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 .
ART REJECTION:
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) 1,3 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Minh(USPGPUB 2010/0264914 A1).
-- In considering claim 1, the claimed subject matter that is met by Minh includes:
1) obtaining a plurality of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) maps for a plurality of zones is met by the processor based system(28, which utilizes a DMR technique, wherein radial fluids distribution D-T1 maps(64) provided for gas, oil, and water zones(see: Minh, sec[0048]);
2) decomposing each NMR map to generate a plurality of probability density functions for each zone is met by the fluid data being processed, such that the fluid density is estimated based on a particular zone(see: Minh, secs[0052-0053]);
3) clustering the probability density functions for at least a portion of the plurality of zones into a plurality of clusters is met by the variable fluid mixture densities being estimated at multiple radial positions(see: Minh, sec[0021]);
4) determining at least one petrophysical property using the plurality of clusters is met by the nuclear magnetic resonance tool which determines the fluid mixture densities based on the density regions being determined in both radial and axial directions, as seen in figures 9 and 13(see: Minh, sec[0022]).
-- With regards to claim 3,
1) wherein the plurality of NMR maps and the plurality of probability density functions for each zone are three-dimensional (3D) is met by the saturation-profiling mode being in 3D NMR(see: Minh, sec[0052]).
-- With regards to claim 15,
1) generating a representation of a multi-dimensional data space via a display of each probability density function, each cluster, label of each cluster, or any combination thereof, and displaying the representation via a display is met by the is met by the DOI maps being displayed on output(36)(see: sec[0055]).
-- With regards to claim 16,
1) generating a representation of the at least one petrophysical property that is determined using the plurality of clusters, and displaying the representation via a display is met by the is met by the DOI maps being displayed on output(36)(see: sec[0055]).
-- With regards to claim 17,
1) the at least one petrophysical property comprises fluid type, fluid component volume, pore volume, pore type, hydrocarbon saturation, water saturation, or any combination thereof is met by the measuring tool determining fluid mixture densities(see: Minh, sec[0021,0023]).
-- With regards to claim 18,
1) the fluid component comprises bound water, free water, hydrocarbon, or any combination thereof is met by the system tracking hydrocarbon intervals(see: Minh, sec[0044]).
-- With regards to claim 19,
1) determining a pore volume of a particular fluid component corresponding to a particular cluster comprises summing each pore volume of each probability density function in the particular cluster is met by the matrix densities determined by the porosity density determination(see: Minh, secs[0043-0044]).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minh in view of Valori et al(USPGPUB 2015/0130460 A1).
-- Claim 2 recites subject matter that is met by Minh, as discussed in claim 1, except for:
1) the plurality of NMR maps and the plurality of probability density functions for each zone are two-dimensional (2D).
Although not specifically taught by Minh, use of 2D NMR is well known. In related art, Valori et al(Valori) teaches a NMR map which processes obtained data using 2D(see: Valori, sec[0027]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate 2D processing of NMR maps, since this would have provided an accurate means of determining probability density in the system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-14, and 20-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARYL C POPE whose telephone number is (571)272-2959. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM M-F.
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, BRIAN ZIMMERMAN can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/DARYL C POPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights