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 .
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) 1,3-13,21-26,29-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hopper (US 20050055163) in view of Carlson et al. (US 20160312602)
With regard to Claim 1, Hopper teaches a system comprising: (a) a processor unit (paragraph 70; processor on rig); and (b) at least one tool that is connectible to a subsea riser (paragraphs 84-85), the at least one tool is operatively communicable with the processor unit (paragraph 70), wherein the at least one tool is configured to detect a perturbation in a magnetic field that is proximal the at least one tool and to generate a perturbation signal that is communicable to the processor unit (paragraphs 70,84-85; Figures).
Hopper discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Hopper is silent about including at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members.
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hopper to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (80,81, see Figs. 1,10) of Hopper is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson. It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the riser or wellhead of Hopper. The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead
With regard to claims 3,5-8, 21-23,26, (see paragraphs 70,84-85; Figures of Hopper, Figs. 1-4, para 0026-0034 of Carlson).
With regards to claim 4, processor unit is positioned subsea (para 86, Fig. 10 of Hopper or Fig. 1 of Carlson)
With regard to claim 9, see (Figs. 1-4 of Carlson) teach the claimed tool.
Re claim 10, the tool array is positioned about the tubular portion (see Figs. 1-4 of Carlson).
Re claim 11, wherein the tubular portion is constructed of a non-magnetic material (see abstract of Carlson)
Re claim 12, wherein the non-magnetic material is a 316 stainless steel, a 360 stainless steel, nitronic 50 stainless steel, a 625 Inconel, a 718 Inconel, aluminum, one or more polymers, a plastic and combinations thereof (para 0034 of Carlson).
With regard to claim 13, wherein the tool array is configured to generate the magnetic field (see paragraphs 70,84-85 of Hopper and Figs. 1-4, para 0026-0034 of Carlson).
Re claim 24, wherein the perturbation in the magnetic field is caused by changing a physical dimension of a portion of the body that is within or proximal to the magnetic field (92, Hopper).
Re claim 25, wherein the at least one tool is further configured to generate a deviation-from-center signal and the at least one tool is configured to communicate the deviation-from-center signal to the processor or the input and display device (para 0084, Fig. 11 of Hopper).
With regard to claim 29, Hopper teaches a method of drilling or intervening on a subsea well, the method comprising steps of: (a) connecting a riser between an offshore vessel and a blowout preventer stack of a subsea wellhead (see Fig. 1); (b) generating a magnetic field above, within or below the blowout preventer stack (paragraphs 84-85); (c) detecting a perturbation in the magnetic field(paragraphs 70,84-85; Figures).; and
( d) communicating a perturbation in the magnetic field signal to a processor, wherein the perturbation in the magnetic field is caused by a body moving into, through or away from the magnetic field(paragraphs 70,84-85; Figures).
Hopper discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Hopper is silent about including at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members.
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hopper to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Fig. 10) of Hopper is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson. It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the riser or wellhead of Hopper. The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
With regard to claim 30-31, (see paragraphs 84-85 of Hopper) teach the claimed sensor above the BOP.
Claim(s) 14-20, 32,33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hopper in view of Carlson as applied to claim 1, 29 above, and further in view of Markel et al. ‘512
Hopper (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Hopper (as modified above) is silent wherein the at least one tool comprises a first tool that is connectible to a lubricator that is positioned on the offshore vessel. Markel et al. teaches wherein at least one tool comprises a first tool (para 0011, 0032-0040, para 0015, 0043) that is connectible to a lubricator (32) that is positioned on the offshore vessel.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hopper (as modified above) to have the tool connectible to a lubricator that is positioned on the offshore vessel as taught by Markel et al. since such a modification allows for a tool to be installed under high pressure.
With regard to claim 15, a second tool (80,81 Fig. 10 of Hopper).
Re claim 16, Hopper (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Hopper (as modified by Carlson) is silent about including a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment. Markel et al. teaches including a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment (see para 10,11; claims 1,3).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hopper (as modified above) to include a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment as taught by Markel et al. since such a modification would be based on users desire for information at the various locations
such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 17, wherein the third tool is connectible to the subsea wellhead above, within or below a subsea blowout preventer stack of the subsea wellhead (see discussion above with respect to Markel).
Re claim 18, wherein the at least one tool comprises a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from one or more properties of a subsea environment (see discussion above with regards to claim 15).
Re claim 19, wherein the at least one tool further comprises a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a further subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment (see discussion of claim 16 above).
Re claim 20, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hopper (as modified above) to have the second tool replace with the tool taught by Carlson
wherein the subsea housing is constructed of a material that does not perturb the magnetic field (see abstract, para 0007 and claim 1 of Carlson) since such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the riser or wellhead of Hopper.
With regards to claim 32, Hopper (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Hopper (as modified by Carlson) is silent wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs within the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location. Markel teaches
the step of generating a magnetic field occurs within a blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location (see para 0010, 0011, claims 1,3). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hopper (as modified above) to include another tool (as taught by the combination of Hopper and Carlson)
wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs within the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location as taught by Markel since such a modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
With regards to claim 33, Hopper (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Hopper (as modified by Carlson) is silent
wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs below the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location.
Markel teaches the step of generating the magnetic field occurs below the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location (see para 0010, 0011, claims 1,3). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hopper (as modified above) to include a another tool (as taught by the combination of Hopper and Carlson) wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs below the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location as Markel since such a modification would be based on users desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead (below BOP).
Claim(s) 1,3-13, 21-26,29-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plotnikov et al. (US 20180252092) in view of Carlson et al. ‘602
Plotnikov discloses a system comprising: a processor unit (see Figs. 1-6, para 0048-0049); at least one tool (200) that is connectible inline with a lubricator on an offshore vessel, a subsea riser, or a subsea wellhead (see para 0029-0031), the at least one tool is operatively communicable with the processor unit, wherein the at least one tool is configured to detect a perturbation in a magnetic field that is proximal the at least one tool and to generate a perturbation signal that is communicable to the processor unit, wherein the at least one tool is configured to generate the magnetic field that extends at least partially through a central bore of the lubricator, a central bore of the subsea riser, or a central bore of the subsea wellhead (212, 214, 216, Para 0034+). Plotnikov discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Plotnikov et al. is silent about including at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members.
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Plotnikov et al. to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Figs 2-6) of Plotnikov is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson. It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the riser or wellhead of Plotnikov (para 0031). The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 3, wherein the processor unit is positioned on the offshore vessel (para 0048, Plotnikov).
Re claim 4, wherein the processor unit is positioned subsea (see Fig. 6 and para 0048,0049 of Plotnikov; Fig. 1 of Carlson).
Re claim 5, wherein the processor unit comprises a processor that is configured to generate a command for the at least one tool to generate the magnetic field and wherein this command is receivable by the at least one tool and wherein the at least one tool is configured to generate the magnetic field upon receipt of said command from the processor (see para 0031-0049, Figs. 1-6 of Plotnikov, Figs. 1-4, para 0026-0034 of Carlson).
With regard to claims 6-8, 21-23,26, (see para 0031-0049, Figs. 1-6 of Plotnikov, Figs. 1-4, para 0026-0034 of Carlson) teach the claimed magnetic field and processor/display location.
With regard to claim 9, see (Figs. 4,5 of Plotnikov, Figs. 1-4 of Carlson) teach the claimed tool.
Re claim 10, the tool array is positioned about the tubular portion (Figs. 4,5 of Plotnikov, see Figs. 1-4 of Carlson).
Re claim 11, wherein the tubular portion is constructed of a non-magnetic material (see para 0038, 0039 of Plotnikov, see abstract of Carlson)
Re claim 12, wherein the non-magnetic material is a 316 stainless steel, a 360 stainless steel, nitronic 50 stainless steel, a 625 Inconel, a 718 Inconel, aluminum, one or more polymers, a plastic and combinations thereof (para 0038, 0039 of Plotnikov, para 0034 of Carlson).
Re claim 13, the tool array is configured to generate the magnetic field (para 0026-0053 of Plotnikov, Figs. 1-4, para 0026-0034 of Carlson).
Re claim 24, wherein the perturbation in the magnetic field is caused by changing a physical dimension of a portion of the body that is within or proximal to the magnetic field (210, paragraphs 0046+ of Plotnikov).
Re claim 25, wherein the at least one tool is further configured to generate a deviation-from-center signal and the at least one tool is configured to communicate the deviation-from-center signal to the processor or the input and display device (see Fig. 2 of Plotnikov).
Re claim 29. Plotnikov discloses a method of drilling or intervening on a subsea well, the method comprising steps of: (a) connecting a riser between an offshore vessel and a blowout preventer stack of a subsea wellhead (see Fig. 1 of Plotnikov), generating a magnetic field above, within or below the blowout preventer stack; (see Figs. 1-6, para see para 0029-0031), detecting a perturbation in the magnetic field (see Figs. 1-6, para 0048-0049, see para 0029-0031),
(d) communicating a perturbation in the magnetic field signal to a processor (see Figs. 1-6, para 0048-0049, see para 0029-0031), wherein the perturbation in the magnetic field is caused by a body moving into, through or away from the magnetic field.
Plotnikov discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Plotnikov et al. is silent about including at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (riser to BOP).
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Plotnikov et al. to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Figs 2-6) of Plotnikov is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson. It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the BOP or the riser or wellhead of Plotnikov (para 0031). The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 30, wherein the step of generating a magnetic field occurs above to the blowout preventer stack, distal to the blowout preventer stack and about the riser and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location (see para 0031 of Plotnikov).
Re claim 31, wherein the step of generating a magnetic field occurs above and proximal to the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location (see para 0031 of Plotnikov).
Re claim 32, wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs within the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location
(see Figs. 1-6, para 0048-0049, see para 0029-0031 of Plotnikov).
Re claim 33, wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs below the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location (see Figs. 1-6, para 0048-0049, see para 0029-0031 of Plotnikov).
Claim(s) 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plotnikov in view of Carlson as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Markel et al. ‘512
Plotnikov (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Plotnikov (as modified above) is silent wherein the at least one tool comprises a first tool that is connectible to a lubricator that is positioned on the offshore vessel. Markel et al. teaches wherein at least one tool comprises a first tool (para 0011, 0032-0040, para 0015, 0043) that is connectible to a lubricator (32) that is positioned on the offshore vessel.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Plotnikov (as modified above) to have the tool connectible to a lubricator that is positioned on the offshore vessel as taught by Markel et al. since such a modification allows for a tool to be installed under high pressure.
Re claim 15, Plotnikov (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Plotnikvo (as modified by Carlson) is silent about including a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from a subsea environment. Markel et al. teaches including a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from a subsea environment (see para 10,11; claims 1,3).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Plotnikov (as modified above) to include a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from a subsea environment as taught by Markel et al. since such a modification would be based on users desire for information at the various locations
such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 16, Plotnikov (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Plotnikov (as modified by Carlson) is silent about including a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment. Markel et al. teaches including a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment (see para 10,11; claims 1,3).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Plotnikov (as modified above) to include a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment as taught by Markel et al. since such a modification would be based on users desire for information at the various locations
such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 17, wherein the third tool is connectible to the subsea wellhead above, within or below a subsea blowout preventer stack of the subsea wellhead (see Markel).
Re claim 18, wherein the at least one tool comprises a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from one or more properties of a subsea environment (see discussion above with regards to claim 15).
Re claim 19, wherein the at least one tool further comprises a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a further subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment (see discussion of claim 16 above).
Re claim 20, wherein the subsea housing is constructed of a material that does not perturb the magnetic field (see para 0038,0039 of Plotnikov, see abstract, para 0007 and claim 1 of Carlson).
Claim(s) 27,34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plotnikov et al. (US 20180252092) in view of Carlson et al. ‘’602 and Sbordone ‘835
Plotnikov discloses a system comprising: a processor unit (see Figs. 1-6, para 0048-0049); at least one tool (200) that is connectible inline with a BOP, a subsea riser, or a subsea wellhead (see para 0029-0031), the at least one tool is operatively communicable with the processor unit, wherein the at least one tool is configured to detect a perturbation in a magnetic field that is proximal the at least one tool and to generate a perturbation signal that is communicable to the processor unit, wherein the at least one tool is configured to generate the magnetic field that extends at least partially through a central bore of the BOP, a central bore of the subsea riser, or a central bore of the subsea wellhead (212, 214, 216, Para 0034+). Plotnikov discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Plotnikov et al. is silent about including at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead using the at least one pair of connection members.
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
Sbordone teaches a tool (46) is connectible inline with a lubricator (32) of a subsea wellhead.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Plotnikov et al. to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead
using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. and Sbordone since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Figs 2-6) of Plotnikov is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson and positioned inline with a lubricator of a subsea well head as taught by Sbordone. It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the riser or wellhead of Plotnikov (para 0031) or inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead (32 of Sbordone). The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
It should be noted that such a modification (lubricator) allows for a tool to be installed under high pressure.
Re claim 34, Plotnikov discloses a method of intervening on a subsea well, the method comprising steps of: (a) generating a magnetic field at a position about a subsea blowout preventer stack (see para 0029-0031) and wellhead, wherein the subsea blowout preventer stack is operatively coupled to a subsea wellhead; (b) detecting a perturbation in the magnetic field; and (c) communicating a perturbation in the magnetic field signal to a processor, wherein the perturbation in the magnetic field is caused by a body moving into, through or away from the magnetic field as it moves between the blowout preventer stack (see Figs. 1-6, para 0048-0049, see para 0029-0031) and the wellhead. Plotnikov discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Plotnikov is silent about including a tool (emit/detect magnetic field) using one or more connection members comprising magnetic material connectable to a subsea lubricator.
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
Sbordone teaches a tool (46) is connectible inline with a lubricator (32) of a subsea wellhead.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Plotnikov et al. to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead
using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. and Sbordone since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Figs 2-6) of Plotnikov is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson and positioned inline with a lubricator of a subsea well head as taught by Sbordone. It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the BOP, the riser or wellhead of Plotnikov (para 0031) or inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead (32 of Sbordone). The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
It should be noted that such a modification (lubricator) allows for a tool to be installed under high pressure.
Claim(s) 1,3-13, 21-26,29,32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vitou (US 20170089163) in view of Carlson et al. ‘602.
Vitou discloses a system comprising: a processor unit (para 0026-0029, Fig. 5); at least one tool (56, para 0024, see Figs. 3A-4B) that is connectible inline with a lubricator on an offshore vessel, a subsea riser, or a subsea wellhead (26,34), the at least one tool is operatively communicable with the processor unit, wherein the at least one tool is configured to detect a perturbation in a magnetic field that is proximal the at least one tool and to generate a perturbation signal that is communicable to the processor unit, wherein the at least one tool is configured to generate the magnetic field that extends at least partially through a central bore of the lubricator, a central bore of the subsea riser, or a central bore of the subsea wellhead (Figs. 3A-4B). Vitou discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Plotnikov et al. is silent about including at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members.
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vitou to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Figs 3A-4B) of Vitou is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson or sensing means (20, Fig.1 of Carlson) is added to sensing means (Figs 3A-4B of Vitou). It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the riser or wellhead of Vitou (see flanges at the riser and wellhead). The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 3, wherein the processor unit is positioned on the offshore vessel (see Fig. 5 of Vitou).
Re claim 4, wherein the processor unit is positioned subsea (see Fig. 1 of Carlson).
Re claim 5, wherein the processor unit comprises a processor that is configured to generate a command for the at least one tool to generate the magnetic field and wherein this command is receivable by the at least one tool and wherein the at least one tool is configured to generate the magnetic field upon receipt of said command from the processor. (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5 of Vitou, Figs. 1-4, para 0026-0034 of Carlson).
With regard to claims 6-8, 21-23,26, (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5 of Vitou, Figs. 1-4, para 0026-0034 of Carlson) teach the claimed magnetic field and processor/display location.
With regard to claim 9, see (Figs. 1-4 of Carlson) teach the claimed tool.
Re claim 10, the tool array is positioned about the tubular portion (see Figs. 1-4 of Carlson).
Re claim 11, wherein the tubular portion is constructed of a non-magnetic material (see abstract, para 0007, 0034, claim 1 of Carlson)
Re claim 12, wherein the non-magnetic material is a 316 stainless steel, a 360 stainless steel, nitronic 50 stainless steel, a 625 Inconel, a 718 Inconel, aluminum, one or more polymers, a plastic and combinations thereof (see abstract, para 0007, 0034, claim 1 of Carlson).
Re claim 13, the tool array is configured to generate the magnetic field (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5 of Vitou, Figs. 1-4, para 0026-0034 of Carlson).
Re claim 24, wherein the perturbation in the magnetic field is caused by changing a physical dimension of a portion of the body that is within or proximal to the magnetic field (58, Fig. 4A of Vitou).
Re claim 25, wherein the at least one tool is further configured to generate a deviation-from-center signal and the at least one tool is configured to communicate the deviation-from-center signal to the processor or the input and display device (see Figs. 4A,4B).
Re claim 29. Vitou discloses a method of drilling or intervening on a subsea well, the method comprising steps of: (a) connecting a riser between an offshore vessel and a blowout preventer stack of a subsea wellhead (see Fig. 1 of Vitou), generating a magnetic field above, within or below the blowout preventer stack (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5), detecting a perturbation in the magnetic field (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5 of Vitou)
(d) communicating a perturbation in the magnetic field signal to a processor (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5), wherein the perturbation in the magnetic field is caused by a body moving into, through or away from the magnetic field.
Vitou discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Vitou is silent about including at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (riser to BOP).
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vitou to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Figs 3A-4B) of Vitou is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson or sensing means (20, Fig.1 of Carlson) is added to sensing means (Figs 3A-4B of Vitou). It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the BOP or the riser or wellhead of Vitou. The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 32, wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs within the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location
(16,56 of Vitou).
Claim(s) 14-20,30,31,33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vitou in view of Carlson as applied to claim 1, 29 above, and further in view of Markel et al. ‘512
Vitou (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Vitou (as modified above) is silent wherein the at least one tool comprises a first tool that is connectible to a lubricator that is positioned on the offshore vessel. Markel et al. teaches wherein at least one tool comprises a first tool (para 0011, 0032-0040, para 0015, 0043) that is connectible to a lubricator (32) that is positioned on the offshore vessel.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Vitou (as modified above) to have the tool connectible to a lubricator that is positioned on the offshore vessel as taught by Markel et al. since such a modification allows for a tool to be installed under high pressure.
Re claim 15, Vitou (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Vitou (as modified by Carlson) is silent about including a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from a subsea environment. Markel et al. teaches including a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from a subsea environment (see para 10,11; claims 1,3).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Vitou (as modified above) to include a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from a subsea environment as taught by Markel et al. since such a modification would be based on users desire for information at the various locations
such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 16, Vitou (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Vitou (as modified by Carlson) is silent about including a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment. Markel et al. teaches including a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment (see para 10,11; claims 1,3).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Vitou (as modified above) to include a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment as taught by Markel et al. since such a modification would be based on users desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 17, wherein the third tool is connectible to the subsea wellhead above, within or below a subsea blowout preventer stack of the subsea wellhead (see Figs. 3A-4B of Vitou, Fig.1 of Markel).
Re claim 18, wherein the at least one tool comprises a second tool that is connectible to the subsea riser and wherein the system further comprises a subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the second tool from one or more properties of a subsea environment (see discussion above with regards to claim 15).
Re claim 19, wherein the at least one tool further comprises a third tool that is connectible to the subsea wellhead and wherein the system further comprises a further subsea housing that is configured to house and protect the third tool from a subsea environment (see discussion of claim 16 above).
Re claim 20, wherein the subsea housing is constructed of a material that does not perturb the magnetic field (see abstract, para 0007 and claim 1 of Carlson).
With regards to claim 30, Vitou (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Vitou (as modified by Carlson) is silent wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs above the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location. Markel teaches
the step of generating a magnetic field occurs above a blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location (see para 0010, 0011, claims 1,3, Fig. 1). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Vitou (as modified above) to include another tool (as taught by the combination of Hopper and Carlson) wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs above the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location as taught by Markel since such a modification would be based on users desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Re claim 31, see discussion above with respect to claim 30.
With regards to claim 33, Vitou (as modified by Carlson) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Vitou (as modified by Carlson) is silent
wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs below the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location.
Markel teaches the step of generating the magnetic field occurs below the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location (see para 0010, 0011, claims 1,3, Fig. 1). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Vitou (as modified above) to include a another tool (as taught by the combination of Hopper and Carlson) wherein the step of generating the magnetic field occurs below the blowout preventer stack and the step of detecting occurs in substantially the same location as Markel since such a modification would be based on users desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
Claim(s) 27,34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vitou (US 20170089163) in view of Carlson et al. ‘’602 and Sbordone ‘835
Vitou discloses a system comprising: a processor unit (para 0026-0029, Fig. 5); at least one tool (56, para 0024, see Figs. 3A-4B) that is connectible inline with a BOP, a subsea riser, or a subsea wellhead (16), the at least one tool is operatively communicable with the processor unit, wherein the at least one tool is configured to detect a perturbation in a magnetic field that is proximal the at least one tool and to generate a perturbation signal that is communicable to the processor unit, wherein the at least one tool is configured to generate the magnetic field that extends at least partially through a central bore of the BOP, a central bore of the subsea riser, or a central bore of the subsea wellhead (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5 of Vitou). Vitou discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Vitou et al. is silent about including at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead using the at least one pair of connection members.
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
Sbordone teaches a tool (46) is connectible inline with a lubricator (32) of a subsea wellhead.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vitou to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. and Sbordone since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Figs 3A-4B) of Vitou is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson and positioned inline with a lubricator of a subsea well head as taught by Sbordone. It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the BOP, the riser or wellhead of Vitou or inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead (32 of Sbordone). The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
It should be noted that such a modification (lubricator) allows for a tool to be installed under high pressure.
Re claim 34, Vitou discloses a method of intervening on a subsea well, the method comprising steps of: (a) generating a magnetic field at a position about a subsea blowout preventer stack (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5) and wellhead, wherein the subsea blowout preventer stack is operatively coupled to a subsea wellhead; (b) detecting a perturbation in the magnetic field; and (c) communicating a perturbation in the magnetic field signal to a processor, wherein the perturbation in the magnetic field is caused by a body moving into, through or away from the magnetic field as it moves between the blowout preventer stack (see para 0024-0029, Figs. 3A-5) and the wellhead. Vitou discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Vitou is silent about including a tool (emit/detect magnetic field) using one or more connection members comprising magnetic material connectable to a subsea lubricator.
Carlson et al. discloses at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible using the at least one pair of connection members (see Figs. 1-4, abstract, para 0007, 0012, claim 1).
Sbordone teaches a tool (46) is connectible inline with a lubricator (32) of a subsea wellhead.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vitou to include at least one pair of connection members, the connection members comprising magnetic material and the tool is connectible inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead using the at least one pair of connection members as taught by Carlson et al. and Sbordone since such a modification provides a protective housing for the sensing means.
The sensing means (see Figs 3A-4B) of Vitou is essentially replaced by sensing means (20, Fig. 1) of Carlson and positioned inline with a lubricator of a subsea well head as taught by Sbordone. It should be noted that such a modification provides several advantages such as facilitates replacement of the tool if need be. It should be noted that the tool structure of Carlson enables locating the tool along different parts of the BOP, the riser or wellhead of Vitou or inline with a lubricator of a subsea wellhead (32 of Sbordone). The modification would be based on user’s desire for information at the various locations such as at the BOP, riser or wellhead.
It should be noted that such a modification (lubricator) allows for a tool to be installed under high pressure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/12/2025 with respect to Hopper and Carlson have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordi