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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-5, 12-16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (US 11231511 B2, “Wu”) in view of Charron (US 20040068377 A1, “Charron”).
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses a method for constructing a seismic image by attenuation of internal multiples in a seismic dataset (column 15, lines 64-66, where a seismic survey generates multiples, a workflow may aim to attenuate the presence of those multiples in seismic survey data)(column 16, lines 36-51, data-driven modeling of multiples includes using an input wavelet to generate modeled seismic multiples. Adaptive subtraction of multiples method includes utilizing modeled seismic multiples and then subtracting the modeled multiples from the recorded data. XIMP process utilizes modeled multiples with from a data-driven method in order to attenuate multiples in recorded data)), comprising:
receiving the seismic dataset from a wide azimuth seismic survey for imaging a subsurface structure from a data processing platform (column 17, lines 45-55, workflow may include receiving wide azimuth data (WAZ). WAZ involves seismic data acquisition where, for example, separate source vessels are used to record seismic reflections from areas out to the side of a recording spread);
determining, using the seismic dataset, a plurality of geometry parameters (column 1, lines 50-55, instructions stored in memory that are executed by the system cause the system to receive seismic survey data of a subterranean environment arranged according to a seismic survey geometry to define a two dimensional domain and identify traces, including a target trace within the domain) and a current working swath in a target swath area(column 17, lines 45-55, workflow may include receiving wide azimuth data (WAZ). WAZ involves seismic data acquisition where, for example, separate source vessels are used to record seismic reflections from areas out to the side of a recording spread);
identifying, using the plurality of geometry parameters, a plurality of neighboring swaths in the target swath area(Implicit, (column 17, lines 45-55, workflow may include receiving wide azimuth data (WAZ). WAZ involves seismic data acquisition where, for example, separate source vessels are used to record seismic reflections from areas out to the side of a recording spread)(source vessels acquiring data out to the sides of a recording spread are equivalent to identifying neighboring swaths);
determining, using the plurality of neighboring swaths and the current working swath, a data library for predicting internal multiple events in the target swath area (column 16, lines 38-51, data driven modeling of multiples methods includes generating modeled seismic multiples based on recorded seismic data);
selecting, using the current working swath, a raw seismic trace which originates from a seismic source to a seismic receiver (Fig. 7, column 23 lines 3-7, method includes an identification block for identifying multiple generating horizons and a target trace location (SR) for which to compute a model of internal multiples);
predicting, using a data-driven internal multiple elimination (DDIME) process, a three- dimensional (3D) internal multiple event which originates from the seismic source to the seismic receiver (column 16, lines 38-51, data-driven modeling of multiples includes using an input wavelet to generate modeled seismic multiples. Adaptive subtraction of multiples method includes utilizing modeled seismic multiples and then subtracting the modeled multiples from the recorded data).;
determining a processed seismic trace by subtracting the 3D internal multiple event from the raw seismic trace which originates from the seismic source to the seismic receiver(column 16, lines 38-51, data-driven modeling of multiples includes using an input wavelet to generate modeled seismic multiples. Adaptive subtraction of multiples method includes utilizing modeled seismic multiples and then subtracting the modeled multiples from the recorded data).;
and outputting the processed seismic trace to the data processing platform for imaging the subsurface structure (column 34, lines 46-54, method includes a render and identify block for rendering a seismic image to a display using the generated seismic data with attenuated multiple energy and for identifying a portion of a reservoir in the seismic image).
Wu fails to disclose
reducing, using the plurality of geometry parameters, redundant seismic data in the data library by excluding seismic data outside the target swath area and decimating seismic data based on a predetermined decimation parameter;
Charron teaches
reducing, using the plurality of geometry parameters, redundant seismic data in the data library by excluding seismic data outside the target swath area and decimating seismic data based on a predetermined decimation parameter ([0048], for one given position of a source-receiver couple, there is only one linked seismic path. It would be wise to perform a decimation driven by the seismic paths. This decimation would consist in eliminating all source-transmitter couples whose seismic paths are identical or very similar, except for one) ([0050]-[0052], redundant traces are removed based on similarity to neighboring traces. Redundancy of traces is often found in underwater seismic acquisition, such as when two navigated consecutive lines overlap in terms of coverage);
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Wu, to include the teachings of Charron to yield a data-driven method for predicting and attenuating internal multiples within a wide-azimuth seismic survey where the overall data volume is reduced through decimation so that repeating or redundant data does not affect the accuracy of the predicted internal multiples prior to their attenuation. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar method. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 2, Wu, as modified in view of Charron teaches the method of claim 1. Wu further teaches
wherein the seismic dataset from the wide azimuth seismic survey is grouped by seismic source(Implicit, (column 17, lines 45-55, workflow may include receiving wide azimuth data (WAZ). WAZ involves seismic data acquisition where, for example, separate source vessels are used to record seismic reflections from areas out to the side of a recording spread).
Regarding claim 3, Wu, as modified in view of Charron teaches the method of claim 1. Charron further teaches
reducing, using the plurality of geometry parameters, redundant seismic data in the data library by decimating source lines in the plurality of neighboring swaths at a predetermined factor ([0048], for one given position of a source-receiver couple, there is only one linked seismic path. It would be wise to perform a decimation driven by the seismic paths. This decimation would consist in eliminating all source-transmitter couples whose seismic paths are identical or very similar, except for one).
Regarding claim 4, Wu, as modified in view of Charron teaches the method of claim 1.
retaining sources from the current working swath in the data library (Implicit, column 22, lines 52-55, XIMP can be performed in a manner where simultaneous predictions occur. For example, computations for a first horizon can be saved in memory and used for each subsequent horizon)(Computations for a horizon using seismic data would implicitly include source and receiver data that are also saved in memory).
Regarding claim 5, Wu discloses the method of claim 1. Wu further discloses
generating a seismic image of the subsurface structure from the processed seismic trace (Fig. 20, column 34, lines 46-50, method (2000) can includes a render and identify block (2070) for rendering a seismic image to a display utilizing the generated seismic data with attenuated multiple energy and for identifying a portion of a reservoir in the seismic image).
Regarding claim 12, the claim is a system claim that corresponds to claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 13, the claim is a system claim that corresponds to claim 2 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 14, the claim is a system claim that corresponds to claim 3 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is a system claim that corresponds to claim 4 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is a system claim that corresponds to claim 5 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is a CRM claim corresponding to claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Claim(s) 6-8 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Charron and Dutta et al. ("Practical strategies for interbed multiple attenuation." SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting. SEG, 2019, “Dutta”).
Regarding claim 6, Wu, as modified in view of Charron teaches the method of claim 1. Wu further teaches
wherein the DDIME process comprises: determining, using the plurality of geometry parameters, a plurality of first and second multiple position pairs for the 3D internal multiple event (Fig. 8, column 26, lines 24-45, Fig. 8 illustrates a map and slice view of a receiver location (R) and a source location (S) where a trace can be identified as being associated with the source and receiver. Trace can include primary energy and multiple energy. A source trace can be identified and defined as a trace between the source location and a location X1. A receiver trace can be identified and defined as a trace between the receiver location and a location X2. A generator trace can be defined as a trace that is generated by an internal multiple generator reflector);
Wu, as modified in view of Charron fails to teach
for each of the plurality of first and second multiple position pairs: determining, using the data library, a first seismic trace which originates from the seismic source to a first multiple position, a second seismic trace which originates from the first multiple position to a second multiple position, and a third seismic trace which originates from the second corresponding multiple position to the receiver;
determining an intermediate seismic trace by correlating the first seismic trace with the second seismic trace;
and determining an internal multiple subset associated with the corresponding first and second multiple position pair by convolving the intermediate seismic trace with the third seismic trace;
and determining the 3D internal multiple event by summing the internal multiple subset for the plurality of first and second multiple position pairs.
Dutta teaches
for each of the plurality of first and second multiple position pairs: determining, using the data library, a first seismic trace which originates from the seismic source to a first multiple position, a second seismic trace which originates from the first multiple position to a second multiple position, and a third seismic trace which originates from the second corresponding multiple position to the receiver (Fig. 1, pg. 2, Fig. 1 illustrates predicting an interbed multiple between a source (S) and receiver (R). Interbed multiple is calculated convolving trace SR’ with trace S’R and cross correlating with trace S’R’);
determining an intermediate seismic trace by correlating the first seismic trace with the second seismic trace (Fig. 1, pg. 2, Interbed multiple is calculated convolving trace SR’ with trace S’R and cross correlating with trace S’R’);
and determining an internal multiple subset associated with the corresponding first and second multiple position pair by convolving the intermediate seismic trace with the third seismic trace (Fig. 2, pg. 2, virtual shot V(S, S’) is first computed by executing the cross-correlation in equation 1b(a). Once V(S,S’) is computed, these virtual shots are convolved with real-receiver gathers G(S’, R), by reusing the same virtual traces for neighboring real-receiver locations on the surface);
and determining the 3D internal multiple event by summing the internal multiple subset for the plurality of first and second multiple position pairs (pg. 2, equations 1(a), (1b), and (1c) involve integrating the real and virtual shot gathers between the source and receiver associated with the interbed multiple).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Wu, as modified in view of the teachings of Charron, to further include the teachings of Dutta to yield a method for predicting and attenuating internal multiples in a wide-azimuth seismic survey in which a target trace is broken down into subsets of component traces in order to reduce the compute cost by exploiting the grid positionings and offset of the source and receiver locations and further reducing the number of duplicate computations while simultaneously handling as many shots and receivers as possible. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar method. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C) .
Regarding claim 7, Wu, as modified in view of Dutta teaches the method of claim 6. Dutta further teaches
wherein the DDIME process further comprises: for each of the plurality of first and second multiple position pairs for the 3D internal multiple event, selecting the first and second multiple position to be evenly distributed across a working area associated with the raw seismic trace which originates from the seismic source to the seismic receiver (Implicit, Fig. 1, pg. 2, Fig 1 illustrates positions (S), (S’), (R’), and (R) being evenly distributed across the working area between source (S) and receiver (R))(Traces SR, SR’, S'R and S’R’ and the associated multiples positions are therefore also evenly distributed).
Regarding claim 8, Wu, as modified in view of Charron and Dutta teaches the method of claim 6. Dutta further teaches
wherein the DDIME process further comprises: achieving an even distribution of the seismic source, the first multiple position, the second multiple position, and the seismic receiver in the working area(Implicit, Fig. 1, pg. 2, Fig 1 illustrates positions (S), (S’), (R’), and (R) being evenly distributed across the working area between source (S) and receiver (R)) (Traces SR, SR’, S'R and S’R’ and the associated multiples positions are therefore also evenly distributed ).
Regarding claim 17, the claim is a system claim that corresponds to claim 6 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is a system claim that corresponds to claim 7 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Claim(s) 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Charron, Dutta, and Bisley (US 20150006085 A1, “Bisley”).
Regarding claim 9, Wu, as modified in view of Charron and Dutta teaches the method of claim 6. Wu, as modified in view of Charron and Dutta fails to teach
wherein the DDIME process further comprises: determining the first seismic trace by interpolating a first plurality of seismic traces within a first seismic grid which contains the first seismic trace (column 25, lines 2-5, the method can include interpolation and/or nearest reliable neighbor approach as to a source, a receiver, data in a seismic data set.).
Bisley teaches
wherein the DDIME process further comprises: determining the first seismic trace by interpolating a first plurality of seismic traces within a first seismic grid which contains the first seismic trace ([0052]-[0054], interpolated 3D common shot gather is generated from measured survey data. For a given target trace, the 3D interpolation creates a pair of areal gathers with identical surface station footprints where one gather is a shot gather with source coordinates located at the source coordinates of the target trace, and the other gather is a receiver gather with receiver coordinates located at the receiver coordinates of the target trace).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Wu, as modified in view of the teachings of Charron and Dutta, to further include the teachings of Bisley to yield a method for predicting and attenuating internal multiples in a wide-azimuth seismic survey which avoids sampling issues in which an insufficient amount of samples may be collected by estimating data points in a 3D space are estimated from actual measured survey data. Making such a modification amounts to applying a known technique to improve a similar method in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 11, Wu, as modified in view of Charron and Dutta teaches the method of claim 6. Wu, as modified in view of Charron and Dutta fails to teach
wherein the DDIME process further comprises: determining the third seismic trace by interpolating a third plurality of seismic traces within a third seismic grid which contains the third seismic trace.
Bisley teaches
determining the third seismic trace by interpolating a third plurality of seismic traces within a third seismic grid which contains the third seismic trace ([0052]-[0054], interpolated 3D common shot gather is generated from measured survey data. For a given target trace, the 3D interpolation creates a pair of areal gathers with identical surface station footprints where one gather is a shot gather with source coordinates located at the source coordinates of the target trace, and the other gather is a receiver gather with receiver coordinates located at the receiver coordinates of the target trace).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Wu, as modified in view of the teachings of Charron and Dutta, to further include the teachings of Bisley to yield a method for predicting and attenuating internal multiples in a wide-azimuth seismic survey which avoids sampling issues in which an insufficient amount of samples may be collected by estimating data points in a 3D space are estimated from actual measured survey data. Making such a modification amounts to applying a known technique to improve a similar method in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 19 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 10, Wu, as modified in view of Charron and Dutta teaches the method of claim 6. Wu, as modified in view of Charro and Dutta fails to teach
wherein the DDIME process further comprises: determining the second seismic trace by interpolating a second plurality of seismic traces within a second seismic grid which contains the second seismic trace.
Bisley (the closest identified prior art) teaches
However Bisley makes no teaching of a second seismic trace, as defined by claim 6, being determined by a plurality of seismic traces that originate from a first multiple position to a second multiple position. Rather Bisley only teaches that the 3D interpolation occurs on the receiver side and the source side, such that the first seismic trace and third seismic trace of a target trace are determined by interpolating a common shot gather and a common receiver gather. No other identified prior art teaches this limitation either wholly or in part with sufficient motivation to combine).
Regarding claim 19, Wu, as modified in view of Charron and Dutta teaches the system of claim 17. Dutta further teaches
and achieving an even distribution of the seismic source, the first multiple position, the second multiple position, and the seismic receiver in the working area(Fig. 1, pg. 2, Fig 1 illustrates positions (S), (S’), (R’), and (R) being evenly distributed across the working area between source (S) and receiver (R)) (Traces SR, SR’, S'R and S’R’ and the associated multiples positions are therefore also evenly distributed).
Wu, as modified in view of Charron and Dutta fails to teach
wherein the DDIME process further comprises: determining the first seismic trace by interpolating a first plurality of seismic traces within a first seismic grid which contains the first seismic trace;
determining the second seismic trace by interpolating a second plurality of seismic traces within a second seismic grid which contains the second seismic trace;
determining the third seismic trace by interpolating a third plurality of seismic traces within a third seismic grid which contains the third seismic trace;
Bisley teaches
wherein the DDIME process further comprises: determining the first seismic trace by interpolating a first plurality of seismic traces within a first seismic grid which contains the first seismic trace([0052]-[0054], interpolated 3D common shot gather is generated from measured survey data. For a given target trace, the 3D interpolation creates a pair of areal gathers with identical surface station footprints where one gather is a shot gather with source coordinates located at the source coordinates of the target trace, and the other gather is a receiver gather with receiver coordinates located at the receiver coordinates of the target trace.;
determining the third seismic trace by interpolating a third plurality of seismic traces within a third seismic grid which contains the third seismic trace([0052]-[0054], interpolated 3D common shot gather is generated from measured survey data. For a given target trace, the 3D interpolation creates a pair of areal gathers with identical surface station footprints where one gather is a shot gather with source coordinates located at the source coordinates of the target trace, and the other gather is a receiver gather with receiver coordinates located at the receiver coordinates of the target trace.;
However Bisley, who is the closest related prior art, makes no teaching of a second seismic trace, as defined by claim 6, being determined by a plurality of seismic traces that originate from a first multiple position to a second multiple position. Rather Bisley only teaches that the 3D interpolation occurs on the receiver side and the source side, such that the first seismic trace and third seismic trace of a target trace are determined by interpolating a common shot gather and a common receiver gather. No other identified prior art teaches this limitation either wholly or in part with sufficient motivation to combine);
Conclusion
Prior art made of record though not relied upon in the present basis of rejection are noted in the attached PTO 892 and include:
Zou et al. ("A new multidimensional method that eliminates internal multiples that interfere with primaries, without damaging the primary, without knowledge of subsurface properties, for off-shore and on-shore conventional and unconventional plays." SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting. SEG, 2019, “Zhou”) which discloses a data-driven internal multiple attenuation method
Zhang et al. (US 20230168407 A1, “Zhang”) which discloses a generalized method for internal multiple prediction
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6136. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at 571-270-3603. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights