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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
-reference character “105” has been used to designate both the surface in Fig. 1 and the housing in Fig. 2.
-reference character “125” has been used to designate both down hold fluid in Fig. 1 and internal housing space in Fig. 2.
-not all reference characters have been cross referenced across all figures, please verify all are correct.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 11-15, 20 and 28 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 Ln 4-5, please amend to --on [[the]] a longitudinal axis--.
Claim 1 Ln 8, please amend to --the wellbore fluid[[s]] and--.
Claim 2 Ln 2-3, please amend to --change [[the]] a longitudinal distribution of weight--.
Claim 2 Ln 5, please amend to --[[a]] the controller--.
Claim 2 Ln 6-7, please amend to --change -the -longitudinal distribution of the weight of the robot, wherein [[the]] a magnitude--.
Claim 4 Ln 2, please amend to --a lateral direction of [[the]] a reorientation--.
Claim 6 Ln 4, please amend to --the controller [[coupled]] configured to receive the [[sensed]] orientation [[information]] from--.
Claim 11 Ln 3, please amend to --of [[a]] the wellbore--.
Claim 12 Ln 7, please amend to --suffices to reorient --.
Claim 13 Ln 1, please amend to --The method of claim [[11]] 12,--.
Claim 14 Ln 1, please amend to --The method of claim [[11]] 12,--.
Claim 14 Ln 1-2, please amend to --of [[the]] a lateral reorientation--.
Claim 15 Ln 1, please amend to --The method of claim [[13]] 14,--.
Claim 20 is objected to as it is identical to claim 19.
Claim 28 Ln 3, please amend to --of [[a]] the wellbore --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(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 1-11 and 23-29 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 Ln 6-7 states the limitation "a sensor system configured to … determine position and orientation of the robot in the wellbore”. It is unclear how the sensor determines the robot position/orientation in the wellbore. It is further unclear what is done with that information as it isn’t ‘sent’ to the controller.
Ln 10 further states the limitation "wellbore fluid information”. It is unclear if this information is the same as or distinct from the ‘wellbore fluid and reservoir characteristics’. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate. For examination, lines 8-10 were interpreted as --the wellbore fluid[[s]] configured to receive the sensed structural information, the position and orientation of the robot in the wellbore and the wellbore fluid [[information]] characteristics to--.
Claim 6 Ln 2 states the limitation "an orientation sensor”. It is unclear if this sensor is included with or distinct from the sensor system stated in claim 1 Ln 6. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate. For examination, lines 2-3 interpreted as --the sensor system further includes an orientation sensor configured to sense [[an]] the orientation of the robot--.
Claim 7 Ln 2 states the limitation "a density sensor… a downhole fluid”. It is unclear if this sensor is included with or distinct from the sensor system stated in claim 1 Ln 6. It is further unclear if the downhole fluid is the same as or distinct from the wellbore fluid stated in claim 1 Ln 2. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate. For examination, lines 2-3 interpreted as --the sensor system further includes a density sensor to sense the measurements as a density of the wellbore fluid surrounding the downhole robot-- and line 6 as --the [[downhole]] wellbore fluid--.
Claims 2-5 and 8-11 are rejected for their dependence upon claim 1.
Claim 23 Ln 2 states the limitation "sensors configured to measure wellbore geometry”. It is unclear if this sensor(s)/wellbore geometry is the same as or distinct from the sensor of claim 23 Ln 4 and the geometry of the wellbore of claim 23 Ln 8. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate. For examination, lines 1-4 were interpreted as -- wherein the [[robot]] sensor comprises: sensors configured to measure the geometry of the wellbore [[geometry]], wellbore fluid
Claim 26 Ln 2 states the limitation "a stern-mounted thruster and a bow-mounted thruster”. It is unclear if these thrusters are included with or distinct from the propulsion unit stated in claim 23 Ln 7. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate. For examination, the limitation was interpreted as --a stern-mounted thruster and a bow-mounted thruster of the propulsion unit--.
Claim 23 Ln 8 states the limitation "passively reorienting the robot via guidance from geometry of the well bore”. It is unclear how the robot can be ‘passively reoriented’ without some form of active control or action. At least as is described within the disclosure, reorienting the robot (such as based upon sensed wellbore geometry) is only taken by actively adjusting the robot buoyancy via the buoyancy system. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indeterminate.
Claims 24-25 and 27-29 are rejected for their dependence upon claim 23.
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.
-(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by LIU; Airong et al. US 20230103110 A1, hereinafter Liu.
Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) an untethered, downhole robot is configured to have a density within + or – 20% of wellbore fluid in which it will be operating, the downhole robot comprising:
a generally elongate housing (111);
at least one propulsion unit (22) on an end of the housing on the longitudinal axis;
a sensor system (3) configured to
sense structural information regarding geometry of a wellbore ([0044, 0059, 0061] states obtaining geometry of the surrounding area, such as a wellbore, which has been interpreted as intended use),
determine position and orientation of the robot in the wellbore ([0013, 0046] states obtaining position/depth/orientation of the robot), and
collect measurements characterizing the wellbore fluid characteristics ([0013, 0046] states obtaining “environmental data” obtained as the fluid characteristics surrounding the robot, such as wellbore fluid in the interpreted intended use);
a controller (“control system”) configured to receive the sensed structural information, the position and orientation of the robot in the wellbore and the wellbore fluid characteristics to control the robot’s traversal within the wellbore [0044-0046]; and
a memory device (“memory”) to log collected data locally on robot [0068, 0075].
Regarding claim 2, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) further comprising:
a buoyancy system (112/113) configured to change the longitudinal distribution of weight of the robot is present to aid with vertical descent and ascent when the robot is not sufficiently neutrally buoyant [0045]; and
a controller (“control system”) capable of discerning deviation of the wellbore from vertical and, in response, control the buoyancy system to change longitudinal distribution of the weight of the robot, wherein the magnitude of the change in the longitudinal distribution of the weight suffices to reorient the robot [0044-0047]
Regarding claim 3, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) in response to discernment of the deviation during descent of the robot into the wellbore, the controller is configured to control the buoyancy system to change the longitudinal distribution of the weight of the robot such that a bow of the robot is made less dense, a stern of the robot is made more dense, or densities of both the bow and the stern are changed ([0045] states the control system controlling the buoyancy system to make various parts of the robot less dense, to achieve the desired “attitude”, [0056] states an operational condition whereby the bow was made less dense and the stern more dense (“steering rotor module of the underwater robot faces the water surface”)).
Regarding claim 4, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) the controller is configured to regulate a lateral direction of the reorientation of the robot that occurs responsive to the changed longitudinal distribution of weight ([0045 and 0057] states controlling the lateral or rotational orientation of the robot).
Regarding claim 5, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) the robot further comprises a steering mechanism (211-213) coupled to the controller (“control system”), wherein the controller is configured to regulate the lateral direction of the reorientation of the robot using the steering mechanism [0041].
Regarding claim 6, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) the downhole robot further includes an orientation sensor (3) configured to sense an orientation of the robot [0046]; and the controller (“control system”) coupled to receive the sensed orientation information from the orientation sensor and to regulate the lateral direction of the reorientation based thereon [0046].
Regarding claim 8, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) the buoyancy system is a multi-chamber, internal buoyancy system that conveys liquid between chambers without communicating fluid with surroundings of the downhole robot [0044-0047].
Regarding claim 10, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) the buoyancy system is configured to change lateral distribution of weight of the robot ([0045 and 0057] states controlling the lateral or rotational orientation of the robot); and the controller is configured to control the changes in the lateral distribution of the weight based on the sensed structural information [0045, 0057].
Claims 23-25 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by BOULDIN BRETT et al. WO 2021011048 A2, hereinafter Bouldin.
Regarding claim 23, as far as is determinate, Bouldin discloses (Fig. 2, 4, 14, 15) a method of navigating a wellbore with an untethered autonomous downhole robot that has a density within + or – 20% of wellbore fluid in which it will be operating (this preamble is being interpreted as intended use as the method does not further recite steps requiring the device properties such as ‘untethered’ or ‘robot density’), the method performed by a controller (208) of the downhole robot and comprising:
detecting, using a sensor (CCL) [0018, 0051, 0079-0080] located on the downhole robot, approach of the downhole robot to a deviation of the wellbore from vertical (402) [0100]; and
in response to the detection of the approach of the deviation, exclusively driving the robot with a propulsion unit, the driving including traversing a portion (122) of the wellbore (120) and passively reorienting the robot via guidance from geometry of the wellbore ([0023] states that upon detection, initiating a thruster/propulsion unit to reorient from vertical to horizontal and traverse the non-vertical part of the wellbore).
Regarding claim 24, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) the robot comprises: sensors configured to measure wellbore geometry, wellbore fluid information, reservoir characteristics; and sensors configured to measure speed of the robot, depth of the robot, angular rate of the robot, attitude of the robot, and/or acceleration of the robot (CCL) [0018, 0051, 0079-0080].
Regarding claim 25, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) further comprising: determining, by the controller of the downhole robot, position of the robot within the wellbore; and determining, by the controller of the downhole robot, orientation of the robot within the wellbore [0042].
Regarding claim 29, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) further comprising: adjusting, by the controller of the downhole robot, an orientation of the robot using the propulsion unit ([0023] states that upon detection, initiating a thruster/propulsion unit to reorient from vertical to horizontal and traverse the non-vertical part of the wellbore).
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 of this title, 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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Bulten, Norbert WO 2021074483 A1, hereinafter Bulten. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (underwater vessels); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (navigating underwater). MPEP2141.01(a) I.
Regarding claim 7, Liu discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 2 except fails to explicitly state that the downhole robot comprises a density sensor configured to sense density of a downhole fluid surrounding the downhole robot; and the controller is further configured to control the buoyancy system to change the longitudinal distribution of the weight of the robot based on the sensed density of the downhole fluid.
Bulten discloses (Fig. 1) a downhole robot comprising:
a generally elongate housing (105);
a propulsion unit (150);
a sensor system (“plurality of sensors” [0057]);
a controller (120); and
a density sensor (260, 290) configured to sense density of a downhole fluid surrounding the downhole robot; and the controller is further configured to control the buoyancy system to change the longitudinal distribution of the weight of the robot based on the sensed density of the downhole fluid for the purpose of operating the propulsion unit in the safest and most efficient way possible [0117, 0121, 0249].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to modify Liu, by providing the density sensor, as taught by Bulten, for the purpose of operating the propulsion unit in the safest and most efficient way possible.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Saeed; Abubaker et al. US 20220065058 A1, hereinafter Saeed. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (underwater vessels); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (navigating underwater). MPEP2141.01(a) I.
Regarding claim 11, Liu discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1 except fails to explicitly state that the robot further comprising three or more protruding members distributed around the housing, wherein the protruding members are configured to contact an inner wall of a wellbore that is being traversed while preventing the housing from contacting the inner wall.
Saeed discloses (Fig. 2) a downhole robot (10) comprising:
a generally elongate housing (14/18)
a sensor system (12);
a controller (16) and
three or more protruding members (28, 30) distributed around the housing, wherein the protruding members are configured to contact an inner wall of a wellbore that is being traversed while preventing the housing from contacting the inner wall [0031].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to modify Bouldin, by providing the three or more protruding members, as taught by Saeed, for the purpose of preventing the housing from contacting the inner wall.
Claims 12-17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouldin in view of Liu. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (underwater vessels); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (navigating underwater). MPEP2141.01(a) I.
Regarding claim 12, Bouldin discloses (Fig. 2, 4, 14, 15) a method of navigating a wellbore (120) with a downhole robot (140), the method performed by a controller (208) of the downhole robot and comprising:
detecting, using a sensor (CCL) [0018, 0051, 0079-0080] located on the downhole robot, approach of the downhole robot to a deviation of the wellbore from vertical (402) [0100]; and
in response to the detection of the approach of the deviation, reorient the downhole robot ([0023] states that upon detection, initiating a thruster/propulsion unit to reorient from vertical to horizontal and traverse the non-vertical part of the wellbore).
Bouldin fails to explicitly state that reorienting the robot is performed by changing longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot.
Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) an untethered, downhole robot comprising:
a generally elongate housing (111);
at least one propulsion unit (22) on an end of the housing on the longitudinal axis;
a sensor system (3) configured to
sense structural information regarding geometry of a wellbore ([0044, 0059, 0061] states obtaining geometry of the surrounding area, such as a wellbore, which has been interpreted as intended use),
determine position and orientation of the robot in the wellbore ([0013, 0046] states obtaining position/depth/orientation of the robot), and
collect measurements characterizing the wellbore fluid characteristics ([0013, 0046] states obtaining “environmental data” obtained as the fluid characteristics surrounding the robot, such as wellbore fluid in the interpreted intended use);
a controller (“control system”) configured to receive the sensed structural information, the position and orientation of the robot in the wellbore and the wellbore fluid characteristics to control the robot’s traversal within the wellbore [0044-0046]; and
a memory device (“memory”) to log collected data locally on robot [0068, 0075].
Liu further states that reorienting the robot by changing longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot enables control for “optimal attitude” for passing a “vertical narrow environment” or a “horizontal narrow environment” [0059].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to modify Bouldin, by providing the robot components (propulsion unit, sensor system, controller, memory) and method of reorienting, as taught by Liu, for the purpose of controlling for “optimal attitude” for passing a “vertical narrow environment” or a “horizontal narrow environment”.
Regarding claim 13, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) changing the longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot comprises causing a bow of the downhole robot to descend slower than a stern of the downhole robot ([0045] states the control system controlling the buoyancy system to make various parts of the robot less dense, to achieve the desired “attitude”, [0056] states an operational condition whereby the bow was made less dense and the stern more dense (“steering rotor module of the underwater robot faces the water surface”)).
Regarding claim 14, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) further comprising controlling a direction of the lateral reorientation of the downhole robot ([0045 and 0057] states controlling the lateral or rotational orientation of the robot).
Regarding claim 15, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) controlling the direction of the lateral reorientation of the downhole robot comprises controlling a rudder, or a hydroplane, or a drag-generating components, or a steerable propeller (211-213), or a lateral redistribution of weight of the downhole robot [0041, 0045, 0057].
Regarding claim 16, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) controlling the direction of the lateral reorientation of the downhole robot comprises sensing an orientation of the downhole robot and using the sensed orientation to control the direction of the lateral reorientation of the downhole robot [0046].
Regarding claim 17, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) changing the longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot comprises moving a fluid bow-ward or stern-ward between chambers housed in the robot [0044-0047].
Regarding claim 21, Liu discloses (Fig. 1-6) further comprising: detecting, using the sensor, approach of the downhole robot to a lateral section of the wellbore; and in response to the detection of the approach of the lateral section, generating thrust to propel the downhole robot ([0018, 0051, 0079-0080] states detecting the lateral section and initiating the thruster/propulsion unit to propel the robot through the lateral section of the downhole).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouldin in view of Liu in further view of Bulten. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (underwater vessels); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (navigating underwater). MPEP2141.01(a) I.
Regarding claim 22, Bouldin discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 14 except fails to explicitly state that the method further comprises sensing a density of downhole fluid surrounding the downhole robot; and the longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot is changed based on the sensed density.
Bulten discloses (Fig. 1) a downhole robot comprising:
a generally elongate housing (105);
a propulsion unit (150);
a sensor system (“plurality of sensors” [0057]);
a controller (120); and
a density sensor (260, 290) sensing a density of downhole fluid surrounding the downhole robot; and the longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot is changed based on the sensed density for the purpose of operating the propulsion unit in the safest and most efficient way possible [0117, 0121, 0249].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to modify Bouldin, by providing the density sensor and operational method, as taught by Bulten, for the purpose of operating the propulsion unit in the safest and most efficient way possible.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouldin in view of Saeed. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (underwater vessels); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (navigating underwater). MPEP2141.01(a) I.
Regarding claim 28, Bouldin discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 23 except fails to explicitly state that the downhole robot further comprises three or more protruding members distributed around the housing, wherein passively reorienting the downhole robot comprises contacting an inner wall of a wellbore with at least one of the protruding members while preventing the housing from contacting the inner wall.
Saeed discloses (Fig. 2) a method of navigating a wellbore “wellbore” with a downhole robot (10), the method performed by a controller (16) of the downhole robot and comprising:
detecting, using a sensor (12) located on the downhole robot; and
the downhole robot further comprises three or more protruding members (28, 30) distributed around the housing, wherein passively reorienting the downhole robot comprises contacting an inner wall of a wellbore with at least one of the protruding members while preventing the housing from contacting the inner wall [0031].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to modify Bouldin, by providing the three or more protruding members, as taught by Saeed, for the purpose of preventing the housing from contacting the inner wall.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 26 and 27 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 18-20 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.
Regarding claim 9, Liu discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 2 except fails to explicitly state that the buoyancy system is configured to communicate fluid with surroundings of the downhole robot.
Withstanding the formalities/rejections listed previously, Claim 9 contains allowable subject matter. The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed relationship between the buoyancy system and the fluid surroundings. Although Liu discloses a robot comprising a buoyancy system, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Liu to incorporate the details of the buoyancy system is configured to communicate fluid with surroundings of the downhole robot, along with the other claimed components of the robot. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 18, Bouldin discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 14 except fails to explicitly state that changing the longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot comprises communicating a fluid with a surroundings of the downhole robot.
The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed relationship between the buoyancy system and the fluid surroundings. Although Bouldin discloses a robot comprising a buoyancy system, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bouldin to incorporate the details of changing the longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot comprises communicating a fluid with a surroundings of the downhole robot, along with the other claimed components of the method. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 19, Bouldin discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 14 except fails to explicitly state that further comprising guiding the downhole robot into a sidewall of the wellbore prior to changing the longitudinal distribution of the weight of the downhole robot.
The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed relationship between the buoyancy system and the fluid surroundings. Although Bouldin discloses changing the longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bouldin to incorporate the details of guiding the downhole robot into a sidewall of the wellbore prior to changing the longitudinal distribution of the weight of the downhole robot, along with the other claimed components of the method. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 20, Bouldin discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 14 except fails to explicitly state that further comprising guiding the downhole robot into a sidewall of the wellbore prior to changing the longitudinal distribution of the weight of the downhole robot.
The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed relationship between the buoyancy system and the fluid surroundings. Although Bouldin discloses changing the longitudinal distribution of weight of the downhole robot, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bouldin to incorporate the details of guiding the downhole robot into a sidewall of the wellbore prior to changing the longitudinal distribution of the weight of the downhole robot, along with the other claimed components of the method. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Regarding claim 26, Bouldin further discloses (Fig. 1-6) further comprising: operating a stern-mounted thruster (202) to generate thrust in a forward direction [0074].
Bouldin fails to explicitly state that further comprising: operating a bow-mounted thruster to generate thrust in a reverse direction.
Withstanding the formalities/rejections listed previously, Claim 26 contains allowable subject matter. The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed bow mounted thruster. Although Bouldin discloses a robot comprising a thruster, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bouldin to incorporate the details of operating a bow-mounted thruster to generate thrust in a reverse direction, along with the other claimed components of the method. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the claim.
Claim 27 depends upon claim 26.
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.”
Relevant Art
The following is a listing of relevant art:
US 20200361583 A1, US 11152555 B2, US 20130239870 A1, US 20090178603 A1, US 20240294241 A1, US 11834141 B1, US 20260077843 A1, US 20180346082 A1
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW WIBLIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9836. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NATHANIEL WIEHE can be reached on 571-272-8648. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW WIBLIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights