Appeal No. 97-1628
Application No. 08/442,610
It is our conclusion that Broding and Vogel fail to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the
subject matter recited in the appellants’ claims, and
therefore the rejection cannot be sustained.
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
As explained in the specification, and with particular
attention to Figure 3A, the appellants’ invention comprises a
transmitter and a receiver located within a steel casing 115,
which is filled with fluid (drilling mud) 121. Cement 119
surrounds the casing, filling the space between the casing and
the earth 117 in which the borehole is located. As shown in
Figure 1, fluid anomalies also can exist within the cement,
such as channels 129, 131, and 133. From the explanation
beginning on page 7 of the specification, it would appear that
in the process of interrogating the various substances and the
interfaces therebetween, the shear energy components of the
acoustic signal must travel though areas of fluid. This is
carried forward in the claims, many of which require that
shear acoustic energy be propagated “within the casing” and
“beyond the casing” (i.e. claim 39), and some also require
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007