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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language “survey data for unit areas belonging to an even-numbered row is interpolated using seismic data acquired for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered rows, the interpolation method comprising: (a) specifying a partial matrix having an odd number of rows and an odd number of columns within the entire matrix of the survey target area; (b) training artificial intelligence by using the survey data for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered columns in odd-numbered rows of the partial matrix as training data” should read “survey data for unit areas belonging to an even-numbered row is interpolated using the seismic data acquired for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered rows, the interpolation method comprising: (a) specifying a partial matrix having an odd number of rows and an odd number of columns within [[the]] entire matrix of the survey target area; (b) training artificial intelligence by using the survey data for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered columns in the odd-numbered rows of the partial matrix as training data” in order to provide the appropriate antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is requested.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite an abstract idea as discussed below. This abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application for the reasons discussed below. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the reasons discussed below.
Under Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the
four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. Applied to the present application, the claims belong to one of the statutory classes of a process.
Step 2A of the 2019 Guidance is divided into two Prongs. Prong 1 requires the
examiner to determine if the claims recite an abstract idea, and further requires that
the abstract idea belongs to one of three enumerated groupings: mathematical
concepts, mental processes, and certain methods of organizing human activity.
Independent Claim 1 is copied below, with the limitations belonging to an
abstract idea highlighted in bold; the remaining limitations are ''additional elements''.
An interpolation method for three-dimensional (3D) seismic data based on machine learning in which,
in a survey target area in which a plurality of unit areas are formed in a matrix form having a plurality of rows and columns,
survey data for unit areas belonging to an even-numbered row is interpolated using seismic data acquired for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered rows, the interpolation method comprising:
(a) specifying a partial matrix having an odd number of rows and an odd number of columns within the entire matrix of the survey target area;
(b) training artificial intelligence by using the survey data for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered columns in odd-numbered rows of the partial matrix as training data and using the survey data for a unit area belonging to an even-numbered column disposed between the unit areas to which the training data belongs as correct answer data;
(c) forming a transformation matrix by alternating rows and columns through axis transformation in the partial matrix; and
(d) providing the survey data for unit areas belonging to the odd-numbered columns in odd-numbered rows of the transformation matrix as input data to the artificial intelligence and interpolating and generating the survey data for a unit area belonging to an even-numbered column disposed between the unit areas to which the input data belongs.
Under Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the bold portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exception. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the grouping that covers mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion).
The steps “in a survey target area in which a plurality of unit areas are formed in a matrix form having a plurality of rows and columns”, “survey data for unit areas belonging to an even-numbered row is interpolated using seismic data acquired for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered rows”, “(a) specifying a partial matrix having an odd number of rows and an odd number of columns within the entire matrix of the survey target area”, “(c) forming a transformation matrix by alternating rows and columns through axis transformation in the partial matrix”, and “interpolating and generating the survey data for a unit area belonging to an even-numbered column disposed between the unit areas to which the input data belongs” are treated by the examiner as belonging to mathematical concept grouping.
Prong 2 of Step 2A of the 2019 Guidance requires the examiner to determine if the claims recite additional elements or a combination of additional elements which integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. This requires additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the abstract idea in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the abstract idea, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea.
In Claim 1, the additional elements “(b) training artificial intelligence by using the survey data for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered columns in odd-numbered rows of the partial matrix as training data and using the survey data for a unit area belonging to an even-numbered column disposed between the unit areas to which the training data belongs as correct answer data” and “(d) providing the survey data for unit areas belonging to the odd-numbered columns in odd-numbered rows of the transformation matrix as input data to the artificial intelligence” are generally recited and used for extra-solution activities being mere computer implementation, and do not qualify as a particular machine or a particular transformation.
The preamble of Claim 1: “An interpolation method for three-dimensional (3D) seismic data based on machine learning in which,” is a generically recited preamble.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, when considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
Step 2B of the 2019 Guidance requires the examiner to determine whether the additional elements cause the claim to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The considerations for this particular claim are essentially the same as the considerations for Prong 2 of Step 2A, and the same analysis leads to the conclusion that the claim does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Therefore, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The independent claim 1, therefore, is not patent eligible.
With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-4 provide additional features/steps which are part of an expanded algorithm, so these limitations should be considered part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claims (Step 2A, Prong One), recite no additional elements reflecting a practical application (Step2A, Prong Two), and fail a “significantly more” test under the step 2B for the same reasons as discussed with regards to the independent claims.
The dependent claims are, therefore, also ineligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The references of Chambers, Liu, Salman, Wang, and Wei do not disclose the following limitation of Claim 1: “survey data for unit areas belonging to an even-numbered row is interpolated using seismic data acquired for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered rows, the interpolation method comprising: (a) specifying a partial matrix having an odd number of rows and an odd number of columns within the entire matrix of the survey target area; (b) training artificial intelligence by using the survey data for unit areas belonging to odd-numbered columns in odd-numbered rows of the partial matrix as training data and using the survey data for a unit area belonging to an even-numbered column disposed between the unit areas to which the training data belongs as correct answer data; (c) forming a transformation matrix by alternating rows and columns through axis transformation in the partial matrix; and (d) providing the survey data for unit areas belonging to the odd-numbered columns in odd-numbered rows of the transformation matrix as input data to the artificial intelligence and interpolating and generating the survey data for a unit area belonging to an even-numbered column disposed between the unit areas to which the input data belongs”, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the applicant.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20010005813A1 to Chambers et al. (hereinafter Chambers) discloses 3-D seismic trace extrapolation and interpolation.
US20200183035 to Liu et al. (hereinafter Liu) discloses data Augmentation for Seismic Interpretation Systems and Methods.
US20190383965 to Salman et al. (hereinafter Salman) discloses geophysical Deep Learning.
US20200309979 to Wang et al. (hereinafter Wang) discloses system and method for property estimation from seismic data.
US20210293983 to Wei et al. (hereinafter Wei) discloses facilitating hydrocarbon exploration and extraction by applying a machine-learning model to seismic data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lyudmila Zaykova-Feldman whose telephone number is (469)295-9269. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 5:30pm, Monday through Friday.
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, Arleen M. Vazquez can be reached on 571-272-2619. 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.
/LYUDMILA ZAYKOVA-FELDMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/LINA CORDERO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights