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 .
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.
Claims 1-25 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 1, the limitations:
“receiving a distance between the first null point and the second null point” is unclear because the claim does not specify the source of the distance information or how the distance is obtained. It is therefore unclear whether the distance is manually entered, sensor-derived, calculated, or otherwise determined.
Additionally, the limitation: “determining a signal strength at a selected one of the first null point and the second null point” is unclear because the phrase “selected one” lacks antecedent clarification regarding how the selection is made.
Further, the limitation:
“using at least the distance and the signal strength to determine a calibration constant” fails to clearly define the calibration constant or the manner in which the calibration constant is determined.
Claims 14-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 112(b) for the reasons set forth above.
However, upon correction of the noted indefiniteness issues, claims 14-25 would be allowable over the prior art currently of record because the prior art fails to teach or suggest the additional limitations recited therein.
With respect to claim 14, the prior art fails to teach in combination with the rest of the limitations in the claim: “in a first mode, determine a depth and position of an underground source
of the electromagnetic dipole field relative to the receiving antenna; and
in a second mode, calibrate the tracker using steps comprising:
determine, from the at least one receiving antenna, a location of a first null
point and a second null point in the electromagnetic dipole field; receiving a distance between the first null point and the second null point; receiving a depth offset between the first null point and the second null point;
determining a signal strength at a selected one of the first null point and the second null point using the at least one receiving antenna; using at least the distance, the depth offset, and the signal strength to calculate a calibration constant; and storing the calibration constant in the memory.”
With respect to claim 22, the prior art fails to teach in combination with the rest of the limitations in the claim: “determining a position of a first null point in the electromagnetic dipole field and a position of a second null point in the electromagnetic dipole field using the receiving antenna;
determining a distance, in three dimensions, between the position of the
first null point and the position of the second null point;
determining the strength of the electromagnetic dipole field at a selected one of the first null point and the second null point; and
using the determined strength of the electromagnetic dipole field and the determined distance between the first null point and the second
null point, calculating a new calibration constant; and storing the new calibration constant in a memory.”
Claims 15-17 and 19-21 are allowable due to their dependencies on claim 14; claim 18 is allowable due to its dependency on claim 17; claims 23-25 are allowable due to their dependencies on claim 22.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-3 and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mercer (U.S. Patent No. 7,154,273 B2).
With respect to claim 1, Mercer discloses a tracking system, comprising:
at least one receiving antenna configured to detect a direction and magnitude of a magnetic field (abstract, lines 1-7; tracking and boring tool which is above ground locator for determining the strength of the locating signal at a selected point relative to the boring tool);
a processor comprising a memory (col. 17, lines 52-53; see CPU 128 memory which stores distance measurement), in communication with the at least one
receiving antenna (see Fig. 9 shows the antenna 46 showing a magnetic transmitting antenna 46 contained in a conductive housing 270), the processor configured to perform steps comprising: receiving a first signal from the at least one receiving antenna indicative of the location of a first null point in the magnetic field and a second signal indicative of the location of a second null point in the magnetic field (col. 25, lines 22-30; the signal strength in the two antennas will balance at three locations along a vertical plane containing the axis of the transmitting antenna);
receiving a distance between the first null point and the second null point (col. 17, lines 11-19); determining a signal strength at a selected one of the first null point and the second null point (col. 17, lines 11-19);
using at least the distance and the signal strength to determine a calibration constant (col. 17, lines 11-21); and storing the calibration constant in the memory (see CPU memory 128 shown in Fig. 5B).
With respect to claim 2, Mercer discloses the tracking system of claim 1, wherein the processor receives the distance between the first null point and the second null point from a manual measurement (col. 17, lines 11-19).
With respect to claim 3, Mercer discloses the tracking system of claim 1, wherein the distance between the first null point and the second null point comprises a horizontal distance and a vertical distance (col. 31, lines 10-21).
With respect to claim 8, Mercer discloses the tracking system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to receive a signal indicative of a pitch of an underground antenna, wherein the magnetic field emanates from the underground antenna (col. 44, lines 59-66; see antenna 46 shown in Fig. 9).
With respect to claim 9, Mercer discloses the tracking system of claim 1 comprising a housing (see antenna 46 shown in a conductive housing 270 shown in Fig. 9), wherein the at least one receiving antenna and the processor are disposed within the housing.
With respect to claim 10, Mercer discloses a system, comprising:
the tracking system of claim 1; and an underground beacon, comprising a transmitting antenna, wherein the transmitting antenna emits the magnetic field (see antenna 46 induces a voltage in housing 270 that causes electrical current 274 to flow shown in Fig. 9).
With respect to claim 11, Mercer discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the beacon further comprises an orientation sensor, the orientation sensor configured to detect a pitch of the beacon (col. 4, lines 51-58).
With respect to claim 12, Mercer discloses the system of claim 11, wherein: the pitch of the beacon is placed on the first signal; and the processor receives the pitch of the beacon from the first signal (microprocessor 802 Fig. 39).
With respect to claim 13, Mercer discloses the system of claim 10, further comprising a drill string, wherein the underground beacon is disposed on the drill string (col. 13, lines 4-10).
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.
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olsson et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0004203 A1).
With respect to claim 4, Mercer discloses the tracking system of claim 1.
Mercer does not disclose further comprising a GPS signal receiver.
Mercer discloses comprising a GPS signal receiver (para 0051, lines 27-36).
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 device of Mercer to include comprising a GPS signal receiver as taught by Mercer to predictably use a marker device data.
With respect to claim 5, Mercer discloses the tracking system of claim 4 wherein the processor is configured to determine an absolute position of the first null point and the second null point using the GPS signal receiver (para 0030, lines 1-13).
With respect to claim 6, Mercer discloses the tracking system of claim 5 in which the processor receives the distance between the first null point and the second null point from the determination of the absolute position of the first null point and the second null point (para 0030, lines 1-13).
With respect to claim 7, Mercer discloses the tracking system of claim 4 wherein the distance between the first null point and the second null point is received from the GPS signal receiver (para 0030, lines 1-13).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHANA AKHTER HOQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-7543. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30am-4:00pm.
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, Eman A Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/FARHANA A HOQUE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights