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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II (Figures 4 and 5) in the reply filed on February 2, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 12, 16, 30, and 31 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings were received on May 2, 2025. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-11, 13-15, 17-29 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The use of the term “toolstring” in the claims should be changed to --tool string-- as this is the accepted form of this word.
In line 1 of claim 8, the space between “comprising” and “the step” is underlined; the underlining should be removed.
In claim 24, line 4 recites “the radial drilling tool string comprising” and line 5 recites “the radial drilling toolstring comprises”. Both of these phrases are not needed.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 11 and 13 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.
Regarding claim 11: Claim 11 requires “a secondary anchor sensor” however there is no recitation of a first anchor sensor in claim 11 or claims 1 and 10, the claims from which claim 11 depends. It is not possible for a second of an element to exist without there being a first.
Regarding claim 13: Claim 13 requires “a secondary anchor sensor”. It is unclear if this is a second anchor sensor or a sensor for a secondary anchor. For the purposes of examination, it is being treated as the latter.
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) 1-8, 10-12, 14, 15, and 17-21, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hopkins et al. (US 2011/0278070, Hopkins) in view of Garcia et al. (US 2018/0216458, Garcia) and Chen et al. (US 2021/0230998, Chen).
Regarding claim 1: Hopkins discloses a method Abstract for drilling a radial hole at 32 in a wellbore wall 12, Fig 1, 2, the method comprising the steps of:
providing a radial drilling tool string Fig 1 connected to a surface via an elongated flexible member 10, the radial drilling tool string comprises:
an electronic section 16, 18, 20, 22,
an anchoring portion 28 comprising a primary anchor unit 30,
a drilling portion 26 comprising a radial drill unit 32,
wherein the radial drilling tool string forms a longitudinal axis Fig 1 and the radial drill unit is adapted to rotate a drill bit [0094]and to displace [0094] and retract [0094] the drill bit in a radial direction in relation to the longitudinal axis Fig 2;
positioning the radial drilling tool string at a desired position within the wellbore Fig 1, [0091]; and
activating the electronic section to perform a sequence of actions for the drilling of the radial hole [0093]-[0109], which in turn:
activates the primary anchor unit to anchor the radial drilling tool string to the wellbore wall [0093];
activates the radial drill unit such that the drill bit starts rotating and radially displaces the drill bit to drill the radial hole in the wellbore wall [0094]; and
upon completing drilling the radial hole deactivates the radial drill unit such that the drill bit is retracting into the radial drill unit and the drill bit stops rotating [0108], [0109] – drill bit must be retracted in order to move the unit to another location.
Hopkins discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the electrical section being programmable via a graphical user interface (GUI) and adapted for controlling the radial drilling tool string to drill the radial hole in the wellbore wall, the GUI comprises visual displays, the programming being a sequence of actions for the drilling of the radial hole.
Garcia discloses a method and system similar to that of Hopkins. Garcia discloses a method for drilling a radial hole [0031] in a wellbore wall Fig 2, the method comprising the steps of:
providing a radial drilling tool string 200 connected to a surface via an elongated flexible member 112, the radial drilling tool string comprises:
an electronic section 220, 230/900, the electronic section including an input device 926 to receive input and commands from a human operator [0090], [0094] and an output device 928 – [0095],
an anchoring portion 240 comprising a primary anchor unit 242,
a drilling portion [0031] comprising a radial drill unit [0031],
wherein the radial drilling tool string forms a longitudinal axis Fig 2 and the radial drill unit is adapted to displace [0085] and retract [0085] a drill bit 514 in a radial direction in relation to the longitudinal axis Fig 9;
positioning the radial drilling tool string at a desired position within the wellbore Fig 2, 5; and
programming the electronic section to perform a sequence of actions for the drilling of the radial hole [0097], [0098], Fig 15.
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 Hopkins so that the electronic section was programmable with a sequence of actions for drilling the radial hole, as taught by Garcia, in order to have been able to automatically perform the method of forming a radial hole based on data entered by a human operator [0097].
Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the electrical section being programmable via a graphical user interface (GUI) and the GUI comprising visual displays.
Chen discloses a method for controlling the drilling of a well using a GUI 600, 900, 1000, 1100, that includes visual displays Fig 6, 9, 10, 11, to enter and control the sequence of operations involved in the drilling [0198].
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 Hopkins so that the electronic section was programmed by a GUI, as taught by Chen, in order to have been able to input needed data to establish the sequence, update that information, and include other information regarding operators and other activities [0152].
Regarding claims 2 and 21: Wherein the radial drilling tool string comprises at least one of [0036] of Hopkins for measuring [0036] of Hopkins, torque and weight, respectively.
Regarding claim 3: Wherein the method comprises the step of the electronic section performing an automated check during the sequence of actions, the automated check uses at least one of the [0102], [0104], [0106] of Garcia.
Regarding claim 4: Wherein the automated check is performed after at least one of the following actions [0106], [0124], [0148], [0149] of Garcia – assessing if the core drilling operation has failed would include assessment at each point in the operation:
activating the primary anchor unit;
starting rotation of the drill bit;
displacing the drill bit in the radial direction;
retracting the drill bit into the drill unit;
stopping rotation of the drill bit; and
deactivating the primary anchor unit.
Regarding claim 5: Wherein the radial drilling tool string comprises an orientation tool 810 – [0078]-[0080] of Garcia adapted to be controlled by the electronic section, the orientation tool, when activated, is adapted to rotate the drilling portion around the longitudinal axis relative to the anchoring portion, and including orienting the drilling portion in relation to the anchoring portion [0143], [0145] of Garcia.
Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the orientation tool being rigidly connected to the anchoring portion in one end and rigidly connected to the drilling portion in an opposite end.
However, 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 Hopkins so that the orientation tool was rigidly connected to the anchoring portion in one end and rigidly connected to the drilling portion in an opposite end, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 6: Wherein the radial drilling tool string comprises an orientation tool sensor for measuring an orientation tool performance parameter [0044], [0079], [0092] of Hopkins; [0080] of Garcia.
Regarding claim 7: The method further comprising the step of the electronic section performing an automated check during the sequence of actions using the orientation tool performance parameter, the automated check is performed at least one of prior to activating the orientation tool, while the orientation tool is activated, and after deactivating the orientation tool [0078], [0102], [0104], [0106] – assessing if the core drilling operation has failed would include assessment at each point in the operation.
Regarding claim 8: The method further comprising the step of orienting the drilling portion such that the drill bit is oriented to a programmed orientation in relation to the wellbore before drilling the radial hole in the wellbore wall [0044], [0079], [0092] of Hopkins.
Regarding claim 10: Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the radial drilling tool string comprising a secondary anchor unit within the drilling portion, and the method comprises setting the secondary anchor unit prior to drilling the radial hole.
Garcia discloses that the anchor 240 used there in can include one or more anchor modules [0088].
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 Hopkins to include a second anchor unit, as taught by Garcia, in order to have further stabilized the drilling unit in the well. This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring that the string and drilling unit did not shift during the operation thus causing damage to the well and the tool string.
Regarding claim 14: Wherein the electronics section provides an operator with a status of the automated check(s) via the visual display in the GUI [0149]-[0151], [0204], [0207] of Chen and stops the sequence of actions if any performance parameter is not within a predetermined limit or range during an action [0106], [0148], [0149] of Garcia.
Regarding claim 15: Wherein the method comprises the steps of:
programming the electronic section to drill at least one subsequent radial hole at a subsequent drill bit position relative to the radial hole [0102], [0104], [0106], Fig 15 of Garcia; and
activating the electric section which in turn:
positions the drill bit to the subsequent drill bit position [0109] of Hopkins; and
drilling the subsequent radial hole [0109] of Hopkins.
Regarding claim 17: The method further comprising the step of providing, through the visual display in the GUI, the orientation of the drill bit in relation to the deviated wellbore and a high side therein [0051], [0052[, [0156]-[0162], Fig 10 of Chen.
Regarding claim 18: Wherein the method comprises the step of programming the electronic section with the sequence of actions where the electronic section, through the GUI and the visual displays, provides information to an operator of at least one of a planned action, a currently ongoing action, and a completed action Fig 11 of Chen.
Regarding claim 19: Wherein the electronic section is preprogramed to displace and retract the drill bit in a programmed sequence [0033], [0097], [0098], Fig 15 of Garcia.
Regarding claim 20: Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the programming of the electronic section involving programming to displace the drill bit out to a specific distance in the radial direction.
As the depth to which the radial hole needed to extend would have been known, 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 Hopkins to include programming the drilling unit to only extend to the needed depth in order to have ensured that unnecessary damage to the wellbore wall did not occur and that unwanted fluids did not enter the well. This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring limited affect on future production occurred.
Regarding claim 23: Wherein the orientation tool is adapted to controllably orient the radial drill unit in 360 degrees around the longitudinal axis [0078] of Garcia – samples around the well.
Claim(s) 2-4, 11, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hopkins in view of Garcia and Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sheiretov et al. (US 2021/0254422, Sheir).
Claim 2 is alternately rejected here in order to address the primary anchor sensor option.
Regarding claim 2: Hopkins, as modified, discloses a radial drill unit sensor [0036] of Hopkins that measures a radial drill unit performance parameter [0036] of Hopkins – weight and torque.
Hopkins, as modified, fails to disclose that the radial drilling tool string includes at least one of a primary anchor sensor for measuring a primary anchor performance parameter.
Sheir discloses a downhole system that includes an anchor 72 as well as a sensor 250 for measuring the force applied by the anchor [0068].
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 Hopkins to include a primary anchor sensor for measuring a primary anchor performance parameter, as taught by Sheir, in order to have been able to determine if the anchors were applying sufficient force to the wellbore wall to keep the tool string from moving. This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring that the tool string did not drop or move during the operation.
Regarding claim 3: Wherein the method comprises the step of the electronic section performing an automated check during the sequence of actions, the automated check uses at least one of the [0102], [0104], [0106] of Garcia.
Regarding claim 4: Wherein the automated check is performed after at least one of the following actions [0106], [0124], [0148], [0149] of Garcia – assessing if the core drilling operation has failed would include assessment at each point in the operation:
activating the primary anchor unit;
starting rotation of the drill bit;
displacing the drill bit in the radial direction;
retracting the drill bit into the drill unit;
stopping rotation of the drill bit; and
deactivating the primary anchor unit.
Regarding claim 11: Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the radial drilling tool string comprises a secondary anchor sensor, and including the electronic section performing an automated check during the sequence of actions using the secondary anchor sensor for measuring a secondary anchor performance parameter, the automated check is performed at least one of prior to activating the secondary anchor unit, while the secondary anchor unit is activated, and after deactivating the secondary anchor unit.
Sheir discloses a downhole system that includes an anchor 72 as well as a sensor 250 for measuring the force applied by the anchor [0068].
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 Hopkins to include a primary anchor sensor for measuring a primary anchor performance parameter, as taught by Sheir, in order to have been able to determine if the anchors were applying sufficient force to the wellbore wall to keep the tool string from moving. This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring that the tool string did not drop or move during the operation.
This modification would result in the electronic section performing an automated check during the sequence of actions using the secondary anchor sensor for measuring a secondary anchor performance parameter, the automated check is performed at least one of prior to activating the secondary anchor unit, while the secondary anchor unit is activated, and after deactivating the secondary anchor unit [0078], [0097], [0098], [0102], [0104], [0106], Fig 15.
Regarding claim 13: Hopkins, as modified, discloses that the primary anchor sensor, the radial drill unit sensor, an orientation sensor, a linear actuator sensor and a secondary anchor sensor each comprises at least one of an electric sensor, an electronic nodecard, a motor controller, and a hydraulic sensor.
Hopkins, as modified, fails to disclose the inclusion of a primary anchor sensor and a secondary anchor with a secondary anchor sensor.
Garcia discloses that the anchor 240 used there in can include one or more anchor modules [0088].
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 Hopkins to include a second anchor unit, as taught by Garcia, in order to have further stabilized the drilling unit in the well. This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring that the string and drilling unit did not shift during the operation thus causing damage to the well and the tool string.
Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the inclusion of a primary anchor sensor and a secondary anchor sensor.
Sheir discloses a downhole system that includes an anchor 72 as well as a sensor 250 for measuring the force applied by the anchor [0068].
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 Hopkins to include a primary anchor sensor and a secondary anchor sensor for measuring a primary anchor performance parameter and a secondary anchor performance parameter, as taught by Sheir, in order to have been able to determine if the anchors were applying sufficient force to the wellbore wall to keep the tool string from moving. This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring that the tool string did not drop or move during the operation.
Regarding claim 14: Wherein the electronics section provides an operator with a status of the automated check(s) via the visual display in the GUI [0149]-[0151], [0204], [0207] of Chen and stops the sequence of actions if any performance parameter is not within a predetermined limit or range during an action [0106], [0148], [0149] of Garcia.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hopkins in view of Garcia and Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Snyder (US 2013/0186687).
Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the GUI providing an operator with a "Stop drilling" visual button in the GUI, the "Stop drilling" button is adapted to program the electronic section with a stop-drilling sequence of actions to deactivate the radial drill unit such that the drill bit is retracted to a retracted configuration and rotation of the drill bit is stopped while at least the primary anchor unit remains active.
Snyder discloses a GUI used with wellbore drilling. The GUI 300 includes a “Stop” button Fig 3 that is used to stop the drilling operation [0166].
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 Hopkins so that the GUI included a “Stop” button, as taught by Snyder, in order to have been able to stop the drilling operation if needed [0166].
Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the deactivation of the radial drill unit involving retracting the drill bit to a retracted configuration and stopping the rotation of the drill bit while at least the primary anchor unit remains active.
However, if an assessment or check of the drilling operation [0102], [0104], [0106], [0148], [0149] of Garcia determined that there were problems or failures with the operation, the drilling would be stopped. Stoppage of the drilling would naturally involve stopping the rotation of the drill as this is the movement actually forming the hole in the wall.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that the stoppage would also involve all necessary steps to correct the drilling operation. This would have included retraction of the drill, maintaining the position of the tool string in the well (anchor remaining set), or moving the tool string in the well (anchor unset). This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring that the issue that caused the error in or failure of the drilling operation was corrected.
Claim(s) 24-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hopkins in view of Garcia, Chen, and Sheir.
Regarding claim 24: Hopkins discloses a radial drilling tool string Fig 1 for drilling a radial hole at 32 in a wellbore wall 12, Fig 1, 2, the radial drilling tool string is adapted to connect to a surface via an elongated flexible member 10 – Fig 1, the radial drilling tool string forms a longitudinal axis Fig 1, 2, the radial drilling tool string comprising:
an electronic section 16, 18, 20, 22,
an anchoring portion 28 comprising a primary anchor unit 30,
a drilling portion 26 comprising a radial drill unit 32; and
wherein the radial drill unit is adapted to rotate a drill bit [0094] and to displace [0094] and retract [0094] the drill bit in a radial direction in relation to the longitudinal axis Fig 2;
wherein the electronic section is adapted to actuate the tool string in a sequence of actions for controlling the radial drilling tool string to drill the radial hole in the wellbore wall [0093]-[0109].
Hopkins discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the drilling tool string including a primary anchor sensor is connected to the primary anchor unit for measuring the primary anchor performance parameter, the electronic section being programmable with a sequence of actions via a graphical user interface (GUI) and adapted for controlling the radial drilling tool string to drill the radial hole in the wellbore wall and, the electronic section being adapted to perform an automated check of a primary anchor performance parameter while performing the sequence of actions and either continue or stop the sequence of actions if the primary anchor performance parameter does not meet set ranges or limits.
Sheir discloses a downhole system that includes an anchor 72 as well as a sensor 250 for measuring the force applied by the anchor [0068].
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 Hopkins to include a primary anchor sensor for measuring a primary anchor performance parameter, as taught by Sheir, in order to have been able to determine if the anchors were applying sufficient force to the wellbore wall to keep the tool string from moving. This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring that the tool string did not drop or move during the operation.
Hopkins discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the electronic section being programmable with a sequence of actions via a graphical user interface (GUI) and adapted for controlling the radial drilling tool string to drill the radial hole in the wellbore wall and the electronic section being adapted to perform an automated check of a primary anchor performance parameter while performing the sequence of actions and either continue or stop the sequence of actions if the primary anchor performance parameter does not meet set ranges or limits.
Garcia discloses a system similar to that of Hopkins. Garcia discloses a radial drilling tool string 200 for drilling a radial hole [0031] in a wellbore wall Fig 2, the radial drilling tool string is connected to a surface via an elongated flexible member 112, the radial drilling tool string comprises:
an electronic section 220, 230/900, the electronic section including an input device 926 to receive input and commands from a human operator [0090], [0094] and an output device 928 – [0095],
an anchoring portion 240 comprising a primary anchor unit 242,
a drilling portion [0031] comprising a radial drill unit [0031],
wherein the radial drilling tool string forms a longitudinal axis Fig 2 and the radial drill unit is adapted to displace [0085] and retract [0085] a drill bit 514 in a radial direction in relation to the longitudinal axis Fig 9;
wherein the electronic section is programmable with a sequence of actions via a graphical user interface (GUI) and adapted for controlling the radial drilling tool string to drill the radial hole in the wellbore wall [0097], [0098], Fig 15;
wherein the electronic section is adapted to perform an automated check during the sequence of actions [0102], [0104], [0106], Fig 15.
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 Hopkins so that the electronic section was programmable with a sequence of actions for drilling the radial hole and adapted to perform automated checks on the operations, as taught by Garcia, in order to have been able to automatically perform the method of forming a radial hole based on data entered by a human operator [0097].
This modification would have resulted in perform an automated check of a primary anchor performance parameter while performing the sequence of actions and either continue or stop the sequence of actions if the primary anchor performance parameter does not meet set ranges or limits as this is part of the drilling operation of Hopkins, as modified.
Hopkins discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the electronic section being adapted to perform an automated check of a primary anchor performance parameter while performing the sequence of actions and either continue or stop the sequence of actions if the primary anchor performance parameter does not meet set ranges or limits.
Chen discloses a method for controlling the drilling of a well using a GUI 600, 900, 1000, 1100, that includes visual displays Fig 6, 9, 10, 11, to enter and control the sequence of operations involved in the drilling [0198].
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 Hopkins so that the electronic section was programmed by a GUI, as taught by Chen, in order to have been able to input needed data to establish the sequence, update that information, and include other information regarding operators and other activities [0152].
Regarding claim 25: Wherein the radial drilling tool string comprises at least two radial drill unit sensors [0036] of Hopkins – weight and torque connected to the radial drill unit for measuring a drill unit performance parameter [0036].
Regarding claim 26: Wherein the radial drilling tool string comprises an orientation tool 810 – [0078]-[0080] of Garcia adapted to be controlled by the electronic section, the orientation tool, when activated, is adapted to rotate the drilling portion around the longitudinal axis relative to the anchoring portion, and including orienting the drilling portion in relation to the anchoring portion [0143], [0145] of Garcia.
Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the orientation tool being rigidly connected to the anchoring portion in one end and rigidly connected to the drilling portion in an opposite end.
However, 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 Hopkins so that the orientation tool was rigidly connected to the anchoring portion in one end and rigidly connected to the drilling portion in an opposite end, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 27: Wherein the radial drilling tool string comprises an orientation tool sensor for measuring an orientation tool performance parameter [0044], [0079], [0092] of Hopkins; [0080] of Garcia.
Regarding claim 28: Hopkins, as modified, discloses all of the limitations of the above claim(s) except the radial drilling tool string comprising a secondary anchor unit within the drilling portion, and the method comprises setting the secondary anchor unit prior to drilling the radial hole.
Garcia discloses that the anchor 240 used there in can include one or more anchor modules [0088].
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 Hopkins to include a second anchor unit, as taught by Garcia, in order to have further stabilized the drilling unit in the well. This would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring that the string and drilling unit did not shift during the operation thus causing damage to the well and the tool string.
Regarding claim 29: The above modification to include a secondary anchor unit, as taught by Garcia, would have resulted in a secondary anchor sensor for measuring a secondary anchor performance parameter. The inclusion of anchor sensors is considered obvious over Sheir as indicated above with respect to claim 24.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is 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:
The prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest an electronic section that uses an iterative loop to orient a drill bit to a programmed orientation, and if programmed orientation, during orientation, is overshoot or undershoot, the iterative loop uses a measured overshoot or undershoot value between the programmed orientation and the measured orientation during a subsequent attempt to orient the drill bit to the programmed orientation 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
2/26/2026