], Fig. 3), wherein the at least one interest point is a location with at least one characteristic that(i) will impede movement of at least one drill string component, (ii) will increase friction on the drill string, or (iii) will cause the drill string to change direction when at least one component is proximal the interest point (fatigue, 90% yield stress, 100% yield stress, sinusoidal buckling, helical buckling, lockup, and/or torque failure will all impede movement of at least one drill string component as these are all drill string failures; pp[0021]);
controlling a characteristic of each device indicator based on the position of the particular drill string component relative to the at least one interest point (If cell 324 contained a value, such as an "x," that would indicate that the drilling system 100 had experienced torque failure at a measured depth; pp[0022]);
Whalley is silent regarding generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation; and drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem.
Dursun, drawn to a target risk attribute predictor while drilling, discloses generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters (in response to predicting target risks corresponding to temperature variation, pore pressure variation, vibration variation, and/or some other attribute that can be correlated with an increased risk of drilling degradation or failure, the output of the target risk attribute predictor may be used to manually or automatically adjust a drilling direction and/or drilling operational parameters (e.g., torque, weight-on-bit, rotation rate) while drilling a borehole; pp[0019]) and drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem (adjustments to drilling operational parameters are done while drilling; pp[0019]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Whalley such that the adjusting the drilling operation comprising adjusting drilling operational parameters, as taught by Dursun, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to prevent or mitigate risks during drilling (pp(0019])
Regarding claim 2, Whalley further teaches further comprising predicting a status of the drill string component over a projected interval and providing an indication of the predicted status (The planning tool 236 will predict the type and location of a drill system failure (or failures); pp[0025])
Regarding claim 3, Whalley further teaches wherein controlling the characteristic comprises providing a first characteristic (an “x” in a box 324) based on the position of the drill string component being at the position of the at least one interest point (“interest point” are regions/depths with drill string failure such as fatigue, 90% yield stress, 100% yield stress, sinusoidal buckling, helical buckling, lockup, and/or torque failure; pp[0021], Fig. 3) and providing a second characteristic (leaving box 324 empty) based on the position of the drill string component being different from the position of thee at least one interest point (“interest point” are regions/depths with drill string failure such as fatigue, 90% yield stress, 100% yield stress, sinusoidal buckling, helical buckling, lockup, and/or torque failure; pp[0021], Fig. 3)
Regarding claim 4, Whalley further teaches wherein controlling the characteristic comprises controlling at least one of a color of the indicator, a size of the indicator, or a shape of the indicator (“x” is a shape which is used to indicate a drill system failure; pp[0022]).
Regarding claim 5, Whalley further teaches comprising displaying a mapping of the borehole with the at least one interest point and a mapping of the drill string relative to the at least one interest point (borehole is mapped 232 which illustrated drill string relative to the areas with buckling/other drill system failures; pp[0022], Fig. 3,4).
Regarding claim 6, Whalley further teaches wherein the device indicator comprises a current status indicator, and wherein controlling the characteristic of the device indicator comprises controlling a characteristic of the current status indicator based on a present condition of the drill string component (the drilling control system 145 uses the collected data to estimate where in the drilling system such failures have occurred. An empty or blank cell indicates that the drill system failure associated with the column that intersects at that cell is not present at the depth associated with the row that intersects at that cell and the presence of a value, such as an "x," indicates that the corresponding fault has occurred at the corresponding depth; pp[0009], [0022]).
Regarding claim 7, Whalley further teaches wherein the device indicator comprises a projected status indicator, and wherein controlling the characteristic of the device indicator comprises controlling a characteristic of the projected status indicator based on a predicted future condition of the drill string component (The planning tool 236 will predict the type and location of a drill system failure (or failures) under those circumstances. In one embodiment, the planning tool 236 sets the flags in the failure flag field 218 or the other fields 220 corresponding to the identified fault (or faults) in the data record or data records 212a-n that correspond to the location of the identified fault (or faults). For example, if the planning tool 236 predicts that the drill string 110 will experience sinusoidal buckling at 4530 feet of measured depth; pp[0025]).
Regarding claim 8, Whalley further teaches further comprising mapping the plurality of device indicators corresponding to placement of the drill string components along the drill string (the indicators 324 correspond to each drill pipe/ component type which is mapped 232; Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding claim 9, Whalley teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising a plurality of instructions executable by one or more processors, which, when executed on the one or more processors (A processor with access to the memory generates and transmits for display on a graphical user interface a schematic of a portion of the drill string; Abstract, pp[0032], claim 8), cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising:
displaying a plurality of device indicators (320 and 324; Figs. 3-6) on a user interface (226), each device indicator corresponding to a drill string component (list of drill string component 318; Fig. 3, 4 along a drill string (drill string as shown; Fig. 3, pp[0014] located in a borehole during drilling of the borehole (drill string is located in the borehole 310 during drilling of the borehole 310; Fig. 3);
determining a position of each of a plurality of drill string components (measured depth 316; Fig. 3) relative to at least one interest point of the borehole (“interest point” are regions/depths with drill string failure such as fatigue, 90% yield stress, 100% yield stress, sinusoidal buckling, helical buckling, lockup, and/or torque failure; pp[0021], Fig. 3), wherein the interest point is a location with at least one characteristic that (i) will impede movement of at least one drill string component, (ii) will increase friction on the drill string, or (iii) will cause the drill string to change direction (fatigue, 90% yield stress, 100% yield stress, sinusoidal buckling, helical buckling, lockup, and/or torque failure will all impede movement of at least one drill string component as these are all drill string failures; pp[0021]);
controlling a characteristic of each device indicator based on the position of the particular drill string component relative to the at least one interest point (If cell 324 contained a value, such as an "x," that would indicate that the drilling system 100 had experienced torque failure at a measured depth; pp[0022]);
Whalley is silent regarding generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation; and drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem.
Dursun, drawn to a target risk attribute predictor while drilling, discloses generating an output response to mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point, wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters (in response to predicting target risks corresponding to temperature variation, pore pressure variation, vibration variation, and/or some other attribute that can be correlated with an increased risk of drilling degradation or failure, the output of the target risk attribute predictor may be used to manually or automatically adjust a drilling direction and/or drilling operational parameters (e.g., torque, weight-on-bit, rotation rate) while drilling a borehole; pp[0019]) and drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem (adjustments to drilling operational parameters are done while drilling; pp[0019]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Whalley such that the adjusting the drilling operation comprising adjusting drilling operational parameters, as taught by Dursun, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to prevent or mitigate risks during drilling (pp(0019]).
Regarding claim 10, Whalley further teaches wherein the instructions further comprise instructions, which, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising: providing a first alert based on the position of the drill string component being at the position of the at least one interest points and providing a second alert based on the position of the drill string component being different from the position of the at least one interest points (“the processor causes an alarm icon, such as a triangle with an overlaid exclamation point, and text indicating the type of failure and details of the depth where the failure occurred to be displayed on the graphical user interface 226 adjacent to the shaded areas. For example, in the embodiment shown in FIG. 4, the depth zones representing 4530-4830, 4830-5160, and 7200-16550 feet have been shaded. In addition, an alarm icon and the text ‘Sinusoidal Buckling 4530-4830 ft’ is displayed adjacent to the 4530-4830 foot shaded area”; pp[0026])
Regarding claim 11, Whalley further teaches wherein the instructions further comprise instructions, which, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising: controlling at least one of a color of the indicator, a size of the indicator, or a shape of the indicator (“x” is a shape which is used to indicate a drill system failure; pp[0022]).
Regarding claim 12, Whalley further teaches wherein the instructions further comprise instructions, which, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising: displaying a mapping of the borehole with the one or more interest points and a mapping of the drill string relative to the one or more interest points (borehole is mapped 232 which illustrated drill string relative to the areas with drill system failures (point of interest); pp[0022], Fig. 3,4).
Regarding claim 13, Whalley further teaches wherein the instructions further comprise instructions, which, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising: controlling a characteristic of a current status indicator based on a present condition of the drill string component (an empty or blank cell indicates that the drill system failure associated with the column that intersects at that cell is not present at the depth associated with the row that intersects at that cell and the presence of a value, such as an "x," indicates that the corresponding fault has occurred at the corresponding depth; Figs. 3-5, pp[0022]); and controlling a characteristic of a projected status indicator based on a predicted future condition of the drill string component (“The planning tool 236 will predict the type and location of a drill system failure (or failures) under those circumstances. In one embodiment, the planning tool 236 sets the flags in the failure flag field 218 or the other fields 220 corresponding to the identified fault (or faults) in the data record or data records 212a-n that correspond to the location of the identified fault (or faults). For example, if the planning tool 236 predicts that the drill string 110 will experience sinusoidal buckling at 4530 feet of measured depth, in one embodiment the planning tool 236 will set the failure flag field 218 or other field 220 associated with the sinusoidal buckling failure in the data record 212a-n which has a depth zone field 214 that includes 4530 feet.”; pp[0025]).
Regarding claim 14, Whalley further teaches wherein the instructions further comprise instructions, which, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising: mapping the plurality of device indicators corresponding to placement of the drill string components along the drill string (the indicators 324 correspond to each drill pipe/ component type which is mapped 232; Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding claim 15, Whalley teaches a system comprising: a processor; and non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising a plurality of instructions executable by the processor (A processor with access to the memory generates and transmits for display on a graphical user interface a schematic of a portion of the drill string; Abstract, pp[0032], claim 8), wherein the plurality of instructions, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising:
identifying a plurality of drill string components (list of drill string component 318; Fig. 3, 4) along a drill string (drill string as shown; Figs. 3-6, pp[0014]) along a drill string (drill string as shown; Figs. 3-6, pp[0014]) located in a borehole during drilling of the borehole (drill string is located in the borehole 310 during drilling of the borehole 310; Fig. 3);
for each drill string component (318) of the plurality of drill string components, identifying at least one corresponding interest point of the borehole (“interest point” are regions/depths with drill string failure such as fatigue, 90% yield stress, 100% yield stress, sinusoidal buckling, helical buckling, lockup, and/or torque failure; pp[0021], Fig. 3), wherein the at least one interest point is a location with at least one characteristic that (i) will impede movement of at least one drill string component, (ii) will increase friction on the drill string, or (iii) will cause the drill string to change direction (fatigue, 90% yield stress, 100% yield stress, sinusoidal buckling, helical buckling, lockup, and/or torque failure will all impede movement of at least one drill string component as these are all drill string failures; pp[0021]);
tracking each drill string component within the borehole and relative to the corresponding at least one interest point (Figs. 3-4, pp[0022]-[0026]);
generating an output response based on the tracking of each drill string component relative to the corresponding at least one interest point along the borehole (the processor causes an alarm icon, such as a triangle with an overlaid exclamation point, and text indicating the type of failure and details of the depth where the failure occurred to be displayed on the graphical user interface 226 adjacent to the shaded areas; pp[0026])
Whalley is silent regarding wherein the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation; and drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem; and mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point.
Dursun, drawn to a target risk attribute predictor while drilling, discloses the output response comprises at least one of (i) adjusting or modifying one or more current drilling operations or current drilling parameters, (ii) accelerating a start time of a next drilling operation, or (iii) delaying the start time of the next drilling operation; and mitigate or avoid an identified or predicted problem resulting from the at least one interest point. (in response to predicting target risks corresponding to temperature variation, pore pressure variation, vibration variation, and/or some other attribute that can be correlated with an increased risk of drilling degradation or failure, the output of the target risk attribute predictor may be used to manually or automatically adjust a drilling direction and/or drilling operational parameters (e.g., torque, weight-on-bit, rotation rate) while drilling a borehole; pp[0019]) and drilling the borehole in accordance with the generated output response to mitigate or avoid the identified or predicted problem (adjustments to drilling operational parameters are done while drilling; pp[0019]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Whalley such that the adjusting the drilling operation comprising adjusting drilling operational parameters, as taught by Dursun, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to prevent or mitigate risks during drilling (pp(0019]).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Whalley and Dursun teaches the system of claim 15, wherein the plurality of instructions.
Dursun further discloses adjusting a drilling operation as the output response based on an identified or predicted problem from the tracking of each drill string component relative to the corresponding the at least one interest point along the borehole, and wherein adjusting a drilling operation comprises postponing a slide, performing a slide sooner than planned, extending a slide, changing RPM, changing WOB, or controlling mud flow (The output of the target risk attribute predictor may be used to manually or automatically adjust a drilling direction and/or drilling operational parameters (e.g., torque, weight-on-bit, rotation rate) while drilling a borehole; pp[0019]).
Regarding claim 17, Whalley further teaches wherein the plurality of instructions, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising generating the output response by: generating a mapping of the drill string, the mapping of the drill string comprising a plurality of indicators, each corresponding to a drill string component of the plurality of drill string components (the indicators 324 correspond to each drill pipe/ component type which is mapped 232; Figs. 3, 4) ; displaying the mapping of the drill string (232 is displayed on 226; Figs. 3-5); and controlling at least one characteristic of each indicator based on the tracking of the corresponding drill string component relative to the corresponding the at least one interest point along the borehole (an empty or blank cell indicates that the drill system failure associated with the column that intersects at that cell is not present at the depth associated with the row that intersects at that cell and the presence of a value, such as an "x," indicates that the corresponding fault has occurred at the corresponding depth; Figs. 3-5, pp[0022]).
Regarding claim 18, Whalley further teaches wherein displaying the mapping of the drill string further comprises displaying a mapping of the borehole (Figs. 3-5) with the at least one interest point (e.g. sinusoidal buckling ; Figs. 3-6,pp[0022], [0023]).
Regarding claim 19, Whalley further teaches wherein the plurality of instructions, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising generating the output response by providing an alert on a user interface of a current position of each drill string component relative to the at least one interest point (“the processor causes an alarm icon, such as a triangle with an overlaid exclamation point, and text indicating the type of failure and details of the depth where the failure occurred to be displayed on the graphical user interface 226 adjacent to the shaded areas. For example, in the embodiment shown in FIG. 4, the depth zones representing 4530-4830, 4830-5160, and 7200-16550 feet have been shaded. In addition, an alarm icon and the text "Sinusoidal Buckling 4530-4830 ft" is displayed adjacent to the 4530-4830 foot shaded area, an alarm icon and the text "Helical Buckling 4830-5160 ft" is displayed adjacent to the 4830-5160 foot shaded area, and an alarm icon and the text "Sinusoidal Buckling 7200-16550 ft" is displayed adjacent to the 7200-16550 foot shaded area...”;pp[0026])
Regarding claim 20, Whalley further teaches wherein the plurality of instructions, when executed on the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform actions comprising generating the output response by predicting a future status of each drill string component relative to the at least one interest point and providing an alert of the predicted future status of each drill string component relative to the at least one interest point on a user interface (The planning tool 236 will predict the type and location of a drill system failure (or failures) under those circumstances. In one embodiment, the planning tool 236 sets the flags in the failure flag field 218 or the other fields 220 corresponding to the identified fault (or faults) in the data record or data records 212a-n that correspond to the location of the identified fault (or faults). For example, if the planning tool 236 predicts that the drill string 110 will experience sinusoidal buckling at 4530 feet of measured depth; pp[0025]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lamia Quaim whose telephone number is (469)295-9199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM - 6PM CST.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/LAMIA QUAIM/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights