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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-5, 7, 8, and 21 are rejected under 35 USC § 112.
Claims 21 and 22 are new claims.
Claim 22 rejected under 35 USC § 103 Rejection.
Remarks
Applicant’s arguments filed (05/01/2026), with respect to pending claims 1-5, 7, 8, 21 and 22 have been fully considered and are directed to claims as amended.
The new amendments do not overcome the 112 rejection.
In order to overcome the 112 rejection, the Examiner suggests to amend the last line of claim 1: the “plurality of categories” to the “drilling data”, e.g., “transmit the drilling data to the computing device”.
Please see rejection below.
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 1-5, 7, 8 and 21 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation that “an amount of time to fill the buffer with data from the sensor is less than half of a time to transmit the plurality of categories to the computing device”. Taken at face value, this would seem to say that if the time to transmit the plurality of categories to the computing device is 2 hours, then the time to fill the buffer with data from the sensor must be less than 1 hour. So, the recited apparatus would appear to function by taking an hour to fill the buffer and then 2 hours to transmit the plurality of categories to the computing device, during which transmission time it would seem that the buffer would be unavailable to store more data. This does not seem to be the intent of the applicant, as seen in claim 22, which recites that the if filling the buffer with drilling data took 1 hour, then transmitting that same drilling data to the uphole computing device would have taken at least 2 hours. This makes sense of the claim, since transmitting the plurality of categories rather than the drilling data itself is therefore efficient.
A standard buffering technique (sometimes referred to as “double buffering”) works in the opposite manner, with the transmission time being half the time it takes to fill the buffer, so that half the buffer can be filled and while that data is being transmitted, the second half of the buffer can receive data, which is then transmitted while the first half of the buffer is overwritten with new data. However, the claim language as presently written in claim 1 appears to be the opposite of the “double buffering” approach. The examiner respectfully requests that the applicant confirm that they intend to recite that the transmission time takes twice (or more) the length of time it takes to fill the buffer. For examining purposes, it is assumed that the claim is written as intended.
Referring to Fig. 2 of the specification, the buffering appears to occur during the extended time periods 342-1 and 342-2, for instance, and the transmission appears to be indicated as occurring abruptly at the 346-1 and 346-2 moments in time. This does not seem consistent with the claim language as written, in which the transmission time is twice (or more) the length of the buffering time. The examiner respectfully requests that the applicant clarify how the figure is to be interpreted in light of the claim language.
Dependent claims 2-4, 7 and 8 share the issue discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Examiner suggests that the applicant amend the last line of claim 1: the “plurality of categories” to the “drilling data”, e.g., “transmit the drilling data to the computing device”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips et al., (US Pub.20210254448), hereinafter Phillips in view of O’Connell (US Pat. 6691209B1), hereinafter O’Connell and Zhang (CN115695455A), hereinafter Zhang and Hall et al., (US Pub.20050284659A1), hereinafter Hall.
Regarding Claim 22, Phillips disclose an apparatus (FIG. 1 depicts a drilling rig 10 suitable for using various method embodiments disclosed herein, para [0021], [drilling rig 10 constitutes an apparatus]), comprising:
a buffer (Upon acquiring an acceptable number of measurements (e.g., when a buffer having a predetermined size is full or when a predetermined number of measurements are received in each azimuthal sector), para 0049);
a memory; and
a processor configured to execute executable instructions stored in the memory (the methods described herein may be configured for implementation via one or more controllers deployed downhole (e.g., in a rotary steerable tool or in an MWD tool). A suitable controller may include, for example, a programmable processor, such as a digital signal processor or other microprocessor or microcontroller and processor-readable or computer- readable program code embodying logic. A suitable controller may further optionally include volatile or non-volatile memory or a data storage device, para [0081]) to:
capture drilling data from a sensor associated with a bottom hole assembly;
store the drilling data in the buffer (magnetometer measurements Bx and By may be collected and binned into a predefined number of azimuthal sectors at 242 while rotating (drilling), para [0049], [collecting and binning magnetometer measurements into a predefined number of azimuthal sectors constitutes storing the drilling data in the buffer]);
in response to the buffer exceeding a threshold capacity classify the drilling data into a plurality of categories (the magnetometer measurements may be binned into 36 azimuthal sectors (each of which extends 10 degrees). Upon acquiring an acceptable number of measurements (e.g., when a buffer having a predetermined size is full or when a predetermined number of measurements are received in cache azimuthal sector), the binned measurements, including N Bx and By measurements (plurality categories), are received by a fitting algorithm at 244, para [0049], when a buffer having a predetermined size is full constitutes a buffer exceeding a threshold capacity]); and (para [0049], where magnetometer measurements may be binned into 36 azimuthal sectors);
transmit the plurality of categories uphole to a computing device (Fig. 5, # 244, para [0049], where binned measurements, including N B.sub.x and B.sub.y measurements, are received by a fitting algorithm at 244).
Phillips does not disclose:
transmit the threshold capacity of the buffer is predefined such that an amount of time to fill the buffer with data from the sensor is less than half of a time to transmit the drilling data to the computing device; and
the processor is further configured to capture additional drilling data from
the sensor during a transmission of the plurality of categories to the computing
device.
Hall discloses “data processing or logging hardware 90 may be installed in the bottom hole assembly 21 ("BHA") along with other downhole tools 46 and sensors 44. Nevertheless, because of the extremely slow data rates of mud pulse telemetry, very little raw data is transmitted uphole where it can be logged, analyzed, or used to adjust drilling parameters” (para 0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to provide that the amount of time to fill the buffer with data from the sensor will be less than half of a time (which as taught by Hall is very long) to transmit the drilling data uphole to the computing device, in order to collect and store appropriately informative amounts of data downhole, which can then be partially processed in the BHA downhole, avoiding the necessity to send all the data uphole at a extremely slow data rate.
Zhang discloses the processor is further configured to capture additional drilling data from the sensor during a transmission of the plurality of categories to the computing device (Abstract, where the information transmission module performs data communication with the corresponding sensor module through each sensor protocol; the information transmission module processes and stores the sensor data from different sensor modules, and the sensor data is continuously uploaded to the cloud platform module, the invention realizes accessing different types or different types of sensors to perform data communication at the same time under the information transmission module, and the working efficiency of the information transmission module is improved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to provide capture additional drilling data from the sensor during a transmission of the plurality of categories as taught by Zhang into Phillips in order to mitigate costly downtime, optimize well placement, and enable intelligent, automated decision-making.
1) Examiner note regarding the prior art of the record:
Regarding Claim 1, Phillips et al., (US Pub.20210254448) disclose an apparatus (FIG. 1 depicts a drilling rig 10 suitable for using various method embodiments disclosed herein, para [0021], [drilling rig 10 constitutes an apparatus]), comprising:
a buffer (Upon acquiring an acceptable number of measurements (e.g., when a buffer having a predetermined size is full or when a predetermined number of measurements are received in each azimuthal sector), para 0049);
a memory; and
a processor configured to execute executable instructions stored in the memory (the methods described herein may be configured for implementation via one or more controllers deployed downhole (e.g., in a rotary steerable tool or in an MWD tool). A suitable controller may include, for example, a programmable processor, such as a digital signal processor or other microprocessor or microcontroller and processor-readable or computer- readable program code embodying logic A suitable controller may further optionally include volatile or non-volatile memory or a data storage device, para [0081]) to:
capture drilling data from a sensor associated with a bottom hole assembly(FIG. 2 depicts the lower BHA portion of drill string 30 including drill bit 32 and rotary steerable tool 60, para [0023]; While FIG. 2 depicts a rotary steerable tool 60, it will be understood the disclosed embodiments are not limited to the use of a rotary steerable tool. Moreover, while the accelerometer and magnetometer sensor sets 65 and 67 may be deployed and processed in a rotary steerable tool (as depicted on FIG. 2), they may also be located elsewhere within the drill string, para [0025], [the magnetometer being included in the steerable tool 60 of the bottom hole assembly "BHA" shown in figure 2 constitutes a sensor associated with a bottom hole assembly]; The accelerometer and magnetometer sets 65, 67 may be configured for making downhole navigational (surveying) measurements during a drilling operation, para [0030], [the magnetometer sets 67 making downhole measurements during a drilling operation constitutes capturing drilling data from a sensor associated with a bottom hole assembly]);
store the drilling data in the buffer(magnetometer measurements Bx and By may be collected and binned into a predefined number of azimuthal sectors at 242 while rotating (drilling), para [0049], [collecting and binning magnetometer measurements into a predefined number of azimuthal sectors constitutes storing the drilling data in the buffer]);
in response to the buffer exceeding a threshold capacity (the magnetometer measurements may be binned into 36 azimuthal sectors (each of which extends 10 degrees). Upon acquiring an acceptable number of measurements (e.g., when a buffer having a predetermined size is full or when a predetermined number of measurements are received in cache azimuthal sector), the binned measurements, including N Bx and By measurements, are received by a fitting algorithm at 244, para [0049], I when a buffer having a predetermined size is full constitutes a buffer exceeding a threshold capacity]); and
transmit the drilling data uphole to a computing device (The computed survey parameters may be stored in downhole memory and transmitted to the surface, for example, via mud pulse telemetry, electromagnetic telemetry (or other telemetry techniques). In some embodiments, the accuracy of the computed parameters may be sufficient such that the drilling operation may forego the use of conventional static surveying techniques. In such embodiments, the wellbore survey may be constructed at the surface based upon the transmitted measurements, para [0079]; the survey parameters may be sent to the surface using telemetry so that the survey parameters may be analyzed, para 0080, [the transmitted measurements, i.e., the survey parameters being transmitted to the surface to be analyzed constitutes transmitting the drilling data uphole to a computing device where the surface is uphole and the device receiving the transmitted parameters at the surface is the computing device]).
Zhang (CN115695455A) is in the field of information transmission (abstract) and disclose classified the drilling data having a plurality of categories (the information transmission module classifies a plurality of sensor data stored in a data queue of the sensor module, and particularly divides the sensor data into a timely sensor data category and a common sensor data category according to different requirements on timeliness of the sensor data, page 3, lines 13-15); and
transmit the plurality of categories (the network communication unit is used for transmitting related data and control commands between the information transmission module and the cloud platform module, para [0073], [the cloud platform module constitutes a computing device]).
Brookes et al., (US20220178247A1) disclose wherein the threshold capacity of the buffer is predefined such that an amount of time to fill the buffer with data from the sensor is based on the time between server communication sessions (Due to the fact that there could be more records to be sent at one time than is practical, the number of records sent at one time may be limited to a maximum. Hence if there are very many records in memory to send, the sensor device sends the data records in groups during each normal communication session with the server. The maximum number of records to send in one session may be calculated such that is more than the number of records normally generated between two successive server communication sessions, so that if there is a backlog of data to send, it will get sent, para [0191]), but fails to disclose an amount of time to fill the buffer with data from the sensor is less than half of a time to transmit the plurality of categories to the computing device.
Phillips disclose wherein the threshold capacity of the buffer is predefined (Upon acquiring an acceptable number of measurements (e.g., when a buffer having a predetermined size is full or when a predetermined number of measurements are received in each azimuthal sector), the binned measurements, including N Bx and By measurements, are received by a fitting algorithm at 244, para [0049]), but fails to disclose an amount of time to fill the buffer with data from the sensor is less than half of a time to transmit the plurality of categories to the computing device.
O’Connell (US Pat. 6691209B1) disclose in Claim 7, where the data items to be written into the storage space, comprising: a write buffer for and corresponding to each data type, and a data classifier for, categorizing each data item to be written into the storage space as a member of a data type, wherein each data type is determined according to a relationship between a size of a data item and a topology of a data storage space organization in the mass storage space, storing each categorized data item to be written into the storage space in the corresponding write buffer.
The prior art of record does not teach or fairly suggest the steps of: “an amount of time to fill the buffer with data from the sensor is less than half of a time to transmit the plurality of categories to the computing device”. Claim 1 is not rejected under 102 or 103 Rejections therefore.
Claims 2-5, 7, 8 and 21 are not rejected under 102 or 103 Rejections, as being dependent from base claim 1.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KALERIA KNOX whose telephone number is (571)270-5971. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571)2722302. 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.
/KALERIA KNOX/
Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ANDREW SCHECHTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights