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 § 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.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lakhamraju et al. (US 2021/0198986, hereafter Lakhamraju)
With respect to claim 1, Lakhamraju teaches a system comprising: a receiver (surface processing unit 50) positionable at a surface of a wellbore (borehole 14); and a flow sensor (sensing assembly 74) positionable downhole in the wellbore (borehole 14), wherein the flow sensor comprises: a wire (conductor 76) positionable within a flow path of downhole fluid in the wellbore, the wire being configurable to oscillate based on flow of the downhole fluid; and a sensor (magnetic device 84) configurable to detect an electrical signal generated by oscillation of the wire and to transmit the electrical signal to the receiver. (par. 21-22, 27-34, Figs. 1-4)
Lakhamraju does not explicitly teach wherein the sensor is a variable reluctance sensor, however this is a common and well-understood type of sensor and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the magnetic device as a variable reluctance sensor in order to provide the measure data in a predictable manner.
With respect to claim 2, Lakhamraju teaches the receiver is configurable to: receive the electrical signal from the variable reluctance sensor; determine, based on the electrical signal, a first resonant frequency of the wire; and determine, based on the first resonant frequency, a fluid velocity of the downhole fluid. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 3, Lakhamraju teaches the electrical signal is a first electrical signal, and wherein the flow sensor further comprises: a resonant circuit comprising: a capacitor positionable to contact the downhole fluid and configurable to generate a second resonant frequency based on an electrical pulse transmitted from the surface of the wellbore, wherein the resonant circuit is configurable to transmit the second resonant frequency to the receiver. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 4, Lakhamraju teaches the receiver is further configurable to: receive the second resonant frequency from the resonant circuit; and determine, based on the second resonant frequency, a composition of the downhole fluid. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claims 5-6, although Lakhamraju does not teach the particulars of the wire composition, the optimum parameters would vary based on system parameters, such as dimensions, and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to determine the ideal wire composition and shape through routine experimentation.
With respect to claim 7, Lakhamraju teaches the flow sensor does not include downhole electronics. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 8, Lakhamraju teaches a method comprising: positioning a flow sensor (sensing assembly 74) downhole in a wellbore (borehole 14); exposing a wire (conductor 76) of the flow sensor to a flow path of downhole fluid in the wellbore; oscillating the wire based on flow of the downhole fluid; detecting, by a sensor (magnetic device 84) of the flow sensor, an electrical signal generated by oscillation of the wire; and transmitting, by the variable reluctance sensor, the electrical signal to a receiver (surface processing unit 50) positioned at a surface of the wellbore. (par. 21-22, 27-34, Figs. 1-4)
Lakhamraju does not explicitly teach wherein the sensor is a variable reluctance sensor, however this is a common and well-understood type of sensor and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the magnetic device as a variable reluctance sensor in order to provide the measure data in a predictable manner.
With respect to claim 9, Lakhamraju teaches the receiver is configured to: receive the electrical signal from the variable reluctance sensor; determine, based on the electrical signal, a first resonant frequency of the wire; and determine, based on the first resonant frequency, a fluid velocity of the downhole fluid. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 10, Lakhamraju teaches the electrical signal is a first electrical signal, and the method further comprises: contacting a capacitor of a resonant circuit in the flow sensor with downhole fluid; receiving, by the resonant circuit, an electrical pulse transmitted from the surface of the wellbore; generating, by the capacitor, a second resonant frequency based on the electrical pulse; and transmitting, by the resonant circuit, the second resonant frequency to the receiver. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 11, Lakhamraju teaches the receiver is further configured to: receive the second resonant frequency from the resonant circuit; and determine, based on the second resonant frequency, a composition of the downhole fluid. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claims 12-13, although Lakhamraju does not teach the particulars of the wire composition, the optimum parameters would vary based on system parameters, such as dimensions, and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to determine the ideal wire composition and shape through routine experimentation.
With respect to claim 14, Lakhamraju teaches the flow sensor does not include downhole electronics. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 15, Lakhamraju teaches a flow sensor (sensing assembly 74) comprising: a wire (conductor 76) positionable within a flow path of downhole fluid in a wellbore (borehole 14), the wire being configurable to oscillate based on flow of the downhole fluid; and a sensor (magnetic device 84) configurable to detect an electrical signal generated by oscillation of the wire and to transmit the electrical signal to a receiver (surface processing unit 50) positionable at a surface of the wellbore. . (par. 21-22, 27-34, Figs. 1-4)
Lakhamraju does not explicitly teach wherein the sensor is a variable reluctance sensor, however this is a common and well-understood type of sensor and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the magnetic device as a variable reluctance sensor in order to provide the measure data in a predictable manner.
With respect to claim 16, Lakhamraju teaches the receiver is configurable to: receive the electrical signal from the variable reluctance sensor; determine, based on the electrical signal, a first resonant frequency of the wire; and determine, based on the first resonant frequency, a fluid velocity of the downhole fluid. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 17, Lakhamraju teaches the electrical signal is a first electrical signal, and wherein the flow sensor further comprises: a resonant circuit comprising: a capacitor positionable to contact the downhole fluid and configurable to generate a second resonant frequency based on an electrical pulse transmitted from the surface of the wellbore, wherein the resonant circuit is configurable to transmit the second resonant frequency to the receiver. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 18, Lakhamraju teaches the receiver is further configurable to: receive the second resonant frequency from the resonant circuit; and determine, based on the second resonant frequency, a composition of the downhole fluid. (par. 32-34)
With respect to claim 19, although Lakhamraju does not teach the particulars of the wire composition, the optimum parameters would vary based on system parameters, such as dimensions, and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to determine the ideal wire composition through routine experimentation.
With respect to claim 20, Lakhamraju teaches the flow sensor does not include downhole electronics. (par. 32-34)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2011/0001474; and US 2016/0245680 each teach an invention having similarities to the claimed subject matter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jill E Culler whose telephone number is (571)272-2159. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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.
/JILL E CULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights