Appeal No. 97-1628
Application No. 08/442,610
interface between the casing and the cement, which results in
a compression wave component moving through the cement. It is
this compression wave that is reflected back if it strikes an
anomaly in the cement. The examiner finds on page 2 of the
Answer that:
The difference between [the appellants’] claims . .
. and the Broding system lies in the energy that is
propagated in the cement (annulus between the casing
and the formation). In the instant claims, shear
acoustic energy is reflected from the “surface”,
received and therefore interpreted. In Broding,
compressional acoustic energy is reflected at an
anomaly (surface), received and thereafter
interpreted (emphasis added).
The examiner goes on to take the position that Vogel teaches
“that in cement bond studies shear wave measurements are
preferable to compressional wave measurements” (Answer, page
2), from which the examiner concludes that it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Broding
by replacing the compressional wave system with one using
shear waves (Answer, page 3). The appellants dispute this
conclusion, arguing that the examiner has erroneously
interpreted the teachings of Vogel, that there would have been
no suggestion to combine the teachings of the two references
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007