Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.Download PDFPatent Trials and Appeals BoardOct 1, 20212021000123 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 1, 2021) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 15/323,836 01/04/2017 Xingyong Song 164.2015- IPM-098381 U1 US 2140 138627 7590 10/01/2021 Gilliam IP PLLC (Halliburton) 7200 N. Mopac Suite 440 Austin, TX 78731 EXAMINER TRAN, TONY ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2894 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 10/01/2021 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address(es): uspto@gilliamip.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte XINGYONG SONG, and JASON D. DYKSTRA __________ Appeal 2021-000123 Application 15/323,836 Technology Center 2800 ____________ Before MICHAEL P. COLAIANNI, JEFFREY R. SNAY, and DEBRA L. DENNETT, Administrative Patent Judges. COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellant1 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 the final rejection of claims 9−16, 21, and 22. We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We REVERSE. Appellant’s invention is directed to a system that estimates the properties of drilling mud located downhole by using real-time data, estimated drilling mud properties and mathematical models (Spec. ¶ 5). Claim 9 is illustrative: 1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. (Appeal Br. 3). Appeal 2021-000123 Application 15/323,836 2 A system comprising: a mud circulation system having a drilling mud flowing therethrough; a plurality of sensors including a flow metric sensor and a drilling mud property sensor coupled to the mud circulation system; and a control system including a non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors of the control system to: receive a plurality of measurements acquired by the plurality of sensors including at least one drilling mud flow dynamic and at least one drilling mud property; determine a set of flow dynamics values for the mud circulation system based on a dynamics model; determine a set of drilling mud property predictions based on the set of determined flow dynamics values; determine a difference between the set of drilling mud property predictions and one or more of the plurality of measurements; generate a fusion-determined drilling mud physical state value based on a gain value and the difference between the set of drilling mud property predictions and the one or more of the plurality of measurements; and change an operational parameter of the mud circulation system based on the fusion-determined drilling mud physical state value. Appellant appeals the following rejections: 1. Claims 9−16, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)–(2) as anticipated by Hemsing (US 8,839,668 B2, iss. Sept. 23, 2014). 2. Claims 9−16, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)−(2) as anticipated by Aldred (US 2011/0220410 Al, pub. Sept. 15, 2011). FINDINGS OF FACT & ANALYSIS We review the appealed rejection for reversible error based on the arguments and evidence presented by Appellant. 37 C.F.R. Appeal 2021-000123 Application 15/323,836 3 § 41.37(c)(1)(iv); Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1075 (BPAI 2010) (precedential) cited with approval in In re Jung, 637 F.3d 1356, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (explaining that even if the Examiner had failed to make a prima facie case, “it has long been the Board’s practice to require an applicant to identify the alleged error in the examiner’s rejections”). Appellant argues that Hemsing’s teachings do not relate to mud circulation (Appeal Br. 11). Appellant argues that Hemsing does not disclose a system configured to measure properties of mud flow and generate estimations of physical properties of the mud flow based on the measurements (Appeal Br. 11). Appellant argues that none of the measurement or estimation operations in Hemsing relate to drilling mud property predictions (Appeal Br. 13). Appellant contends that it is improper to equate Hemsing’s estimation of flow rate during build up or draw down operations with estimation of drilling mud properties (Appeal Br. 13). We agree. The Examiner finds Hemsing teaches a control system where sensors measure at least one drilling mud flow dynamic (pressure or temperature) and at least one drilling mud property (viscosity and density) (Final Act. 5). The Examiner finds Hemsing teaches at column 5, lines 21−35 determining a set of flow dynamic values where sensors measure pressure, temperature, viscosity, and density of the fluid (Final Act. 5). The Examiner further finds Hemsing teaches at column 12, lines 20−40 changing an operational parameter of the mud circulation system based on the fusion-determined drilling mud physical state value (Final Act. 6). Hemsing’s teachings relied upon by the Examiner refer to a drawdown and build-up variable (Final Act. 4−6). Hemsing discloses that Appeal 2021-000123 Application 15/323,836 4 the invention is directed to testing formation pressures along a wellbore with a formation isolation device (col. 1, ll. 7-−0, 62−66). Hemsing teaches the formation isolation device includes a probe 50 and a snorkel 54 for isolating a portion of the borehole wall to obtain formation fluids through a port on the tool 10 (col. 3, ll. 47−52). Hemsing discloses moving piston 52 as part of probe 50 to create a volume expansion in the flowline 22 and permit reservoir fluid to flow into a low pressure region (col. 4, ll. 31−37). Once the piston is stopped, reservoir fluid continues to flow into flowline 22 and pressure builds up in the line (i.e., the “buildups” in Hemsing) (col. 4, ll. 49−56). Hemsing discloses the importance of obtaining uncontaminated fluids with the probe 50 by forming a good seal of the isolation device with the borewall (col. 5, ll. 11−16). Hemsing teaches drilling mud is considered a contaminant in the fluid and the instrument can analyze the fluid to determine when the fluid is primarily formation fluid (i.e., fluid from the side of the wellbore) (col. 5, ll. 14−22). Based upon Hemsing’s teachings, we agree with Appellant that Hemsing fails to teach a system that tests drilling mud. Hemsing, rather, teaches to test the formation fluid acquired from the wall of the wellbore to acquire properties of that fluid. Drilling mud according to Hemsing is a contaminant to be avoided. On this record, we reverse the Examiner’s § 102(a)(1)−(2) rejection of claims 9−16, 21, and 22 over Hemsing. Regarding Aldred, Appellant argues Aldred does not teach the data segmentations relate to prediction of drilling mud properties (Appeal Br. 15). Appellant contends the Examiner’s rejection does not even mention prediction or fusion in the context of Aldred’s teachings (Appeal Br. 15). Appeal 2021-000123 Application 15/323,836 5 Appellant contends that Aldred’s estimations relate to drilling angles, not drilling mud properties (Appeal Br. 15−16). We agree. The Examiner finds Aldred teaches a drilling system that includes a mud circulation system having a plurality of sensors (Final Act. 9). The Examiner finds Aldred teaches a flow metric sensor and a drilling mud property sensor that include measuring direction, inclination, survey data, downhole pressure, resistivity, density, and porosity (Final Act. 9). The Examiner finds that pressure and resistivity “could be considered” a flow metric and density and porosity “could be considered” a drilling mud property (Final Act. 9). Aldred teaches a mud circulation pump is used as part of a drilling operation (¶¶ 62−64). Aldred teaches various sensors may be placed on the drilling rig to take measurements from the drilling equipment (¶ 65). The sensors may include a hookload sensor, a block sensor, surface torque sensor, and a standpipe pressure sensor (¶ 65). The standpipe pressure sensor detects mud pulses traveling up the drill string (¶ 65). Aldred teaches monitoring the mud pit 78 for evidence of a sudden influx of fluids (i.e., a kick) in the system (¶ 75). Aldred discloses using a series of models to determine a real-time determination of a changepoint rather than relying on a retrospective analysis (¶ 87). Aldred teaches using the technique for determining rate-of-penetration for the drilling operation and that the technology can be used for other structures or parameters (¶160). Aldred exemplifies that the technology may be used for roller cone bits and other drilling processes (¶ 160). Although the Examiner finds that Aldred’s teaching of measuring porosity and density “could be” related to drilling mud, the Examiner does Appeal 2021-000123 Application 15/323,836 6 not direct us to where Aldred teaches within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 102 the claimed system that uses a control system as recited in claim 9. The portions of Aldred cited by the Examiner do not teach a system that monitors and controls drilling mud properties or values as recited by the control system in claim 9 (Final Act. 9−10). Although, Aldred teaches using the control technology for other structures or parameters, Aldred does not teach that drilling mud control is one of the examples (Aldred ¶¶ 59, 160). The Examiner has not established that Aldred’s teachings anticipate the system of claim 9. We reverse the Examiner’s § 102(a)(1)−(2) rejections of claims 9−16, 21, and 22 over Hemising, and Aldred. DECISION Claims Rejected 35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed 9−16, 21, 22 102(a)(1)−(2) Hemsing 9−16, 21, 22 9−16, 21, 22 102(a)(1)−(2) Aldred 9−16, 21,22 ORDER REVERSED Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation