DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final Rejection
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claim 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are directed to ineligible signals per se. The claim 12 recites a “A machine-readable storage medium having stored thereon a computer program for performing the steps of” and the original disclosure does not provide a clear, deliberate and sufficient definition to exclude signals per se. Instead, the disclosure describes “computer program comprising a routine of set instructions stored in a machine-readable storage medium as described herein. These instructions may be provided to one or more processors of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus (or a combination of devices and circuits) to produce a machine, such that the instructions of the machine, when executed by the processor, implement the functions specified in the block or blocks, or in the acts, steps, methods and processes described herein” and therefore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, " A machine-readable storage medium " as recited in the claim covers transitory signals (see MPEP 2106.03(I): “Non-limiting examples of claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories include: Transitory forms of signal transmission (often referred to as "signals per se"), such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal or carrier wave”).
Use the below language for Step 1 of the SME analysis when claims do NOT recite a statutory category but are still being analyzed under the two-part framework for compact prosecution:
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
Each of claims1-20 falls within one of the four statutory categories. See MPEP § 2106.03. For example, each of claims 1-11 fall within category of process; For example, each of claims 12-20 are not directed to a statutory category, see software per se rejection above, however for the purpose of compact prosecution the claims are also considered under the abstract idea analysis below.
Regarding Claims 1-11
Step 2A – Prong 1
Exemplary claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea of a analyzing the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile.
The abstract idea is set forth or described by the following bold limitations:
A method comprising:
generating a microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile for a first pipe region of at least one pipe region of a hydrocarbon pipeline configured to carry a hydrocarbon fluid, wherein
generating the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile comprises:
simulating hydraulic flow within a first sampling segment within the first pipe region using a hydraulic model, wherein a hydraulic model input comprises a pipe property, an operational property, a fluid property, or any combination thereof, and wherein a hydraulic model output comprises a hydraulic profile;
simulating microbiologically induced corrosion within the first sampling segment using a microbiologically induced corrosion model, wherein a microbiologically induced corrosion model input comprises the hydraulic profile, a microbial property, or any combination thereof, and wherein a microbiologically induced corrosion model output comprises biofilm thickness, biofilm density, microbiologically induced corrosion rate, pitting frequency, or any combination thereof;
generating the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile for the first pipe region based on a likelihood criteria, the microbiologically induced corrosion model output, or any combination thereof; and
analyzing the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile in order to calculate a microbiologically induced corrosion risk score for the first pipe region..
The bold limitations above represent a combination of a mathematical concepts (i.e., a process that can be performed by mathematical relationships or rules or idea) and/ or a mental step because a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or merely data observations, evaluations, and/or judgements . Therefore, the bold limitations fall within the subject matter groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in Section I of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
For example, the limitations “simulating hydraulic flow within a first sampling segment[..]; simulating microbiologically induced corrosion within the first sampling segment[..]; generating the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile for the first pipe region based on a likelihood criteria, the microbiologically induced corrosion model output, or any combination thereof;” a mathematical concepts (i.e., a process that can be performed by mathematical relationships or rules or idea, see [0045]-[0048], [0076] of current application PgPub.
For example, the limitations “analyzing the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile in order to calculate a microbiologically induced corrosion risk score for the first pipe region” a mental step because a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or merely data observations, evaluations, and/or judgements, see [0058]-[0064] of current application discloser .
Limitations are considered together as a single abstract idea for further analysis. (discussing Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010)).
Step 2A – Prong 2
Claims 1 does not include additional elements (when considered individually, as an ordered combination, and/or within the claim as a whole) that are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
For example,1st additional first element is “wherein a hydraulic model input comprises a pipe property, an operational property, a fluid property, or any combination thereof, and wherein a hydraulic model output comprises a hydraulic profile” to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., data gathering and or pre solution activity and /or field of use) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
For example, 2nd additional first element is “wherein a microbiologically induced corrosion model input comprises the hydraulic profile, a microbial property, or any combination thereof, and wherein a microbiologically induced corrosion model output comprises biofilm thickness, biofilm density, microbiologically induced corrosion rate, pitting frequency, or any combination thereof” to be performed, at least in-part, these additional elements appear to only add insignificant extra-solution activity (e.g., data gathering and or pre solution activity and /or field of use) and only generally link the abstract idea to a particular field. Therefore, this element individually or as a whole does not provide a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
The 3rd additional element is “at least one pipe region of a hydrocarbon pipeline configured to carry a hydrocarbon fluid”. This element amounts to mere use of a generic hydrocarbon flow system, which is well understood routine and conventional (see background of current discloser and IDS and PTO 892) and this element individually does not provide a practical application. In view of the above, the “additional element” individually or combine does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. see MPEP 2106.05(d).
In view of the above, the “additional elements” individually do not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. Furthermore, the “additional elements” in combination amount to a plurality of generic component with software, where such computers and software amount to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer(s) and/or mere use of a generic computer component(s) as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Therefore, these elements in combination do not provide a practical application. The combination of additional elements does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, and for this additional reason, the combination of additional elements does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. Noting MPEP 2106.04(d)(I): “It is notable that mere physicality or tangibility of an additional element or elements is not a relevant consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. As the Supreme Court explained in Alice Corp., mere physical or tangible implementation of an exception does not guarantee eligibility. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983-84 (2014) ("The fact that a computer ‘necessarily exist[s] in the physical, rather than purely conceptual, realm,’ is beside the point")”.
Step 2B
Claims1 does not include additional elements, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. For example, the limitation of Claim 1 contains additional elements that are, i.e. “pipe line and hydrocarbon”, generic device and component, which are well understood, routine and convention (see background of current discloser and IDS and PTO 892) and MPEP 2106.05(d))The reasons for reaching this conclusion are substantially the same as the reasons given above in § Step 2A – Prong 2. For brevity only, those reasons are not repeated in this section. See MPEP §§ 2106.05(g) and MPEP §§2106.05(II).
.
Dependent Claims 2-11
Dependent claims 2-11 fail to cure this deficiency of independent claim 1 (set forth above) and are rejected accordingly. Particularly, claims 2-10 recite limitations that represent (in addition to the limitations already noted above) either the abstract idea (bold) or an additional element that is merely extra-solution activity(italicized), mere use of instructions and/or generic components and/computer component(s) as a tool to implement the abstract idea, and/or merely limits the abstract idea to a particular technological environment(under line).
For examples:
2. performing at least one mitigation action for the first pipe region based on the microbiologically induced corrosion risk score, the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile, or any combination thereof.(abstract: mental step)
3.performing the at least one mitigation action for the first pipe region comprises: conducting a field evaluation of the first pipe region, rehabilitating the first pipe region, replacing at least a portion of the first pipe region, generating a corrosion mitigation plan for the first pipe region, or any combination thereof(abstract: mental step).
4. the microbial property comprises microbe type, microbe population, microbe growth data, substrate dependency, biocide efficacy, localization characteristics, or any combination thereof(e.g., data gathering and or pre solution activity and /or field of use).
5. simulating microbiologically induced corrosion within the first sampling segment using a microbiologically induced corrosion model further comprises simulating biofilm growth using a biofilm growth model, wherein a biofilm growth model output comprises the biofilm thickness, the biofilm density, or any combination thereof(abstract: mathematical concepts).
6. displaying the microbiologically induced corrosion risk score and, optionally, the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile, in a graphical user interface, wherein the graphical user interface comprises a geographic map that comprises a representation of the first pipe region localized to one or more locations on the geographic map, and wherein the microbiologically induced corrosion risk score is displayed as a color code overlaid on the representation of the first pipe region(e.g., data gathering and or pre solution activity and /or field of use).
7.identifying a microbiologically induced corrosion risk cluster using the graphical user interface(abstract: mental step).
8. the hydraulic profile comprises: a liquid phase in-situ velocity, a gas phase in-situ velocity, an oil density, a gas density, a water density, an oil viscosity, a gas viscosity, a water viscosity, an oil-water flow pattern, a gas-liquid flow pattern, a pressure, or any combination thereof(e.g., data gathering and or pre solution activity and /or field of use).
9. the likelihood criteria comprises: a production history, a leak history, a pipe coating composition, a pipe coating application history, a pipe coating location, a scraping compliance metric, biocide use data, or any combination thereo(e.g., data gathering and or pre solution activity and /or field of use)f.
10. the hydrocarbon pipeline comprises a dry gas pipeline, a wet gas pipeline, a liquid petroleum pipeline, or a multiphase pipeline(generic component).
11. calculating the microbiologically induced corrosion risk score comprises performing a statistical analysis using the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile(abstract: mathematical concepts).
Regarding Claims 12-20
Claims 12-20 contain language similar to claim 1-11 as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, and for reasons similar to those discussed above, claims 12-20 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101(abstract idea).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 8-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vachhani et al. (US 2008/0257782).
Regarding Claims 1 and 12. Vachhani teaches a method comprising(fig. 1):
generating a microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile for a first pipe region of at least one pipe region of a hydrocarbon pipeline configured to carry a hydrocarbon fluid, wherein generating the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile comprises (abstract; fig. 1):
simulating hydraulic flow within a first sampling segment within the first pipe
region (110: fig.1) using a hydraulic model, wherein a hydraulic model input comprises a pipe property, an operational property, a fluid property, or any combination thereof, and wherein a hydraulic model output comprises a hydraulic profile(108: fig.1; [0024]-[0028]);
simulating microbiologically induced corrosion (112: fig.1) within the first sampling segment using a microbiologically induced corrosion model, wherein a microbiologically induced corrosion model input comprises the hydraulic profile, a microbial property, or any combination thereof(110: fig. 1), and wherein a microbiologically induced corrosion model output comprises biofilm thickness, biofilm density, microbiologically induced corrosion rate, pitting frequency, or any combination thereof(113: fig. 1; [0028]);
generating the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile for the first pipe
region based on a likelihood criteria, the microbiologically induced corrosion model
output, or any combination thereof(113: fig.1; [0024], [0028]); and
analyzing the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile in order to calculate a microbiologically induced corrosion risk score for the first pipe region(A corrosion risk presented by the presence, the amount, and the boiling point of the species is determined. And, the corrosion risk is evaluated in view of piping network information: abstract; [0012]).
Regarding Claims 2 and 13. Vachhani further teaches performing at least one mitigation action for the first pipe region based on the microbiologically induced corrosion risk score, the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile, or any combination thereof(116: fig.1;corrosion risk profile, corrosion risk is evaluated in view of piping network information: [0012], [0014]; [0033]- [0035], abstract; supported by US20170307510’s fig. 9).
Regarding Claims 3 and 14. Vachhani further teaches performing the at least one mitigation action for the first pipe region comprises: conducting a field evaluation of the first pipe region, rehabilitating the first pipe region, replacing at least a portion of the first pipe region, generating a corrosion mitigation plan for the first pipe region, or any combination thereof(116: fig.1; [0024], [0033]; claims 19-20).
Regarding Claims 4 and 15. Vachhani further teaches the microbial property comprises microbe type, microbe population, microbe growth data, substrate dependency, biocide efficacy, localization characteristics, or any combination thereof(sulfur-containing species:[0022]).
Regarding Claims 5 and 16. Vachhani further teaches simulating microbiologically induced corrosion within the first sampling segment using a microbiologically induced corrosion model further comprises simulating biofilm growth using a biofilm growth model, wherein a biofilm growth model output comprises the biofilm thickness, the biofilm density, or any combination thereof (sulfur-containing species, sulfide film : [0022],[0031], abstract).
Regarding Claim 8 and 18. Vachhani further teaches the hydraulic profile comprises: a liquid phase in-situ velocity, a gas phase in-situ velocity, an oil density, a gas density, a water density, an oil viscosity, a gas viscosity, a water viscosity, an oil-water flow pattern, a gas-liquid flow pattern, a pressure, or any combination thereof([0027]-[0030]).
Regarding Claims 9 and 19. Vachhani further teaches the likelihood criteria comprises: a production history, a leak history, a pipe coating composition, a pipe coating application history, a pipe coating location, a scraping compliance metric, biocide use data, or any combination thereof([0027]).
Regarding Claim 10. Vachhani further teaches the hydrocarbon pipeline comprises a dry gas pipeline, a wet gas pipeline, a liquid petroleum pipeline, or a multiphase pipeline(refinery operation having a piping network: abstract, [0027], [0037]).
Regarding Claims 11 and 20. Vachhani further teaches calculating the microbiologically induced corrosion risk score comprises performing a statistical analysis using the microbiologically induced corrosion risk profile(corrosion tendency 113: fig. 1; corrosion rate:[0028]).
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.
Claim(s) 6-7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vachhani in view of Guerriero et al. (US 2017/0076563).
Regarding Claims 6 and 17. Vachhani further teaches displaying the microbiologically induced corrosion risk score (corrosion risk presented by the presence, the amount, and the boiling point of the species is determined. And, the corrosion risk is evaluated in view of piping network information:[0012], [0014])
Vachhani silent about displaying the graphical user interface comprises a geographic map that comprises a representation of the first pipe region localized to one or more locations on the geographic map, and wherein the corrosion risk score is displayed as a color code overlaid on the representation of the first pipe region.
However, Guerriero teaches the graphical user interface comprises a geographic map that comprises a representation of the first pipe region localized to one or more locations on the geographic map(1120: fig. 11), and wherein the corrosion risk score is displayed as a color code overlaid on the representation of the first pipe region(1120: fig. 11; [0049]; score: fig. 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Vachhani, the graphical user interface comprises a geographic map that comprises a representation of the first pipe region localized to one or more locations on the geographic map, and wherein the corrosion risk score is displayed as a color code overlaid on the representation of the first pipe region, as taught by Guerriero, so as to monitor external corrosion of a pipeline network in a compact and inexpensive way.
Regarding Claims 7. Vachhani further teaches displaying the microbiologically induced corrosion risk score (corrosion risk presented by the presence, the amount, and the boiling point of the species is determined. And, the corrosion risk is evaluated in view of piping network information:[0012], [0014])
Vachhani silent about identifying a corrosion risk cluster using the graphical user interface.
Dann further teaches identifying a corrosion risk cluster using the graphical user interface(fig.7; section 4; abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Guerriero, identifying a corrosion risk cluster using the graphical user interface, as taught by Dann, so as to monitor external corrosion of a pipeline network in a compact and inexpensive way.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Pirsivash ( US20240019086) teaches non-limiting embodiment, a CGR Calculation (Local/Segment Growth Rate) sub-module may be implemented. Pipelines are the most important energy transmission systems. Over time, pipelines can corrode. According to a non-limiting embodiment, different methods for determining corrosion of pipelines and also calculating corrosion rates will be taken into account. Safe operation of pipelines carrying corrosive products or in a corrosive environment requires (i) an understanding of the corrosion threats, (ii) the ability to estimate corrosion growth rates (CGR) of features; and (iii) the ability to apply these rates to plan future inspections, repairs and replacements. Reducing uncertainties in corrosion behavior will therefore result in safer, more cost-efficient operation.
b) US 11934982 B2 disclose exceeds a predetermined safety level for the one or more processing units; and in accordance with a determination that the second corrosion amount for the one or more processing units in conjunction with the first corrosion amount of the one or more processing units exceeds a predetermined safety level for the one or more processing units, displaying, by the computer, a safety warning on the at least one display.
c) US 2020/0041397 disclose Determining phase wetting regimes in multi-phase hydrocarbon-water pipe flow can thus be instrumental in corrosion engineering, such as by providing information regarding which operating conditions can minimize or increase the risk of internal corrosion.
d) US 2020/0099202: disclose pipeline 20 may be evaluated/inspected for damage or defects and bends that may be prohibitive of or problematic for installation of conduits or electrical cable/conductor. Evaluation or inspection may utilize one or more pigs and/or smart or intelligent pigs. By way of example only, evaluation or inspection may utilize a GPS (global positioning satellite) mapping pig. Evaluation or inspection may involve caliper tools, geometry survey tools, and/or mapping tools. Evaluation or inspection may measure pipeline geometry, configuration, and/or internal diameter, and may detect, locate and measure dents, ovality, buckles, wrinkles, openings, weak spots, degradation, corrosion, and/or other geometry defects of the pipeline 20.
e) US 2022/0345066: disclose the pipeline that record the pig's passage by either audible, magnetic, radio-transmission or other means. The external sensors record when they detect the passage of the pig (time-of-arrival); this is then compared to the pig's internal record for verification or adjustment. The external sensors may have GPS capability. After the pigging run has been completed, the positional data from the external sensors may be matched with the pipeline evaluation data (corrosion, cracks, etc.) and movement data from the pig to provide a location-specific defect and characterization map of the pipeline. In other words, the combined data can be used by an operator to reveal the location, type and size of each pipe defect across an entire length of the pipeline.
f) Dann et al. (Automated matching of pipeline corrosion features from in-line inspection data, 2017).
g) US 2005/0038825: disclose a pipeline corrosion record 127 which can be recalled for analysis in determining prioritization of repair work on a pipeline. The user is provided the ability to then map geographically the corrosion indications measured by the instrument scraping tool.
h) US20170307510: FIG. 9 depicts a correlation of risk score and degradation classification created by the risk analysis unit of the infrastructure unit.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD K ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)270-0328. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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.
/MOHAMMAD K ISLAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights