DETAILED ACTION
In the Final Rejection mailed 3/25/2026:
Claims 1-17 were cancelled.
Claims 18-22 were rejected.
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 .
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.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/24/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to the claims filed 6/24/2026 has been entered:
Claims 1-17 and 22 are cancelled.
Claims 18-21 are active.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 6/24/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 18-21 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Sullivan, as detailed below.
While neither Holdcroft, nor Thornberry teach that the oscillator is an RC oscillator, Sullivan discloses the utilization of an RC oscillator for temperature measurement in downhole mining operations.
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.
Claim 21 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.
Claim 21 recites the limitations “the step of using the first and second frequency measurements” (lines 1-2) and “said frequency measurements” (lines 4-5). There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. A step of using the first, second, and additional frequency measurements was previously recited in claim 18, but a step of using the first and second frequency measurements was not. Additionally, it is unclear which previously recited frequency measurements “said frequency measurements” in lines 4-5 refers to, since applicant previously claimed a first frequency measurement, a second frequency measurement, an additional frequency measurement, and a third frequency measurement, but only the first, second, and additional frequency measurements were used to establish the frequency versus temperature relationship for the oscillator.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holdcroft et al. (US 2011/0006585), herein ‘Holdcroft’, and further in view of Thornberry et al. (US 10450855), herein ‘Thornberry’, and Sullivan et al. (US 2001/0054514), herein ‘Sullivan’.
Regarding claim 18, Holdcroft discloses a method (10) of monitoring a temperature (par. 31) in a borehole (14) in which a detonator (18) is deployed, the method comprising:
deploying the detonator in the borehole (par. 29);
placing an emulsion explosive (28) into the borehole surrounding the detonator (par. 35); and
subsequent to the placement of the emulsion explosive into the borehole:
obtaining a measurement (par. 7 and 11) from a temperature sensor (22);
using said measurement to determine a temperature of the temperature sensor (par. 31); and
using the temperature to assess whether the temperature in the borehole is indicative of a hot-hole condition (par. 7-8 and 33).
Holdcroft does not expressly teach wherein the method further comprises: under temperature-controlled conditions prior to deployment of the detonator in the borehole: using an oscillator, which functions at a frequency which is temperature-dependent, to determine a first frequency measurement which is based on the frequency of oscillation of the oscillator at a first temperature and a second frequency measurement which is based on the frequency of oscillation of the oscillator at a second temperature and an additional measurement which is based on the frequency of oscillation of the oscillator at room temperature which is between the first temperature and the second temperature, using said first, second, and additional frequency measurements to establish a frequency versus temperature relationship for the oscillator, and storing said frequency versus temperature relationship in a memory unit in the detonator; and wherein the temperature sensor is the oscillator, such that the step of obtaining a measurement from a temperature sensor comprises obtaining a third frequency measurement which is based on the frequency of oscillation of the oscillator, and such that the step of using said measurement to determine a temperature of the temperature sensor comprises using said third frequency measurement to determine a temperature of the oscillator based on the frequency versus temperature relationship.
Thornberry teaches a system (100) and method for measuring the temperature in a well (110) comprising: prior to deployment of an oscillator (Fig. 3; col. 4 lines 57-66) which functions as a temperature sensor (142) into the well (Fig. 1), determining a first measurement which is based on the frequency of the oscillator at a first temperature, a second measurement which is based on the frequency of the oscillator at a second temperature, and an additional measurement which is based on the frequency of the oscillator at a room temperature which is between the first temperature and the second temperature and using said first, second, and additional measurements to establish a frequency versus temperature relationship for the oscillator and storing said frequency versus temperature relationship in a memory unit (col. 7 lines 51-57; col. 8 lines 1-11; col. 9 lines 27-34); and, after deployment of the oscillator in the well, obtaining a third measurement of the frequency of the oscillator to determine a temperature of the oscillator based on the frequency versus temperature relationship to determine the temperature in the borehole (col. 7 lines 48-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the temperature sensor used to measure the temperature in the borehole of Holdcroft to be an oscillator which was previously calibrated with the appropriate frequency and temperature relationship data as taught by Thornberry with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide a reliable and inexpensive temperature gauge that can withstand the high temperatures and pressures present in a well (Thornberry; col. 2 lines 6-9).
The modified Holdcroft further does not expressly teach wherein the oscillator is an RC oscillator.
Sullivan teaches a method and apparatus for monitoring and recording of the operating condition of a downhole drill bit during drilling operations (title) comprising a temperature sensor in the form of an RC oscillator (901-905; par. 163).
Additionally, applicant’s specification states that RC oscillators are in widespread use in the art, since crystal oscillators are sensitive to shock, which is prevalent in a mining environment (par. 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the oscillator used to measure the temperature in the borehole of the modified Holdcroft to be an RC oscillator as taught by Sullivan with a reasonable expectation of success in order to obtain the advantages known in the art of RC oscillators over crystal oscillators.
Regarding claim 19, Thornberry, as applied above, discloses wherein the first and second temperatures span a temperature at which all or a part of the detonator is assembled under the temperature-controlled conditions (col. 8 lines 1-11).
Regarding claim 20, Thornberry, as applied above, discloses wherein the method includes the step of extracting data on the first and second frequency measurements from the memory unit with a controller (130, 134) which is in communication with the detonator.
Regarding claim 21, Thornberry, as applied above, discloses wherein the step of using said first, second, and additional frequency measurements to establish the frequency versus temperature relationship for the oscillator comprises using the controller to implement a curve-fitting technique to establish said frequency versus temperature relationship from at least the first, second, and additional frequency measurements and from the corresponding temperatures (col. 8 lines 1-26).
Conclusion
Claims 1-17 and 22 are cancelled. Claims 18-21 are rejected.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S GOMBERG whose telephone number is (571)272-4802. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Troy Chambers can be reached at (571)272-6874. 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.
/Troy Chambers/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3641
/BENJAMIN S. GOMBERG/
Examiner
Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights