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 . Claims 1, 3-8, 10-13, and 15-20 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings filed 11/12/25 are acceptable and entered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” include:
Claim 7: a means for filtering regulations based on location. (See [0051] of applicant’s specification as filed.)
Claim 20: a means for authenticating a user which limits access to manipulate the asset data. (See [0045] of applicant’s specification as filed.)
Further, this application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. These limitations include:
Claim 6: wherein the regulatory module is configured to generate an output based on the asset data and display the output in the interactive user interface. (See [0017] of applicant’s specification as filed.)
Claim 10: wherein the regulatory module interprets the attribute information against the applicable regulations to produce the output. (See [0017] of applicant’s specification as filed.)
Claim 15: wherein the operational module is configured to interpret the attribute information of the one or more assets to generate an operator output. (See [0018] of applicant’s specification as filed.)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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, 3-8, 10-13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Step 1 (The Statutory Categories): Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? MPEP 2106.03.
Per Step 1, the claims are to a system (i.e., a machine) and therefore directed to statutory categories of invention. However, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they are directed to an abstract idea, a judicial exception, without reciting additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
The analysis proceeds to Step 2A Prong One.
Step 2A Prong One: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? MPEP 2106.04.
The abstract idea of claim 1 is (abstract idea steps are italicized and bolded, while additional elements are not):
A database management system for assets of an oil and gas operation, the system comprising:
a server in data communication with a computing device over a network, the computing device having an interactive user interface;
the interactive user interface having a tab window and a display window and memory stored in the server and accessible by the computing device, wherein asset data is stored in the memory and retrievable by the computing device, the asset data comprising:
geospatial information defining at least one disturbance site, spatial feature information representing one or more assets within the disturbance site, and attribute information representing non-spatial features of the one or more assets within the disturbance site;
wherein the interactive user interface displays a digital twin of the at least one disturbance site in the display window and populates the tab window with a selectable listing of the asset data, the interactive user interface dynamically updating the digital twin based on a user selection from the tab window of the geospatial information and the spatial feature information.
The abstract idea steps italicized above are those which could be performed mentally, including with pen and paper. The steps describe, at a high level, data gathering/organizing steps associated with at least one disturbance site. The claims are similar to Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016), where it was decided that the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind (see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, including observations, evaluations, judgements, and/or opinions, then it falls within the Mental Processes – Concepts Performed in the Human Mind grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Additionally and alternatively, the abstract idea steps italicized above describe the rules or instructions pertaining to managing assets of an oil and gas operation, which constitutes a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior relationships, interactions between people. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior relationships, interactions between people, including social activities, teaching, and/or following rules or instructions, then it falls within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity – Managing Personal Behavior Relationships, Interactions Between People grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? MPEP 2106.04.
The additional elements include: a server in data communication with a computing device over a network; an interactive user interface; a tab window; a display window; memory stored in the server and accessible by the computing device; populates the tab window with a selectable listing of the asset data.
These elements are merely instructions to apply the abstract idea to a computer, per MPEP 2106.05(f). Applicant has only described generic computing elements in their specification, as seen in [0015] of applicant’s specification as filed, for example.
Further, the combination of these elements is nothing more than a generic computing system. Because the additional elements are merely instructions to apply the abstract idea to a computer, as described in MPEP 2106.05(f), they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Therefore, per Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements, alone and in combination, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B (The Inventive Concept): Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? MPEP 2106.05.
Step 2B involves evaluating the additional elements to determine whether they amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
The examination process involves carrying over identification of the additional element(s) in the claim from Step 2A Prong Two and carrying over conclusions from Step 2A Prong Two pertaining to MPEP 2106.05(f).
The additional elements and their analysis are therefore carried over: applicant has merely recited elements that facilitate the tasks of the abstract idea, as described in MPEP 2106.05(f).
Further, the combination of these elements is nothing more than a generic computing system. When the claim elements above are considered, alone and in combination, they do not amount to significantly more.
Therefore, per Step 2B, the additional elements, alone and in combination, are not significantly more. The claims are not patent eligible.
The analysis takes into consideration all dependent claims as well:
Dependent claim 3 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (populating the tab window).
Dependent claim 4 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (causes the display window to update).
Dependent claim 5 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (causes the display window to update; wherein the display window is populated).
Dependent claim 6 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (regulatory module).
Dependent claim 7 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (means for filtering regulations based on location).
Dependent claim 8 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (regulation filtering means).
Dependent claims 10-12 and 16-17 further narrow the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information. There are no further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously.
Dependent claim 13 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (a selectable icon).
Dependent claim 15 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (operator module).
Dependent claims 18-19 further narrow the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (operator display; operator map).
Dependent claim 20 further narrows the abstract idea with additional abstract steps and/or information, in addition to reciting further additional elements, beyond those highlighted previously (the server is tiered; means for authenticating a user).
Similar to above, these are generic computing elements being used in their ordinary capacity to facilitate the tasks of the abstract idea. Whether viewed alone or in combination, this does not integrate the narrowed abstract idea into practical application and does not add significantly more, either. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Accordingly, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1, 3-6, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otta (US 20190122416) in view of Currin (US 20190138995) and Schoonover (US 20220405873).
Claim 1
Otta discloses:
A database management system for assets of an oil and gas operation {management system for assets of an oil and gas operation: [0055] FIG. 14 illustrates an exemplary graphical user interface display 1400 for selecting a group of oil wells (e.g., group that includes the plurality of wells). In some implementations, a user can select oil wells for the group by clicking on the Well Selection Mode icon 1402 followed by selection of one or more wells (e.g., by clicking, by double clicking, etc.) from the vertical taskbar 220. In some implementations, clicking on the well selection mode icon 1402 can display one or more predetermined groups of wells (e.g., pads of gas lift wells) from which the user can select. Examiners notes that database evidenced via updating of dashboard with saved data, described in [0050].}, the system comprising:
a server in data communication with a computing device over a network, the computing device having an interactive user interface {server in data communication with a computing device over a network, the computing device having an interactive user interface: [0076] The subject matter described herein can be implemented in a computing system that includes a back-end component (e.g., a data server), a middleware component (e.g., an application server), or a front-end component (e.g., a client computer having a graphical user interface or a web interface through which a user can interact with an implementation of the subject matter described herein), or any combination of such back-end, middleware, and front-end components. The components of the system can be interconnected by any form or medium of digital data communication, e.g., a communication network. Examples of communication networks include a local area network (“LAN”) and a wide area network (“WAN”), e.g., the Internet.};
the interactive user interface having a display window {display window: [0035] At 102, a visual representation of an output value of a plurality of digital models of a plurality of industrial machines (e.g., oil pumps) can be rendered in a graphical user interface display space.}; and
memory stored in the server and accessible by the computing device, wherein asset data is stored in the memory and retrievable by the computing device, the asset data comprising {asset data stored in the memory and retrievable by the computing device: [0049] The DTV system 510 can receive operational parameters detected by the sensors 504a (or 504b), and transmit control signal to the control system 506a (or 506b). The DTV system 510 can calculate pump characteristics based on the received operational parameter and system coefficients which can be stored in a memory device 511.}:
geospatial information defining at least one disturbance site, spatial feature information representing one or more assets within the disturbance site, and attribute information representing non-spatial features of the one or more assets within the disturbance site {geospatial information defining at least one disturbance site and spatial feature information representing one or more assets within the disturbance site: [0039] The visual representation can include oil field information (e.g., a plot of pump characteristics calculated by the DTV system with respect to an operational parameter). Oil field information can be visually represented in an oil field map that can display the geographical locations of the oil well clusters 202, 204, 206 and 208. attribute information representing non-spatial features of the one or more assets within the disturbance site: [0050] At 625 the recommendations can be communicated to the dashboard 514 that can generate visual representation for the recommendation, operational parameters, pump characteristics and graphical objects to receive inputs from the user.};
wherein the interactive user interface displays a digital twin of the at least one disturbance site in the display window {wherein the interactive user interface displays a digital twin of the at least one disturbance site: [0037] The monitoring system can include a Digital Twin Validation (DTV) system that can include optimization algorithm that can, for example, calibrate digital models for various wells and/or a digital model for multiple wells in the cluster (or all the wells in the cluster). Calibration of digital models can be based on, for example, characteristic of the oil wells detected by sensors that can determine oil well properties. In one implementation, calibration of a digital model of an oil well can involve recalculation of system parameters used in the digital model and indicative of the behavior of the oil well. }.
While examiner contends that Otta discloses a database management system and geospatial information defining at least one disturbance site and spatial feature information representing one or more assets within the disturbance site, an additional reference is relied upon for the purposes of compact prosecution.
Otta, also doesn’t explicitly disclose:
the interactive user interface having a tab window; and
populates the tab window with a selectable listing of the asset data, the interactive user interface dynamically updating the digital twin based on a user selection from the tab window of the geospatial information and the spatial feature information.
Accordingly, examiner looks to Currin, which is in a similar field of endeavor directed to advanced infrastructure management and teaches:
a database management system {[0020] Client application 132 may be “thin,” in which case processing is primarily carried out server-side by server application 112. A simple example of a thin client application is a browser application, which simply requests, receives, and renders web pages at user system(s) 130, while server application 112 is responsible for generating the web pages and managing database functions.};
geospatial information defining at least one disturbance site and spatial feature information representing one or more assets within the disturbance site {[0081] Each dataset may comprise a collection of infrastructure assets, locations of those infrastructure assets (e.g., latitude, longitude, and/or elevation, address, etc.), and/or attributes (e.g., size, material, identifier, reference string, etc.) of those infrastructure assets.}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Otta to include the features of Currin. Given that Otta is directed to monitoring multiple assets across different geographic locations, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look to Currin, in order to enhance geospatial accuracy and misalignment that is systemic in infrastructure management mapping space today via a systematic process of automatic, continual improvement {[0065] of Currin}.
The combination of Otta and Currin doesn’t explicitly disclose, however, Schoonover, in a similar field of endeavor directed to monitoring physical infrastructure, teaches:
the interactive user interface having a tab window {tab window: [0060] A ribbon menu 57 permits the user to select application modules 55A-55E in order to customize the map M by adding additional layers 25 or 35 or by drawing on the map M (see e.g. FIGS. 4A-4E). The user also can jump to preset (bookmarked) territory maps, pan or zoom, link to external maps, analyze distances or results, or perform other tasks such as printing and report writing. [0062] Similar scenarios apply for other types of natural hazard events, with one or more layers 25A-25D or subsets of these layers, see e.g. FIGS. 6-17, being selected and overlaid on one or more physical infrastructure layers 35A-35G (or subsets of these layers). Examiner notes that a tab window also depicted in Fig. 11, where said window is represented by the user-selection pane on left. Also see claim 12 of Schoonover.}; and
populates the tab window with a selectable listing of the asset data, the interactive user interface dynamically updating the digital twin based on a user selection from the tab window of the geospatial information and the spatial feature information {populates the tab window with a selectable listing of the asset data, the interactive user interface dynamically updating the digital twin based on a user selection from the tab window of the geospatial information and the spatial feature information: [0047] The notified personnel then use a computing device 50—such as a desk- or laptop computer, tablet, phablet, or mobile phone—to access a graphical user interface 51 that permits the personnel to navigate the service territory T, visually see, or use instrumentation of, an indication of the event's absolute or relative magnitude within the territory T, select additional event data sources 20 and physical infrastructure data sources 30 to produce custom views and map overlays “M”, and conduct an analysis to prioritize inspection efforts. As the personnel navigate the service territory T, and as they select data sources 20, 30, the graphical user interface 51 is dynamically updated. Examiner notes that features also depicted in Fig. 11, where the physical infrastructure data sources correspond to the digital twin. Also see claim 12 of Schoonover.}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combination of Otta and Currin to include the features of Schoonover. Given that Otta is directed to monitoring multiple assets across different geographic locations, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look to Schoonover, in order to facilitate navigating to preset territory maps, panning or zooming, linking to external maps, analyzing distances or results, or performing other tasks that pertain to infrastructure monitoring {[0060] of Schoonover}.
Claim 3
Currin further teaches: wherein the spatial feature information is categorized by asset type, the categories of asset types populating the tab window as selectable categories {[0151] FIG. 6A illustrates webpage 400 of user interface 210 after a user has selected asset data input 412, according to an embodiment. When the user selects asset data input 412, an asset catalog list 602 is overlaid in webpage 400. Asset catalog list 602 comprises a list of selectable asset types from the asset catalog. These may be the same asset types as those listed in asset list 432. The user may select one of these asset types from asset catalog list 602, for example, by clicking on the identifier of the asset type in asset catalog list 602. Also see [0114].}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 4
Otta further discloses: digital twin {[0037]}.
Currin further discloses: wherein selection of any one category the selectable categories causes the display window to update the [model] by mapping an asset layer, wherein the asset layer includes all assets defined within the selected category and located at the disturbance site {[0124] In an embodiment, multiple assets, asset types, activities, workplans, ArcGIS layers, and/or filters may be selected from their corresponding lists in any combination (e.g., multiple activity types and multiple workplans, a single activity type and a single workplan, multiple activity types and a single workplan and multiple asset types, etc.), such that multiple assets, asset types, activities, workplans, ArcGIS layers, and/or filters may be visualized together in a single view on the virtual map. Also see [0114].}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 5
Otta further discloses: digital twin {[0037]}.
Currin further teaches: wherein selection of multiple of the selectable categories causes the display window to update the [model] by mapping an asset layer for each selected category, wherein the display window is populated with a common asset layer that combines the asset layer for each category to appear as a single asset layer {update the [model] by mapping an asset layer for each selected category: [0127] It should be understood that each overlay—whether it be an overlay of visual representations for an asset type selected via asset list 432 from the asset catalog, an overlay of visual representations for one or more infrastructure assets matching a search string input using search input box 431, an overlay of visual representations of one or more activities selected using activities list 433, an overlay of visual representations for one or more infrastructure assets included in a workplan selected using workplan list 434, an overlay of one or more ArcGIS layers selected using ArcGIS layer list 436A, an overlay of visual representations for one or more infrastructure assets satisfying a filter selected using a filter list, etc.—represents an individual, discrete layer overlaid on the virtual map in virtual map frame 420. Each layer may be toggled on and off, and stacked with one or more other layers using the disclosed inputs and lists. display window populated with a common asset layer that combines the asset layer for each category to appear as a single asset layer: [0057] Once the coordinate system or projection system has been determined, the CAD or shapefile data is converted or recast into WGS 84 format. In an embodiment, the data is recast in a newly created layer that will become the ground-truth layer for that particular data set. There may be multiple layers created, with one such layer for each set of initial data. Thus, each layer may comprise complete or partial data for one type of infrastructure (e.g., sewer, potable water, roads, gas, etc.). However, it should be understood that, in other instances or embodiments, a layer may comprise complete or partial data for multiple types of infrastructure.}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 6
Currin further teaches: a regulatory module stored in the memory and accessible by the computing device, wherein the regulatory module is configured to generate an output based on the asset data and display the output in the interactive user interface {[0226] Platform 110 documents the entire operations and management cycle for infrastructure assets. For instance, the attributes (e.g., sensor readings) and assessments (e.g., ratings) of infrastructure assets and all the events, activities, follow-up activities, and workplans involving an infrastructure asset are recorded over time (e.g., in database(s) 114 by application 200). Thus, the history of each infrastructure asset—including, for example, the attributes, ratings, activities, and events for the infrastructure asset at any given time or over a period of time—may be viewed, queried, analyzed, etc. This level of documentation can prove an organization's regulatory compliance, and may drive auditing and performance measurement.}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 15
Currin further teaches: an operational module stored in the memory and accessible by the computing device, wherein the operational module is configured to interpret the attribute information of the one or more assets to generate an operator output {[0132] In addition, in the illustrated example, asset detail frame 440 comprises a detail input 443 for displaying attributes of the infrastructure asset (e.g., represented in the fields of a data structure representing the infrastructure asset), a street-view input 444 for displaying a street view of the infrastructure asset, a location input 445 for displaying a location (e.g., address, GPS coordinates, etc.) of the infrastructure asset, an activities input 446 for displaying any activities associated with the infrastructure asset, and an expand input 447A for navigating to a user interface with more details regarding the infrastructure asset (e.g., as illustrated in FIGS. 5A and 5B). In addition, asset detail frame 440 could comprise a new activity input for associating the infrastructure asset with a new activity. If the user selects detail input 443, attributes of the infrastructure asset are retrieved from the fields of a data structure for the infrastructure asset and displayed in informational area 442 (e.g., in rows comprising a field name and a field value), as illustrated in FIG. 4I.}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 16
Currin further teaches: wherein the operator output comprises a maintenance schedule for a subset of assets possessing common attribute information, wherein the maintenance schedule is generated based on the common attribute information {[0168] FIG. 8 illustrates a portion of a webpage 800 of user interface 210 which may be presented after a user has selected workplans input 414 from any of the other webpages of user interface 210, according to an embodiment. Webpage 800 may comprise a list of all saved workplans, with each row in the list representing a workplan and providing information about the workplan. For instance, each workplan row may comprise a name of the workplan, the number of infrastructure assets included in the workplan, the type of activity associated with the workplan, a priority of the activity, a scheduled date range for the activity, a progress of the workplan or activity (e.g., a percentage of infrastructure assets for which the activity has been completed), a status of the workplan or activity (e.g., active, planned, incomplete, overdue, pending, etc.), and/or an input for editing the workplan.}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 17
Currin further teaches: wherein the memory further comprises a plurality of asset data entries, each of the plurality of asset data entries comprising geospatial information representing a unique disturbance site and spatial feature information representing one or more assets located within each unique disturbance site {[0081]}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 18
Otta further discloses: wherein the interactive user interface further comprises an operator display that generates an operator map displaying a digital twin for each unique disturbance site {[0035]}.
Claim 19
Otta further discloses: wherein each digital twin is selectable within the operator map and wherein upon selection of a digital twin, the interactive user interface displays only the selected digital twin {[0055] FIG. 14 illustrates an exemplary graphical user interface display 1400 for selecting a group of oil wells (e.g., group that includes the plurality of wells). In some implementations, a user can select oil wells for the group by clicking on the Well Selection Mode icon 1402 followed by selection of one or more wells (e.g., by clicking, by double clicking, etc.) from the vertical taskbar 220. In some implementations, clicking on the well selection mode icon 1402 can display one or more predetermined groups of wells (e.g., pads of gas lift wells) from which the user can select.}.
Claim 20
Currin further teaches: wherein the server is tiered and each tier has a means for authenticating a user which limits access to manipulate the asset data {[0102] In an embodiment, permissions may be set according to asset type. For example, user interface 210 may provide one or more inputs for associating users with each asset type in the asset catalog. In addition, for each asset type in the asset catalog, user interface 210 may provide one or more inputs for assigning one or more permissions to each user associated with the asset type. Permissions may include, for example, a read permission for viewing infrastructure assets of the asset type, a write permission for modifying infrastructure assets of the asset type, a delete permission for deleting infrastructure assets of the asset type from the datasets, and/or a share permission for sharing infrastructure assets of the asset type.}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claims 7-8 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Otta, Currin, and Schoonover, further in view of MacLean (US 20140172513).
Claim 7
The combination of Otta, Currin, and Schoonover, while teaching the features above, doesn’t explicitly teach, however, MacLean, in a similar field of endeavor directed to monitoring compliance of construction projects, teaches: wherein the regulatory module comprises a means for filtering regulations based on location {[0004] The present embodiment of the ECS facilitates maintaining compliance with overlapping, duplicative, and sometimes conflicting environmental regulations between the various levels of governmental control (local, state, federal). [0014] In one embodiment, any desired environmental or other data uploaded from the field (project site) into the field data display(s), or uploaded off-site, is visually overlaid on the GIS display at the appropriate location so that users can scroll on the GIS display and via a related icon on the GIS display, view the associated data stored in the underlying databases and field data displays. For example, an uploaded photo or image data of a deceased avian and other attributes such as GPS location metadata in the image data can be uploaded as a report into the appropriate database directly from the project field/site location along with other relevant information for a "wildlife mortality survey". The image and other information in the report is saved in the associated database, and the report can be displayed in both a field data table display, and may also be automatically viewed from, for example, a mouse-over link in the GIS display.}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combination of Otta, Currin, and Schoonover to include the features of MacLean. Given that Otta is directed to monitoring multiple assets across different geographic locations, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look to MacLean, in order to facilitate the review, communication, management and monitoring of regulatory and cooperative compliance on a project site {[0001] of MacLean}.
Claim 8
MacLean further teaches: wherein the regulation filtering means interprets the geospatial information to determine a precise location of the disturbance site and pulls, from the memory, regulations only applicable to the precise location {[0086] The integration of the field data, for example incidental and attribute data from the incidental surveys with the GIS as described above is an important aspect of the present invention because it directly visually associates any and all collected field data with a geographical location relative to the project. In one embodiment of the present invention shown in FIG. 16, an ECS user can retrieve a predefined survey form or template at step 100, complete the required data fields at step 101, and the survey form and data can then be uploaded to an appropriate database at step 102. The information and data may be disseminated through the on-demand email notification system at step 103. The data may also be categorized by the underlying ECS program at step 104 and the geographic location information from the incidental observation survey is linked to the GIS at step 105. The ECS associates an icon in the GIS at step 106 with the appropriately categorized information and the incidental observation survey on a GIS template for display of the icon at the appropriate geographic location in the GIS.}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of MacLean is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 10
MacLean further teaches: wherein the regulatory module interprets the attribute information against the applicable regulations to produce the output {[0014]}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of MacLean is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 11
Currin further teaches: further comprising tabular feature information stored in the memory and accessible by the computing device, wherein the tabular feature information is linkable to the spatial feature information {[0111] FIG. 4A illustrates a webpage 400 of user interface 210, according to an embodiment. Webpage 400 comprises a navigation frame 410, including navigational inputs, and a virtual map frame 420, including a virtual map.}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of Currin is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 12
MacLean further teaches: wherein the output from the regulatory module is stored as tabular feature information that is linked to the spatial feature information {[0086]}.
The motivation and rationale to include the additional features of MacLean is the same as set forth previously.
Claim 13
Otta further discloses: wherein the interactive user interface displays the output in the digital twin as a selectable icon mapped over an asset with which the output has been linked {[0042] Returning back to FIG. 1, at 104, data characterizing user interaction with the interactive graphical object can be received. For example, a user interaction with the interactive graphical object can include clicking on icon calibrate 234 or icon optimize 236 by the user. By clicking on the icon calibrate 234, the user can calibrate oil well information (e.g., oil well information displayed in the information panel 240).}.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/11/25 have been fully considered. Applicant’s headings are used below for consistency.
Objections to the Drawings; Response to Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 112
Applicant is thanked for their amendments to the drawings. The previous objections are withdrawn. Examiner also withdraws the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112, in view of applicant’s claim amendments.
Response to Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 101
Applicant offers on pages 7-9, regarding the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101:
Applicant asserts the claimed invention vastly improves upon the visibility into and management of assets, i.e., the physical infrastructure, of an oil and gas operation. In the oil and gas industry, the documentary requirements for all infrastructure and events occurring at a well site are extensive and extremely burdensome on operators. Specification, 1 [0008]. This documentary burden is imposed by local, state, and federal laws and regulations and must be strictly adhered to, lest the operator be found in noncompliance and risk government closure of the well site. Historically, data collected by the operator to meet their documentary burdens has been segmented across one or more departments within an operator's framework or among multiple operators operating at a given well site. Specification, 1 [0011]. The visibility a given operator has into its own data to determine compliance with a given regulation is greatly diminished due to the decentralization and fragmentation of relevant data across different departments. The decentralization and fragmentation of the data is further exacerbated in this industry where it is common for an operator to use third-party contractors to conduct most of the work at a given well site. Id. This overall leads to a significant increase to the management and maintenance costs associated with oil and gas operations. Specification, 1 [0012]. In short, many oil and gas operators are unaware of the actual infrastructure installed at a well site and have minimal information on the activities occurring at the site to ensure regulatory compliance.
In response to the historic decentralization and fragmentation of oil and gas operations data that an operator must maintain to ensure regulatory compliance, Applicant's system provides a centralized repository of all relevant data and increases efficiency of visibility and use of such data. In particular, the claimed invention has an interactive user interface which displays a digital twin of at least one disturbance site, the disturbance site being defined by geospatial information data input into the system. Claim 1 as amended herein further provides that the interactive user interface has a tab window and a display window, the tab window being populated with a selectable listing of the asset data and the display window is populated with the digital twin that is dynamically updated based on a user selection from the tab window of the geospatial information and spatial feature information. The user interface dynamically updating the digital twin displayed in response to selections made among the geospatial information and the spatial feature information greatly increases the visibility into and efficiency of use of the information representing oil and gas assets for an operator.
As provided by the Specification, digital twin is understood to mean a digital representation of all oil and gas assets, i.e., spatial features, located at a given disturbance site, i.e., within the boundaries set by the geospatial information, and further includes tabular features, i.e., information pertaining to intangible aspects of the operation that are related back to one or more spatial features, of the disturbance site. Specification, 1 [0036]. The claimed invention takes advantage of geospatial database construction and combines such advantageous data construction with an interactive user interface to increase the visibility into and efficiency of use of data pertaining to an oil and gas operation. The interactive user interface displaying the asset data in a selectable listing in the tab window in conjunction with the digital twin populating the display window allows the user to more efficiently digest the asset data. Selections made in the tab window are automatically reflected in the display window where the digital twin is dynamically updated based on these selections.
Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that the rejection under § 101 is inapposite. Without conceding the claimed system amounts to an abstract idea, Applicant asserts the addition of the interactive user interface with the tab window and display window and functionality of dynamically updating digital twin displayed in the display window based on a user selection from the tab window of the geospatial information and spatial feature information provides for a concrete integration of the alleged abstract idea into a practical application that represents an improvement upon general computing technology. The claim invention provides for increased visibility and use of asset data which has been historically fragmented and decentralized. The claimed system not only provides a centralized repository for all such oil and gas asset data but also provides the interface for a user to efficiently view and use such data for various purposes.
In view of the claim amendments made herein and the discussion above, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the § 101 rejection.
While well taken, examiner remains unpersuaded. Applicant’s claimed invention does not result in an improvement to technology; instead, applicant has used generic computing elements and machinery, recited at a high level of generality, to facilitate the tasks of the abstract idea.
MPEP 2106.05(f) is explicit that simply using other machinery as a tool also amounts to no more than merely applying the abstract idea to a computer, especially when claimed in a solution-oriented manner:
(1) Whether the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. The recitation of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words "apply it". See Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1356, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1743-44 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1327, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1348, 115 USPQ2d 1414, 1417 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In contrast, claiming a particular solution to a problem or a particular way to achieve a desired outcome may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Electric Power, 830 F.3d at 1356, 119 USPQ2d at 1743.
[…]
(2) Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 201