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 .
Response to Amendment
The Preliminary Amendment filed May 12, 2025 has been entered and considered with the Office Action below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “semi-mobile transport elements” as recited in claim 10 and the “drilling rig” as recited in claim 11 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 1-11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The reference numbers included in the claim language should be deleted. While it is not prohibited to include reference numbers in a claim, the inclusion of reference numbers often leads to confusion in the understanding of the claims.
The term “actually” in line 13 of claim 1 is not necessary and should be removed.
In line 20 of claim 1, “left out, bypassed” should be changed to --left out, are bypassed--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “extraction drilling unit” in claims 1 and 11 and “semi-mobile transport element” in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “means of a series of various sensors” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 1-11 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. The following is a list of examples of such errors and must not be treated as all inclusive. The claims must be reviewed in their entirety and all errors, similar and otherwise, corrected.
Regarding claim 1: The following are examples of errors found in claim 1:
The phrase “highly selectively and accurately” in line 4 of claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The phrase “highly selectively and accurately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what renders the process highly selective and accurate and how the term “highly” is defined.
The phrase “3D parallel to each other” in line 7 is considered unclear. What does “3D parallel” mean and how does it differ from the “3D drilling pattern”?
There is insufficient antecedent basis for the following elements:
“the final outer diameter” in line 8
“the shared normal direction” in line 9
It is unclear if the following elements/limitations are referring to previously recited elements/limitations or are to be treated as new elements/limitations:
“two adjacent extraction drillhole sections” in line 9 with respect to “drillhole sections” in lines 5 and 6
“one extraction drillhole section” in line 10 with respect to “drillhole sections” in lines 5 and 6
“3D drilling patterns” in line 21 with respect to “3D drilling patterns” in line 5
“various sets of sensors” in line 28 with respect to “a series of various sensors” in line 15
“a first navigation measuring unit” in lines 32 and 33 with respect to “several measurement units”; in line 27.
The phrase “more or less densely” and “more or less incompletely” in lines 21 and 22 are considered generally confusing. First, more and less are opposites so the phrase “more or less” covers everything but the associated elements be exactly the same. Further, these phrase fail to indicate what they are “more or less” than. The drilling patterns should be “more or less densely arranged” than what for example.
The use of pronouns in a claim render that claim indefinite as it is unclear as to which element or step is being further limited. As such the meets and bounds of the claim cannot be determined. Structural limitations and steps must always be referred to by name.
“their” in line 22
“its” in line 25
“them” in line 30
The phrase “significantly improved” in line 36 of claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The phrase “significantly improved” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what renders the process “significantly improved” and what the process is improved compared to.
Line 41 requires a “third series of measurement values” and line 47 requires a “fifth series of measurement values” however claim 1 fails to include a second or a fourth series. It is not possible to have a third of an element without a second or a fifth of an element without a fourth.
The use of such terms as “can be” in line 57 render a claim indefinite as it is unclear if the related structure or function is required. As such the meets and bounds of the claim cannot be determined.
The phrase "for example", or “i.e.” as used in line 57 of claim 1, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 2: The following is a list of examples of errors found in claim 2:
Line 6 recites “three sets of sensors”. It is unclear if these sets of sensors are part of the “various sensors” in line 15 of claim 1 or the “various set of sensors” in line 28 of claim 1.
It is unclear of a set of sensors, as recited in lines 11-14 and 14-16 are capable of separating material. A sensors, by definition, merely detects and/or gathers data. It is not capable of physically manipulating anything as implied by the use of the term “separating”.
The use of the term “holistically” in line 20 is considered generally confusing. What about the process is holistic?
There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the holistically and digitally integrated process management system “: in lines 20 and 21
The language of lines 21-24 is considered purported merits which is not proper for claim language.
Regarding claim 7: Claim 7 is considered indefinite for the following reasons:
Claim 7 attempts to further limit the distance between two adjacent boreholes by indicating that the distance is “a maximum of 40 cm, preferably a maximum of 30 cm.” Line 8 of claim 1 requires that the distance be “a maximum of 45 cm”. This is a value and not a range thus not providing for the maximum distance to be less than 45 cm. Language such as “a maximum of 45 cm or less” would cover distances less than 45 cm.
The language of claim 7 is considered indefinite because it is unclear if the maximum distance needed to reject the claim is 40 cm or 30 cm. A range or value in a claim cannot be further limited within the same claim.
Regarding claim 10: Claim element “semi-mobile transport elements” is a means (or step) plus function limitation that invokes 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for the claimed function.
Applicant is required to:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be a means (or step) plus function limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; or
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant is required to clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Regarding claim 11: The following are examples of errors found in claim 11:
Claim 11 has been written in such a way that all of claim 1 is incorporated therein. As such, any element or limitation recited in claim 1 cannot be again positively recited in claim 11. Doing so makes it unclear if the two elements/limitations in question are the same feature or if the one in claim 11 is to be considered new.
All of the errors listed for claim 1, and any additional ones found in claim 1, should be referred to when reviewing claim 11.
Regarding claims 3-6, 8, and 9: These claims also contain errors similar to those listed above and must be reviewed and all appropriate changes made.
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(s) 1-3 and 5-11 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Longo et al. (US 2020/0190907, Longo) in view of Mathieson et al. (US 2016/0123096, Math) and Clark (US 2011/0079431), as evidenced by Clark (US 2008/0041626, Clark2).
Claims 1-3 and 5-11 are rejected as best understood in light of the above 35 USC 112(b) errors.
Regarding claims 1 and 11: Longo discloses a method and system for selective mining of solid mineral raw materials using a drilling rig implied with directional drilling system with directional drilling technology Fig 2, Abstract, in which an extraction drilling unit Abstract in a first step penetrates a rock layer with a development drillhole section 104 and is thereby highly selectively and accurately steered into a mining zone 103, in a second step, a 3D drilling pattern Fig 4-12 comprising multiple extraction drillhole sections 201 is laid out at the end of the development drillhole section Fig 2, and in a third step extraction drillhole sections laid out in 3D parallel to each other are drilled Fig 4-12, wherein a maximum distance of 45 cm shown as touching in Fig 4-12 is arranged between the final outer diameters of two adjacent extraction drillhole sections measured in the shared normal direction of the two adjacent drillhole axis segments Fig 4-12, and wherein one extraction drillhole section is drilled after the other and thereby the ore is systematically and highly selectively extracted within the prepared mining panel by an extraction drilling unit and then conveyed to the surface [0033], wherein waste rock zones are only marginally or not at all mineralized and hence selectively left out, bypassed and thus excluded from mining by deploying 3D drilling patterns that are more or less densely arranged in space and their patterns of extraction drillhole sections are more or less incompletely accomplished, or those waste rock zones are penetrated only with the smallest possible drillhole diameter Fig 2-12, Abstract, and wherein after an extraction drillhole section has been completed, this extraction drillhole section is stabilized along with its associated development drillhole segment [0032].
Longo discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except wherein the valuable minerals actually encountered downhole are determined by geophysical signals from a first set of sensors, which are continuously measured at the bottom of the drillhole by means of a series of various sensors, wherein the first set of sensors is arranged in the extraction drilling unit in close proximity to the drill bit at the bottom of the drillhole, and is used for the highly selective sensor-controlled identification of the various valuable mineral and waste rock characteristics downhole, and continuously identifies those waste rock zones, wherein the high-precision directional drilling technology of the drilling rig comprises several measurement units with various sets of sensors, which are arranged in the extraction drilling unit and log surveying-related navigation information and geophysical rock information downhole and transmit them to a control unit arranged on the surface, wherein for acquiring the drillhole axis trajectory of a given drillhole segment by simple position determination a series of measurements is taken by at least a first navigation measurement unit during drilling, so that a first series of measurement values is obtained by the first navigation measurement unit for a specific drillhole segment within a given drillhole, and the position accuracy of the drillhole trajectory is significantly improved by multiple measurement, in that the drilling progress is stopped after the acquisition of the first series of measurement values, and subsequently the extraction drilling unit is moved back in the direction away from the bottom of the drillhole, wherein a series of measurements is again taken by the first navigation measurement unit during the rearward movement of the extraction drilling unit, so that a third series of measurement values is obtained by the first navigation measurement unit for the same drillhole segment within the given drillhole, and after the acquisition of the third series of measurement values the rearward movement of the extraction drilling unit is stopped and subsequently moved again in the drilling direction towards the bottom of the drillhole, wherein a series of measurements is again taken by the first navigation measurement unit during the forward movement towards the bottom of the drillhole, so that a fifth series of measurement values is obtained by the first navigation measurement unit for the same drillhole segment within the given drillhole, wherein the first series of measurement values, the third series of measurement values and the fifth series of measurement values as well as each further series of measurement values are transmitted to the central control unit arranged on the surface, wherein the mean spatial position of the drillhole axis of the respective drillhole segment is determined in the central control unit using all the series of measurement values obtained, and wherein, for two or more adjacent drillholes that are arranged very close to each other, the expectable drillhole deflection of a drillhole segment within the second drillhole, which is already known from actual series of navigational and geophysical measurement values in the first drillhole and thus can be well estimated in advance, is avoided or minimized by anticipating it, i.e. by incorporating its prediction already in the planning and control of drillhole trajectory orientation data.
Math discloses a method and system for extracting ore via boreholes drilled into an ore containing rock layer 106 - Abstract. The boreholes are lateral boreholes 108 that are drilled from a main vertical wellbore in a given pattern for the purpose of maximizing ore extraction [0016]-[0018]. The drilling system 200 used to drill the boreholes includes a variety of sensors 224 including those for geosteering and those for determining the type of rock being encountered by the drill bit 220 – [0019]-[0021]. The sensors communicate with a control system 290 that directs a steering device 222 to redirect and/or maintain the drill bit on the proper trajectory along the vein of ore [0020], [0021].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Longo so that the method and system included determining the valuable minerals encountered downhole by geophysical signals from a first set of sensors, which are continuously measured at the bottom of the drillhole by means of a series of various sensors, wherein the first set of sensors is arranged in the extraction drilling unit in close proximity to the drill bit at the bottom of the drillhole, and is used for the highly selective sensor-controlled identification of the various valuable mineral and waste rock characteristics downhole, and continuously identifies those waste rock zones, wherein the high-precision directional drilling technology of the drilling rig comprises several measurement units with various sets of sensors, which are arranged in the extraction drilling unit and log surveying-related navigation information and geophysical rock information downhole and transmit them to a control unit arranged on the surface, as taught by Math, in order to have ensured that the drilling device maintained its trajectory along the vein of ore [0021].
Longo, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except wherein the high-precision directional drilling technology of the drilling rig comprises several measurement units with various sets of sensors, which are arranged in the extraction drilling unit and log surveying-related navigation information downhole and transmit them to a control unit arranged on the surface, wherein for acquiring the drillhole axis trajectory of a given drillhole segment by simple position determination a series of measurements is taken by at least a first navigation measurement unit during drilling, so that a first series of measurement values is obtained by the first navigation measurement unit for a specific drillhole segment within a given drillhole, and the position accuracy of the drillhole trajectory is significantly improved by multiple measurement, in that the drilling progress is stopped after the acquisition of the first series of measurement values, and subsequently the extraction drilling unit is moved back in the direction away from the bottom of the drillhole, wherein a series of measurements is again taken by the first navigation measurement unit during the rearward movement of the extraction drilling unit, so that a third series of measurement values is obtained by the first navigation measurement unit for the same drillhole segment within the given drillhole, and after the acquisition of the third series of measurement values the rearward movement of the extraction drilling unit is stopped and subsequently moved again in the drilling direction towards the bottom of the drillhole, wherein a series of measurements is again taken by the first navigation measurement unit during the forward movement towards the bottom of the drillhole, so that a fifth series of measurement values is obtained by the first navigation measurement unit for the same drillhole segment within the given drillhole, wherein the first series of measurement values, the third series of measurement values and the fifth series of measurement values as well as each further series of measurement values are transmitted to the central control unit arranged on the surface, wherein the mean spatial position of the drillhole axis of the respective drillhole segment is determined in the central control unit using all the series of measurement values obtained, and wherein, for two or more adjacent drillholes that are arranged very close to each other, the expectable drillhole deflection of a drillhole segment within the second drillhole, which is already known from actual series of navigational and geophysical measurement values in the first drillhole and thus can be well estimated in advance, is avoided or minimized by anticipating it, i.e. by incorporating its prediction already in the planning and control of drillhole trajectory orientation data.
Clark discloses a method and system for drilling a series of densely packed boreholes using geosteering Abstract. The drilling system 68 - Fig 4 used to drill these wells includes a navigation measurement unit 76 that is used to continuously measure the spatial relationship between the drill bit 66 and adjacent wells so as to maintain the trajectory of the borehole being drilled along the desired path and prevent intersection with adjacent wells [0041]-[0048]. As Clark discloses the use of geosteering, this process would include stopping drilling and reversing as necessary as taught by Clark2 Abstract, [0060].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified Longo so that the method and system included a geosteering, navigational system, such as that taught by Clark and evidenced by Clark2, to ensure that the boreholes did into intersect while being drilling in order to have efficiently utilize available space by densely packing wells [0001] of Clark.
Regarding claim 2: Wherein the extraction drillhole section along with its associated development drillhole segment is stabilized using complete backfilling by cementing and thereby backfilling as much waste rock as possible which has previously been extracted downhole [0031], [0032] of Longo, [0022] of Math and subsequently been separated by sensor-based ore sorting on the surface [0022] of Math, and for that purpose, three sets of sensors are provided, which measure the same geophysical signals or at least those signals that target the same rock and valuable mineral characteristics, wherein the first set of sensors 224 – [0021] of Math is used to identify the rock and valuable mineral characteristics and is located in the extraction drilling unit in close proximity to the drill bit at the bottom of the drillhole, the second set of sensors 224 – [0021] of Math is used for the immediate separation of waste rock zones identified downhole and is located in a processing unit at the drilling site on the surface, which is used to separate drill cuttings from drilling fluid, and the third set of sensors 236 – [0022] of Math is located in a mineral processing unit for separating ore from waste rock and finally to produce the valuable minerals and metals concentrate, wherein all actual data obtained by these sensors, as well as all plan or simulation data derived from preparatory models and process management systems, starting with orebody modeling, via mine planning and drilling operation, to ore sorting and processing of extracted material, all these data are collected, correlated and reconciled with each other in a central control unit of the holistically and digitally integrated process management system [0041]-[0043] of Longo.
Regarding claim 3: Wherein during the drilling process a geophysical measurement unit logs at least one, but preferably several series of rock measurement values from the rock segment that has just been drilled through, and accordingly the final outer diameter of at least one extraction drillhole section is accomplished by [0020]-[0022] of Math
Regarding claim 5: Wherein the drilling progress is stopped at a given point of an extraction drillhole section, wherein flushing of the drillhole is continued uninterruptedly and the drilling process is resumed after a defined period of time, so that the drill cuttings yielded before the stop of the drilling progress can be clearly distinguished from those obtained after the stop of the drilling progress [0022] of Math.
Regarding claim 6: Wherein prior to the first step, a layer of cap rock 104 of Math is penetrated with an initial development drillhole section to which the development drillhole section is attached to, preferably with the segments Fig 2 of Math, Fig 4-12 of Longo.
Regarding claim 7: Wherein the distance between the final outer diameters of two adjacent extraction drillhole sections is a maximum of 40 cm, preferably a maximum of 30 cm Fig 4-12 of Longo, boreholes shown as touching.
Regarding claim 8: Wherein after completion of the development drillhole section, the development drillhole section is stabilized [0032] of Longo.
Regarding claim 9: Wherein after completion of the initial development drillhole section, the initial development drillhole section is stabilized [0032] of Longo.
Regarding claim 10: Wherein the drilling rig is provided with semi-mobile transport elements and, in a fourth step, is moved by use of these semi-mobile transport elements to a new drillhole head [0041] of Longo, at which the extraction drilling unit follows the same process as that in claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record fails to disclose o suggest that a method for mining solid minerals using a drilling rig with directional drilling technology that involves rearward movement of the drilling unit and that, during the rearward movement, the drillhole is enlarged by a first drillhole enlargement device arranged in the extraction drilling unit, and, if appropriate, after the acquisition of the third series of measurement values the rearward movement of the extraction drilling unit is stopped, and subsequently the extraction drilling unit is again moved forward in the drilling direction towards the bottom of the drillhole, wherein during the forward movement the drillhole is again enlarged by a second drillhole enlargement device arranged in the extraction drilling unit as recited in the claimed method.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER H GAY whose telephone number is (571)272-7029. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 6-3:30 and every other Friday 6-11.
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, Anita Y Coupe can be reached at (571)270-3614. 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.
/JENNIFER H GAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
JHG
10/7/2026
