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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/24/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Applicant’s Amendment filed on 07/01/2016 in which claims 1 and 15 have been amended, claims 8-14, and 20 have been withdrawn, claims 21-23 have been canceled and entered of record.
Claims 1-7, 15-19, and 24 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 05/22/2026 was considered.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims 1 and 15 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection below.
Examiner’s Note:
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7, 15-19, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, lines 11-14 recite “a ground check circuit that is operatively coupled to the second circuit breaker and is configured to verify electrical connectivity between the power storage system and the microgrid, the ground check circuit configured to prevent closure of the second circuit breaker upon detection of an open circuit condition”. The specification only has support for “If the ground check senses an open circuit” [0017]. The specification does not specifically disclose “verify electrical connectivity between the power storage system and the microgrid”.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is rejected similar to claim 1 above.
Regarding claims 2-7, 16-19, and 24, the claims are rejected due to the rejections of claims 1 and 15 above.
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 1-7, 15-19, and 24 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 1, lines 12-14 recite “the ground check circuit configured to prevent closure of the second circuit breaker” indicates the circuit is not in a closed position. When it combined with the previous limitation “configured to verify electrical connectivity between the power storage system and the microgrid” (which is not support by the disclosure), the limitation is unclear because if the second circuit breaker is not closed, the connectivity between the power storage system and the microgrid always be open. Therefore, the storage system would ever connect to the microgrid, thus the scope of the claim is unclear. For examination purpose, the limitation will be construed as “a ground check circuit that is operatively coupled to the second circuit breaker and is configured to verify electrical connectivity
Regarding claim 15, the claim is rejected similar to claim 1 above.
Regarding claims 2-7, 16-19, and 24, the claims are rejected due to the rejections of claims 1 and 15 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1-5, 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buiel, US Patent Publication 20090195074; hereinafter “Buiel” in view of WILLIAMS, US Patent Publication 2012/0292992; hereinafter “WILLIAMS”, further in view of Haines et al. US Patent Publication 20170054286; hereinafter “Haines”, and further in view of Cryer et al., US Patent Publication 2014/0010671; hereinafter “Cryer”.
Regarding claim 1, Buiel discloses a drilling system (Fig. 4 and 10), comprising:
a generator (Fig. 10, 80);
a power storage system (Fig. 10, 90 and 92) comprising a chargeable power storage device (Fig. 10, 92) [0079];
one or more fracturing system components (Fig. 10, 100);
a microgrid (Fig. 10) comprising:
a first circuit breaker (Fig. 10, CB GEN 86), wherein the generator provides power to the microgrid via the first circuit breaker (Fig. 10, G provide energy to the system through CB GEN 86); and
a second circuit breaker, wherein the power storage system is electrically coupled to the second circuit breaker to controllably supply power to or receive power from the microgrid [0079] via the second circuit breaker;
a ground check circuit that is operatively coupled to the second circuit breaker and is configured to verify electrical connectivity between the power storage system and the microgrid, the ground check circuit configured to prevent closure of the second circuit breaker upon detection of an open circuit condition;
one or more feeder breakers (Fig. 10, breakers between Main AC Bus and drawworks 100), the one or more feeder breakers configured to selectively energize the one or more fracturing system components (Fig. 10, breakers are for controlling power to the drawworks 100); and
a common bus (Fig. 10, Main AC Bus) connected to the first (Fig. 10, 86) and second circuit breakers and to the one or more feeder breakers (Fig. 10, breakers between Main AC Bus and drawworks 100), wherein the common bus is configured to provide load sharing between the generator and the power storage system and to distribute power to the fracturing system components [0075]-[0079], and wherein the first circuit breaker, the second circuit breaker, and the common bus are housed within a switchgear system,
Buiel does not disclose a second circuit breaker for controlling the storage system to controllably supply power to or receive power from the microgrid. WILLIAMS discloses a second circuit breaker (Fig. 3, 152) is electrically coupled to a storage system from the po (Fig. 3, 150) to controllably supply power to or receive power from [0076] [0078] a microgrid (Fig. 3, 84). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Buiel to incorporate the teaching of WILLIAMS and provide a second circuit breaker and have wherein the power storage system is electrically coupled to the second circuit breaker to controllably supply power to or receive power from the microgrid via the second circuit breaker. Doing so would allow the battery bank to be connected to and disconnected from the microgrid to avoid any leakage current between the storage system and the microgrid when the storage system is not being used.
The combination of Buiel and WILLIAMS does not disclose a ground check circuit. Haines discloses a power distribution system having a ground check circuit (Fig. 1, 158) that is operatively a circuit breaker (Fig. 1, 178) and is configured to verify an electrical connectivity [0179], the ground check circuit configured to prevent closure of the second circuit breaker upon detection of an open circuit condition [0179]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Buiel and WILLIAMS to incorporate the teaching of Haines and provide a ground check circuit that is operatively coupled to the second circuit breaker and is configured to verify electrical connectivity between the power storage system and the microgrid, the ground check circuit configured to prevent closure of the second circuit breaker upon detection of an open circuit condition. Doing so would protect the system from ground fault.
The combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS and Haines generally discloses electrical power system for drill rigs. The combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS and Haines does not explicitly disclose the electrical power system for a fracturing system; and wherein the first circuit breaker, the second circuit breaker, and the common bus are housed within a switchgear system. Cryer discloses a power system for supplying power to a fracture system, a newer technique for extracting oil and nature gas (Fig. 4) [0056]; and wherein the first circuit breaker, the second circuit breaker, and the common bus are housed within a switchgear system (Fig. 1, 110) [0040]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS and Haines to incorporate the teaching of Cryer and use the power supply system in a fracture system, and have the first circuit breaker, the second circuit breaker, and the common bus are housed within a switchgear system since the facture system is the newer technique of extracting oil and gas. Doing so would allow applying the exiting power management having maximum efficiency to minimize waste electricity through resistive load, prolong the life of the generators in the newer technique of extracting oil and nature gas and the circuit breakers is being control within the system without loss through long connectivity when the circuit displaced outside of the system.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the fracturing system of claim 1 above, Buiel further discloses the chargeable power storage device is a solid state battery, a flow battery, a flywheel, or a capacitor [0076].
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the fracturing system of claim 1 above, Buiel further discloses the chargeable power storage device is configured to power the one or more fracturing system component during conditions in which the generator is down [0019].
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the fracturing system of claim 1 above, Buiel further discloses the generator is configured to charge the chargeable power storage device when the first and second circuit breakers are both closed [0019].
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the fracturing system of claim 1 above, WILLIAMS further discloses the chargeable power storage device is configured to disconnect from receiving power from the generator when the one or more fracturing system components draw power ([0050] “(1) producing power from an dual fuel engine/generator so as to produce an AC power output; (2) providing an energy storage system switchably connected to the load; and (3) switching power supplied to the load between one or both of the dual fuel engine/generators and the energy storage system based upon a power requirements of the load” indicate the load consuming only from the generator and the energy storage being switched off during the load consuming power from the generator and only turn-on to supplement power based on the load requirement i.e. the generator output is insufficient provide power to the load).
Regarding claim 15, Buiel discloses a method of powering a fracturing system (Fig. 4 and 10) [0035], comprising:
supplying power, via a common bus (Fig. 10, Main AC Bus), from a generator (Fig. 10, 80) to one or more components (Fig. 10, 100) of the fracturing system, the generator connected to the common bus via a first circuit breaker (Fig. 10, G provide energy to the system through CB GEN 86), the one or more components of the fracturing system connected to the common bus via one or more feeder breakers (Fig. 10, breakers between drawworks motor 100 and Main AC Bus), each of the one or more feeder breakers configured to selectively energize the one or more fracturing system components ([0075] teaches controlling CB 86 but not the CB between the main AC bus 104 and the motors 100);
verifying, via a ground check circuit coupled to a second circuit breaker, electrical continuity between a power storage system and the common bus prior to closure of the second circuit breaker, wherein the first circuit breaker. the second circuit breaker, and the common bus are housed within a switchgear system;
charging, via the common bus, [[a]] the power storage system (Fig. 10, 90 and 92) from the generator during one or more conditions in which the load requirement of the one or more components of the fracturing system is below a set point ([0019] highest state of efficiency is the set point), the power storage system connected to the common bus via [[a]] the second circuit breaker; and
supplying, via the common bus (Fig. 10, Main AC Bus), power to the one or more components of the fracturing system from both the generator (Fig. 10, 80) and the power storage system (Fig. 10, 90 and 92) during one or more conditions in which the load requirement of the one or more components of the fracturing system is above the set point ([0019] [0020] peak saving function is known in the art that using local battery for supplying additional power when a main power is at its peak, in this case the two generators G).
Buiel discloses controlling CB 86 but not the CB between the main AC bus 104 and the motors 100 [0075]. Therefore, Buiel does not explicitly disclose each of the one or more feeder breakers configured to selectively energize the one or more fracturing system components. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the circuit breaker since the circuit breakers CB 86 between the generator 80 and main AC bus is being controlled to selectively connecting the generator 80 to the main AC bus, therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the CB between the main AC bus 104 and the motors 100 must be controlled for connecting or disconnecting the main AC bus 104 and the motors 100.
Buiel does not disclose a second circuit breaker for controlling the storage system to controllably supply power to or receive power from the microgrid. WILLIAMS discloses a power storage system (Fig. 3, 150) connected to the common bus (Fig. 3, 84) via a circuit breaker (Fig. 3, 152). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Buiel to incorporate the teaching of WILLIAMS and provide a second circuit breaker and have the power storage system connected to the common bus via a second circuit breaker. Doing so would allow the battery bank to be connected to and disconnected from the microgrid to avoid any leakage current between the storage system and the microgrid when the storage system is not being used.
The combination of Buiel and WILLIAMS does not disclose a ground check circuit. Haines discloses a power distribution system having a ground check circuit (Fig. 1, 158) that is coupled to a circuit breaker (Fig. 1, 178) and is configured to verify an electrical connectivity [0179], the ground check circuit configured to prevent closure of the second circuit breaker upon detection of an open circuit condition [0179]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Buiel and WILLIAMS to incorporate the teaching of Haines and provide a ground check circuit that is operatively coupled to the second circuit breaker and is configured to verify electrical connectivity between the power storage system and the microgrid, the ground check circuit configured to prevent closure of the second circuit breaker upon detection of an open circuit condition. Doing so would protect the system from ground fault.
The combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS and Haines generally discloses electrical power system for drill rigs. The combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS and Haines does not explicitly disclose the electrical power system for a fracturing system; and wherein the first circuit breaker, the second circuit breaker, and the common bus are housed within a switchgear system. Cryer discloses a power system for supplying power to a fracture system, a newer technique for extracting oil and nature gas (Fig. 4) [0056]; and wherein the first circuit breaker, the second circuit breaker, and the common bus are housed within a switchgear system (Fig. 1, 110) [0040]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS and Haines to incorporate the teaching of Cryer and use the power supply system in a fracture system, and have the first circuit breaker, the second circuit breaker, and the common bus are housed within a switchgear system since the facture system is the newer technique of extracting oil and gas. Doing so would allow applying the exiting power management having maximum efficiency to minimize waste electricity through resistive load, prolong the life of the generators in the newer technique of extracting oil and nature gas and the circuit breakers is being control within the system without loss through long connectivity when the circuit displaced outside of the system.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the method of claim 15 above, Buiel further discloses the power storage system includes a chargeable power storage device (Fig. 10, 92) [0079].
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the method of claim 15 above, Buiel also discloses the method further comprising:
supplying power to the one or more components of the fracturing system from the power storage system during conditions in which the generator is down [0019].
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the method of claim 15 above, WILLIAMS also discloses the power storage device disconnects from receiving power from the generator when the one or more fracturing system components draw power ([0050] “(1) producing power from an dual fuel engine/generator so as to produce an AC power output; (2) providing an energy storage system switchably connected to the load; and (3) switching power supplied to the load between one or both of the dual fuel engine/generators and the energy storage system based upon a power requirements of the load” indicate the load consuming only from the generator and the energy storage being switched off during the load consuming power from the generator and only turn-on to supplement power based on the load requirement i.e. the generator output is insufficient provide power to the load).
Claim(s) 6, 19 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer in view of Bosley et al., US Patent Publication 2001/0052704; hereinafter “Bosley”.
Regarding claims 6 and 19, the combination of combination Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the fracturing system and the method of claims 1 and 15 above, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer does not explicitly disclose the power storage device is configured to provide power and starters for one or more generators. Bosley discloses a system battery provide power to start a generator [0075] [0077]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer to incorporate the teaching of Bosley and use the battery bank to start the generators. Doing so would eliminate extra batteries at the generators.
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the fracturing system of claim 1 above, wherein the power storage system (Buiel Fig. 10, energy storage 92) is electrically coupled to the second circuit breaker (WILLIAMS Fig. 3, energy storage 150 coupled with contactor 152 as combined in claim 1 above) controllably supply power to or receive power from the generator (Buiel discloses the generator provide power to energy storage 92 [0077]) via the second circuit breaker (through the contactor 150 disclosed by WILLIAMS as combined in claim 1 above). The combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer does not explicitly disclose the power storage device is configured to provide power to the generator. Bosley discloses a system battery provide power to a generator to start the generator [0075] [0077]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer to incorporate the teaching of Bosley and use the battery bank to start the generators. Doing so would eliminate extra batteries at the generators.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer in view of WILLIAMS, US Patent Publication 2013/0271083; hereinafter “WILLIAMS ‘083”.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer discloses the fracturing system of claim 1, combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer does not disclose the fracturing system further comprising: one or more additional power storage systems coupled to the microgrid. WILLIAMS ‘083 discloses power system comprising one or more additional power storage systems (Fig. 3, 70 and 72) coupled to a microgrid (Fig. 3,86). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Buiel, WILLIAMS, Haines and Cryer to incorporate the teaching of WILLIAMS ‘083 and provide one or more additional power storage systems coupled to the microgrid. Doing so would allow the system extending the UPS time if the generator is offline due to longer maintenance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI H TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0668. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:30 - 5:00.
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, Rexford Barney can be reached at 571-272-7492. 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.
/THAI H TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights