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 .
Election/Restriction
During a telephone conversation with William F. Allison (Reg. No. 71,181) on 05/21/2026, a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, Claims 1-7 and 14-21. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this office action. Claims 8-13 and 22-27 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 01/29/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The use of the terms “Bluetooth,” “LTE,” and “IEEE” (e.g., Specification [0068]), which are trade names or marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The terms should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the terms should be capitalized wherever they appear or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the terms.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out
and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his
invention.
Claim(s) 5, 16, and 21 is/are 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.
Regarding Claim 5, the claim recites the limitation “wherein the second radar signal is measured as a beat frequency difference between the third radar signal and the second radar signal.” It is unclear how the second radar signal is “measured as a beat frequency difference” between itself and another radar signal. Additionally, is unclear how a radar signal can be a frequency difference. For examination purposes, the limitation is interpreted as meaning that a beat frequency is measured between the third radar signal and the second radar signal.
Regarding Claim 16, the claim recites the limitation “wherein the radar source is coupled to the waveguide by at least one of a transmission mode converter or a diffraction grating mirror configured to maintain provision of the transmitted radar signals as frequency modulated continuous wave radar signals.” It is unclear whether the phrase “configured to maintain provision of the transmitted radar signals” applies only to the diffraction grating mirror or also to the transmission mode converter. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted as applying to both the diffraction grating mirror and the transmission mode converter.
Regarding Claim 21, the claim recites the limitation “wherein the second radar signal is measured as a beat frequency difference between the third radar signal and the second radar signal.” It is unclear how the second radar signal is “measured as a beat frequency difference” between itself and another radar signal. Additionally, is unclear how a radar signal can be a frequency difference. For examination purposes, the limitation is interpreted as meaning that a beat frequency is measured between the third radar signal and the second radar signal.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 14-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woskov (US 2025/0067171) in view of Kielb (US 5,847,567).
Regarding Claim 1, Woskov teaches:
A method comprising:
receiving, by a data processor, first data characterizing a first radar signal reflected at a first frequency from a bottom of a borehole ([0005]: “at least a portion of the probe signal reflects and/or scatters from the bottom of the borehole as a return beam”; [0010]: “radar”);
determining, by the data processor, a distance to the bottom of the borehole based on a time of flight of the first radar signal ([0052]: “intermediate beat frequency, fB, that is proportional to the depth, Z”; [0054]: “The round-trip time delay for the pulse's return to the surface electronics can be used to determines the distance to the bottom of the hole.”); and
providing, by the data processor, the distance ([0058]: “Received data can be processed, displayed, and/or stored by the data acquisition electronics 530.”).
Woskov does not explicitly teach:
receiving, by the data processor, second data characterizing a second radar signal reflected from a waveguide within the borehole; or
determining, by the data processor, a distance between the waveguide and the bottom of the borehole based on a time of flight difference between the first radar signal and the second radar signal.
However, Kielb is in the field of radar level measurement (Kielb [Abstract]; [cols. 3-4]) and teaches:
receiving, by a data processor, first data characterizing a first radar signal reflected at a first frequency from a surface of a product within a tank (Kielb [col. 1, lines 57-58]: “a microwave echo from the product”; [col. 3, lines 27-29]: “These microwaves are reflected by product 14 back toward feedhorn 18 into waveguide 20 to housing 16.”; [col. 4, lines 29-30]: FMCW radar system);
receiving, by the data processor, second data characterizing a second radar signal reflected from a waveguide (Kielb [col. 1, line 58]: “a microwave echo from the feedhorn”; [col. 3, lines 33-34]: “the microwave reflection generated at the end of feedhorn 18”; [col. 4, lines 14-17]: “designing an impedance 21 into the waveguide 20 where it meets the antenna 18. This will cause a microwave reflection to occur that will be contained in the FMCW/Fourier spectrum.”; Examiner note: Kielb uses the terms “feedhorn” and “antenna” to refer to the same element.); and
determining, by the data processor, a distance between the waveguide and the bottom of the surface of the product based on a time of flight difference between the first radar signal and the second radar signal (Kielb [col. 3, lines 22-38]: “Circuitry in housing 16 measures distance A, the distance between the end of feedhorn 18 and product 14 … Circuitry in housing 16 calculates distance A by measuring the distance which microwaves 24 travel and subtracting out the distance from housing 16 to the end of feedhorn 18 through waveguide 20. This is done using the microwave reflection generated at the end of feedhorn 18.”; [col. 4, lines 30-31]: “time-of-flight”).
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 invention of Woskov and determine the distance between the waveguide and the bottom of the borehole based on a time of flight difference between a bottom-reflected radar signal and a waveguide-reflected radar signal, as taught by Kielb, with a reasonable expectation of success. Applying Kielb’s known reference reflection technique to Woskov’s radar borehole measurement system would yield the predicable result of improving distance measurement accuracy by compensating for propagation delay through the waveguide (Kielb [Abstract]).
Regarding Claim 14, Woskov teaches:
A system comprising:
a waveguide positioned within a borehole ([0028]: “high-power transmission lines 130 (which may be implemented as waveguides)”; Fig. 1A);
a gyrotron coupled to the waveguide and configured to transmit electromagnetic waves into the borehole via the waveguide ([0028]: “High-power MMW radiation 103 from the high-power source 120 can be coupled into high-power transmission lines 130 (which may be implemented as waveguides) and delivered to the bottom of the borehole 110.”; “gyrotron”);
a radar source coupled to the waveguide and configured to transmit radar signals into the borehole via the waveguide ([0032]: “a ROP/depth monitor 160 that is radiatively coupled to the high-power transmission line 130.”), and
at least one computing device communicably coupled to the radar source, the at least one computing device including a data processor and a memory storing non-transitory instructions ([0058]: “data acquisition electronics 530”; “Received data can be processed, displayed, and/or stored by the data acquisition electronics 530.”), which when executed by the data processor, cause the data processor to perform operations comprising
receiving first data characterizing a first radar signal reflected at a first frequency from a bottom of a borehole ([0005]: “at least a portion of the probe signal reflects and/or scatters from the bottom of the borehole as a return beam”; [0010]: “radar”);
determining a distance to the bottom of the borehole based on a time of flight of the first radar signal ([0052]: “intermediate beat frequency, fB, that is proportional to the depth, Z”; [0054]: “The round-trip time delay for the pulse's return to the surface electronics can be used to determines the distance to the bottom of the hole.”); and
providing, by the data processor, the distance ([0058]: “Received data can be processed, displayed, and/or stored by the data acquisition electronics 530.”).
Woskov does not explicitly teach:
receiving second data characterizing a second radar signal reflected from a waveguide within the borehole; or
determining a distance between the waveguide and the bottom of the borehole based on a time of flight difference between the first radar signal and the second radar signal.
However, Kielb is in the field of radar level measurement (Kielb [Abstract]; [cols. 3-4]) and teaches:
receiving first data characterizing a first radar signal reflected at a first frequency from a surface of a product within a tank (Kielb [col. 1, lines 57-58]: “a microwave echo from the product”; [col. 3, lines 27-29]: “These microwaves are reflected by product 14 back toward feedhorn 18 into waveguide 20 to housing 16.”; [col. 4, lines 29-30]: FMCW radar system);
receiving second data characterizing a second radar signal reflected from a waveguide (Kielb [col. 1, line 58]: “a microwave echo from the feedhorn”; [col. 3, lines 33-34]: “the microwave reflection generated at the end of feedhorn 18”; [col. 4, lines 14-17]: “designing an impedance 21 into the waveguide 20 where it meets the antenna 18. This will cause a microwave reflection to occur that will be contained in the FMCW/Fourier spectrum.”; Examiner note: Kielb uses the terms “feedhorn” and “antenna” to refer to the same element.); and
determining a distance between the waveguide and the bottom of the surface of the product based on a time of flight difference between the first radar signal and the second radar signal (Kielb [col. 3, lines 22-38]: “Circuitry in housing 16 measures distance A, the distance between the end of feedhorn 18 and product 14 … Circuitry in housing 16 calculates distance A by measuring the distance which microwaves 24 travel and subtracting out the distance from housing 16 to the end of feedhorn 18 through waveguide 20. This is done using the microwave reflection generated at the end of feedhorn 18.”; [col. 4, lines 30-31]: “time-of-flight”).
The rationale to modify Woskov with the teachings of Kielb persists from Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, Woskov teaches: wherein the first radar signal is reflected responsive to transmitting a third radar signal into the waveguide from a FMCW radar coupled to the waveguide ([0051]: “The ROP/depth monitor 160 can operate as … a frequency-modulated (FM) radar”; [0057]: “The circuitry of FIG. 4 can be operated as an FM radar when a frequency sweep voltage is applied to the Gunn oscillator and the PIN switch is set to continuously transmit and receive a signal.”).
Regarding Claims 3 and 18, Woskov teaches: wherein the third radar signal is transmitted coincident with an electromagnetic wave transmitted into the waveguide by a gyrotron coupled to the waveguide ([0028]: “High-power MMW radiation 103 from the high-power source 120 can be coupled into high-power transmission lines 130 (which may be implemented as waveguides)”; “A high-power source 120, such as a gyrotron, can generate the MMW radiation 103”; [0045]: “At the same time, the small-signal probe signals 108, 109 from the monitors 160, 170 propagate through the coupling hole 205 in the miter mirror 210 and downward to the bottom of the borehole.”).
Regarding Claims 4 and 19, Woskov teaches: wherein the electromagnetic wave is transmitted into the waveguide in HE11 transmission mode ([0031]: “HE11 mode”).
Regarding Claims 5 and 21, Woskov does not explicitly teach – but Kielb teaches: wherein the second radar signal is measured as a beat frequency difference between the third radar signal and the second radar signal (Kielb [col. 4, lines 47- 67]: “mixer 64 which is a standard Superheterodyne mixer”; “A Fourier analysis of the output of mixer 64 is shown in FIG. 3. Microprocessor 30 identifies the peak due to product 14 and the peak due to antenna 18, and calculates A”). Because generating a beat frequency from the third radar signal and the second radar signal is a feature of Kielb’s reference reflection method, the rationale to modify Woskov with the teachings of Kielb persists from Claim 1. Additionally, generating beat frequencies from transmitted and received signal is considered ordinary and well-known for measuring distance.
Regarding Claim 15, Woskov teaches: wherein the radar source is a frequency modulated continuous wave radar ([0051]: “The ROP/depth monitor 160 can operate as … a frequency-modulated (FM) radar”; [0057]: “The circuitry of FIG. 4 can be operated as an FM radar when a frequency sweep voltage is applied to the Gunn oscillator and the PIN switch is set to continuously transmit and receive a signal.”).
Regarding Claim 16, Woskov teaches: wherein the radar source is coupled to the waveguide by at least one of a transmission mode converter or a diffraction grating mirror configured to maintain provision of the transmitted radar signals as frequency modulated continuous wave radar signals ([0047]: “A transition region comprising a section of tapered waveguide 230 can be located between the small-signal transmission line 133 and the high-power transmission line 130”; “The tapered waveguide 230 can transform the transverse mode from the small-signal transmission line 133 to better match to a mode supported by the high-power transmission line 130 and vice versa”).
Regarding Claim 17, Woskov teaches: wherein the first radar signal is reflected responsive to the radar source transmitting a third radar signal into the waveguide ([0005]: “at least a portion of the probe signal reflects and/or scatters from the bottom of the borehole as a return beam”; [0010]: “radar”).
Regarding Claim 20, Woskov teaches: wherein the waveguide includes a plurality of corrugation features arranged on an inner surface of the waveguide, the plurality of corrugation features configured to maintain transmission of the electromagnetic wave through the waveguide and into the borehole in the HE11 transmission mode ([0047]: “the tapered waveguide 230 may have a corrugated internal surface to transmit the HE11 mode efficiently when the transmission lines 130, 133 to which it connects are implemented as waveguides having corrugated internal surfaces.”).
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woskov (US 2025/0067171) in view of Kielb (US 5,847,567), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Woskov ‘324 (US 2010/0252324).
Regarding Claim 6, Woskov does not explicitly teach: wherein the distance is measured between the bottom of the borehole and a terminal end of the waveguide.
However, Woskov ‘324 is in the field of millimeter wave drilling (MMWD) (Woskov ‘324 [Abstract]) and teaches that the distance between the bottom of the borehole and a terminal end of the waveguide must be far enough for the MMWD to function properly and to prevent the waveguide from overheating (Woskov ‘324 [0029]: “The stand off distance 240 of the leading edge of metallic insert waveguide from the thermal melt front 220 of the borehole is far enough to allow the launched millimeter-wave beam divergence 232 to fill 234 the dielectric borehole 200 with the guided millimeter-wave beam. The standoff distance 240 is also far enough to keep the temperature at the metallic insert low enough for survivability.”).
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 Woskov and measure the distance between the bottom of the borehole and a terminal end of the waveguide, as taught by Woskov ‘324, with a reasonable expectation of success. Measuring this distance would ensure the waveguide is far enough away from the bottom of the borehole so that the MMWD can function properly and the waveguide does not overheat (Woskov ‘324 [0029]).
Regarding Claim 7, Woskov does not explicitly teach: wherein the distance is a standoff distance.
However, Woskov ‘324 teaches a standoff distance, and that the standoff distance must be far enough for the MMWD to function properly and to prevent the waveguide from overheating (Woskov ‘324 [0029]).
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 Woskov and measure the standoff distance, as taught by Woskov ‘324, with a reasonable expectation of success. Measuring this distance would ensure the waveguide is far enough away from the bottom of the borehole so that the MMWD can function properly and the waveguide does not overheat (Woskov ‘324 [0029]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH Y. ZHU whose telephone number is (571) 270-0170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8AM-4PM.
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).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/NOAH YI MIN ZHU/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights