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 .
The amended claims filed 4/3/26 are acknowledged; claims 1, 2, and 4-20 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because
The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a mathematical concepts of converting the sensor data to frequency domain, identifying at least one frequency pattern, comparing the identified at least one frequency pattern to a database of known frequency patterns, which are done via mathematical models and accepting or rejecting the threaded connection which is merely an abstract idea of mental process (making a judgment). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because tubular running operations are well known in the art. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because obtaining sensor data is mere data gathering which is the conventional use of sensors. While the claim includes the additional limitation of “making a threaded connection”, this limitation is merely field of use for the abstract idea and insignificant pre-solution activity.
Claims 2 and 4-10 do not offer any claimed limitations to place the claim in patentable subject matter as they do not offer any additional practical operations or significant steps to remedy the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 4-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruehmann et al. (US 20180224029) in view of Nessjoen et al. (US 8950512).
CLAIM 1: Ruehmann discloses a method for use with a subterranean well. The method includes making a threaded connection during a tubular running operation (see paragraph 0004). Obtaining sensor data during a tubular running operation (from sensors 208, 212; paragraph 0041). The threaded connection is accepted or rejected based on the data (paragraph 0045).
Ruehmann fails to disclose converting the sensor data to frequency domain; identifying at least one frequency pattern in the sensor data; and comparing the identified at least one frequency pattern to a database of known frequency patterns.
Nessjoen discloses a method of monitoring downhole systems.
Nessjoen discloses converting the sensor data to frequency domain (via Fourier discussion in Col. 12). Identifying at least one frequency pattern in the sensor data and comparing the identified at least one frequency pattern to a database of known frequency patterns (finding stick-slip oscillations in the data).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Ruehmann to utilize the data as in Nessjoen with a reasonable expectation of success as the use of a known method applied to similar data to monitor similar data from sensors.
CLAIM 2: Ruehmann discloses controlling the tubular running operation based on the data (paragraph 0045), so it would be obvious to continue to control based on the resulting data of the comparison.
CLAIM 4: Ruehmann discloses the controlling is performed in real time during the tubular running operation (paragraph 0045).
CLAIM 5: The converting comprises performing for the sensor data at least one of the group consisting of fast Fourier transform, short-time Fourier transform, continuous wavelet transform and discrete wavelet transform (see Nessjoen, Fourier discussion).
CLAIM 6: Nessjoen discloses processing the sensor data prior to the converting (first steps of the conversion process would be processing).
CLAIM 7: The processing comprises filtering noise from the sensor data (see Nessjoen, “adjusting” data).
CLAIM 8: Ruehmann fails to disclose the sensor data is output by at least one of the group consisting of a torque sensor, a rotation sensor, a gyroscope and an accelerometer.
Examiner takes official notice that rotation sensors are well known in the art as a means of gathering data.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Ruehmann-Nessjoen by substituting in a rotation sensor for the discloses sensors with a reasonable expectation of success as the use of different data can still result in proper monitoring as taught by Ruehmann and Nessjoen using different data sources.
CLAIM 9: Ruehmann discloses mounting at least one sensor to tubular running equipment, whereby the at least one sensor outputs the sensor data (sensors 208, 212).
CLAIM 10: The tubular running equipment is selected from the group consisting of a tong assembly and a top drive (Ruehmann, paragraph 0002, 0023).
CLAIMS 11 and 13-20: These structures are inherent to the above methods.
CLAIM 12: Examiner takes official notice that accelerometers are also well known in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) filed 4/3/26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
With respect to the 101 rejections, the Applicant has failed to rebut the presented argument and merely makes conclusory statements that the claim is clearly eligible. As noted in Flook, the test is not the mathematical concept is precluding the use for others, but rather “because it did not provide an application of the formula” (see MPEP 2106(I)).
With respect to the prior art, the amended claims are met by the newly cited art.
The official notice taken in the prior action was not traversed and therefore taken as admitted.
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 PATRICK F LAMBE whose telephone number is (571)270-1932. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-4.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571)270-7741. 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.
/PATRICK F LAMBE/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights