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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/07/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument is quoted below:
As described in the instant application, the viscometers "may be used to provide polymer quality data for a polymer solution before and after flowing through the removable apparatus" and the data "may be compared to determine changes in the polymer solution resulting from the removable apparatus." See para. [0041] of the published specification.
Neither Pearson nor Tsunoda teach or suggest adding viscometers before and after flowing through the removable apparatus for determining changes in the polymer solution resulting from the removable apparatus.
In response to applicant's argument above, that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “adding viscometers before and after flowing through the removable apparatus for determining changes in the polymer solution resulting from the removable apparatus”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Furthermore, applicant’s arguments with respect to all pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on all reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Note that the Double Patenting rejection of the Non-Final rejection was based on the co-pending application 18/193,787 which has now been patented. See rejection below.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 – 3, 5 – 7, 9 - 12, 14 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 7 – 11, 15 - 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,399,156 B2 in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0214875 A1 to Terui et al.. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they seek to encompass the same invention (i.e., an assembly, a system and a method comprising a bypass line, a device base positioned along the bypass line and comprising a first opening, a second opening, a support structure, a removable apparatus positioned in the device base, an upstream valve, a downstream valve, and a sampling line connected to the bypass line between the device base and the downstream valve as claimed) except for a first viscometer fluidly connected to the first opening and a second viscometer fluidly connected to the second opening. However, Terui et al. teaches that it is known to use a first viscometer (see first measuring section at 5, Fig. 1 for measuring the viscosity of the raw water, see also Figs. 1, 4 – 7 and paragraph [0044]) fluidly connected to the first opening (see opening at any of the input side of the devices stirring unit 1, Figs. 1 and 6, line mixer 10, Fig. 5 and/or static mixer 20, Fig. 7) and a second viscometer (see second measuring section 6, Figs. 1, 4 – 7 and paragraph [0044]) fluidly connected to the second opening (see opening at the outlet side of any of the devices of stirring unit 1, Figs. 1 and 6, line mixer 10, Fig. 5 and/or static mixer 20, Fig. 7, in addition, see corresponding paragraphs at [0028], [0035], [0044], [0058] – [0071]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a first viscometer and a second viscometer of Terui into U.S. Patent No. 12,399,156 B2, in order to be able to accurately measure and determine changes in viscosity before and after flowing through a device. The modification further allows the user to effectively and efficiently take corrective action as per user’s desire.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 3, 5 – 7, 9 - 12, 14 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 4,821,564 to Pearson et al. (hereinafter “Pearson”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0057302 A1 to Tsunoda et al. (hereinafter “Tsunoda”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0214875 A1 to Terui et al. (hereinafter “Terui”).
Regarding Claim 1, Pearson teaches an assembly (see assembly at Fig. 1), comprising:
a bypass line (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating a “suction conduit 86” that branches out from the conduit 64 and forming multiple bypass line portions such as path involving the “laminar flow viscometer arrangement” at conduit sections 68, 80, 82 and another path forming the “turbulent flow pipe viscometer” section comprising a section of pipe 92, see description at Col. 7, line 4 – Col. 8, line 11, thus any one of the paths involving the “laminar flow viscometer arrangement” and/or the “turbulent flow pipe viscometer” arrangement reads on the bypass line as claimed, see also Col. 8, lines 25 – 40 describing continuous or intermittent sampling of the fluid, hence reading on the invention as claimed) having a first connection end (see connection between the suction conduit 86 and the conduit 64 at either or both of pump regions 70 and/or 71, Fig. 1, which can be considered as the first connection end) and a second connection end (see connection between the conduit 64 and either or both of return conduits 84, 94 forming the second connection end as claimed);
a device base (see frame or skid 15, see Col. 6, lines 59 – 62) positioned along the bypass line (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating the arrangement of the conduits including the bypass lines mounted or supported on the base 15, hence reading on the “device base” as claimed), wherein the device base comprises:
a first opening to the bypass line (see for instance openings at either of flange sections 93 or 95 along the flow path as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, line 52 – Col. 8, lines 1 – 11);
a second opening to the bypass line (see openings at either of flange sections 93 or 95 along the flow path as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, line 52 – Col. 8, lines 1 – 11); and
a support structure (see multiple structures within the frame or base 15 that can be considered as the claimed support structure, see arrangement at Fig. 1) supporting at least one of the first and second openings (see for instance upper plate portion of the frame or skid 15 that supports the components of the apparatus 14 including that of the bypass line and/or see for instance corresponding flange regions at return conduit 94 and/or flowmeter region 74 that is arranged to connect with the corresponding flange sections 93 and 95 of the turbulent flow pipe viscometer section of pipe 92 and/or the laminar flow viscometer arrangement at conduit sections 68, 80, 82 which includes connection regions between the corresponding suction conduit 86 and return conduit 84, hence reading on the invention as claimed);
a plurality of removable apparatuses (92, 97, Fig. 1, see pipe section 92 which is connected by removable bolt type flanges 93 and 95 as seen at Fig. 1 (thus being removable) as well as being replaced by other pipe sections such as section 97 which could have different diameter or hydraulic radius as described at Col. 7, line 52 - Col. 8, lines 1 – 11, hence reading on the invention as claimed), each removable apparatus (92, 97) formed to be interchangeably installed in the device base (see Col. 8, lines 1 – 11) and to fluidly connect the first opening to the second opening when installed (see arrangement at Fig. 1).
Even though Pearson teaches inlet manifold 60 and discharge manifold 62 and conduit sections in between to measure the viscosity of the fluid either continuously or intermittently as described above, Pearson is silent regarding an upstream valve positioned along the bypass line between the device base and the first connection end, a downstream valve positioned along the bypass line between the device base and the second connection end; a sampling line fluidly connected to the bypass line between the device base and the downstream valve; and a sampling valve disposed along the sampling line, the sampling valve configured for drainage and testing of a fluid from the bypass line.
Tsunoda, in the field of sampling systems for sampling fluid flowing through a pipe as seen at 6, Fig. 1 and described at paragraphs [0015], [0016], teaches that it is known to use an upstream valve positioned along the bypass line between the device base and the first connection end (see any of Figs. 2, 4 comprising valve 12 in the upstream side of the sampling system, see for instance annotated Figure below, see paragraphs [0019] – [0020], [0023]);
a downstream valve positioned along the bypass line between the device base and the second connection end (see any of Figs. 2, 4 comprising valve 13 in the downstream side of the sampling system, see for instance annotated Figure below, see paragraphs [0019] – [0020], [0023]);
a sampling line fluidly connected to the bypass line between the device base and the downstream valve (see sampling pipe 14, Figs. 2, 4 connected to the bypass line 11, see annotated Figure below, see paragraphs [0019], [0024]); and
a sampling valve disposed along the sampling line (see sampling valve 16, Figs. 2, 4 disposed along the sampling line 14, see annotated Figure below, see paragraphs [0019], [0024]), the sampling valve configured for drainage and testing of a fluid from the bypass line (see paragraph [0027] describing the sampling method including discharging the fluid from the bypass line through the sampling valve).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the upstream and downstream valve positioned along the bypass line of Tsunoda into Pearson, in order to efficiently and accurately control the fluid flow within the pipe of the sampling system. The modification allows for an accurate and reliable fluid measurement.
In addition, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the sampling line and the sampling valve of Tsunoda into Pearson, in order to sample the fluid directly from the bypass line. The modification allows for an efficient sampling of fluid with a simple configuration and enhances ease of use by the user.
PNG
media_image1.png
700
830
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Even though Pearson teaches a turbulent flow pipe viscometer comprising a pipe 92 arranged between flanges 93 and 95 (i.e., which are fluidly connected to the first opening and the second opening as claimed) as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, lines 52 – Col. 8 line 11, Pearson in view of Tsunoda does not explicitly teach, a first viscometer fluidly connected to the first opening and a second viscometer fluidly connected to the second opening.
Terui, in the field of water treatment system, teaches a first viscometer (see first measuring section at 5, Fig. 1 for measuring the viscosity of the raw water, see also Figs. 1, 4 – 7 and paragraph [0044]) fluidly connected to the first opening (see opening at any of the input side of the devices stirring unit 1, Figs. 1 and 6, line mixer 10, Fig. 5 and/or static mixer 20, Fig. 7) and a second viscometer (see second measuring section 6, Figs. 1, 4 – 7 and paragraph [0044]) fluidly connected to the second opening (see opening at the outlet side of any of the devices of stirring unit 1, Figs. 1 and 6, line mixer 10, Fig. 5 and/or static mixer 20, Fig. 7, in addition, see corresponding paragraphs at [0028], [0035], [0044], [0058] – [0071]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a first viscometer and a second viscometer of Terui into Pearson in view of Tsunoda, in order to be able to accurately measure and determine changes in viscosity before and after flowing through a device. The modification further allows the user to effectively and efficiently take corrective action as per user’s desire.
Regarding Claim 2, Pearson as modified above teaches wherein the first connection end (see connection between the suction conduit 86 and the conduit 64 at either or both of pump regions 70 and/or 71, Fig. 1, which can be considered as the first connection end) is connected to a flow divider valve (see suction conduit 86 arranged to divide the flow to either the laminar flow viscometer arrangement or the turbulent flow pipe viscometer arrangement) positioned along a flow line to an injection pump (see arrangement at Fig. 1).
Insofar as Pearson may be construed as not explicitly teaching a “flow divider valve”, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a flow divider valve, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding Claim 3, Pearson as modified above teaches wherein the second connection end is connected to a production line (see second connection end at discharge end region 84, 94 which is connected to the production line at 64, 62 and eventually to wellhead 17 as seen at Fig. 1), and wherein the production line is fluidly connected to a wellhead (see arrangement at Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 5, Pearson as modified above teaches wherein at least one removable apparatus of the plurality of removable apparatuses comprises a high pressure apparatus capable of holding a pressure up to about 2,000 psi (see arrangement at Fig. 1 of Pearson illustrating first and second openings at 93, 95 and a viscometer 92 installed between the openings, see also Col. 10, lines 25 – 31 describing viscometer section 92 being carried out at relatively high rates, see also claim 1 of Pearson).
Regarding Claim 6, Pearson in view of Tsunoda in view of Terui as modified above teaches the claimed invention except for wherein the high pressure apparatus is a valve. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a valve, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding Claim 7, Pearson in view of Tsunoda in view of Terui as modified above teaches wherein the high pressure apparatus is a static mixer (see static mixer 20, Fig. 7 of Terui).
Regarding Claim 9, Pearson in view of Tsunoda in view of Terui as modified above teaches the claimed invention except for wherein the bypass line is greater than 50 meters long.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a bypass line greater than 50 meters long, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 10, Pearson teaches a system (see system at Fig. 1), comprising:
a flow line (see flow line at multiple conduits as described at Col. 6, lines 12 – 41, see Fig. 1) fluidly connecting an injection pump (see charging pump 32, Fig. 1, see Col. 6, lines 12 – 38) to a wellhead (see wellhead 17 at well 16, Fig. 1, see Col. 6, lines 12 – 41);
a production line (see for instance conduits 34 – 36, 42 Fig. 1) fluidly connected to the wellhead (see arrangement at Fig. 1);
a flow divider valve (see for instance inlet manifold 60) positioned along the flow line between the injection pump (32) and the wellhead (see arrangement at Fig. 1).
Insofar as Pearson may be construed as not explicitly teaching a “flow divider valve”, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a flow divider valve, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Pearson as modified above further teaches;
a bypass line (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating a “suction conduit 86” that branches out from the conduit 64 and forming multiple bypass line portions such as path involving the “laminar flow viscometer arrangement” at conduit sections 68, 80, 82 and another path forming the “turbulent flow pipe viscometer” section comprising a section of pipe 92, see description at Col. 7, line 4 – Col. 8, line 11, thus any one of the paths involving the “laminar flow viscometer arrangement” and/or the “turbulent flow pipe viscometer” arrangement reads on the bypass line as claimed, see also Col. 8, lines 25 – 40 describing continuous or intermittent sampling of the fluid, hence reading on the invention as claimed) extending from the flow divider valve to a downstream connection to the production line (see arrangement at Fig. 1).
Even though Pearson teaches inlet manifold 60 and discharge manifold 62 and conduit sections in between to measure the viscosity of the fluid either continuously or intermittently as described above, Pearson is silent regarding the system comprising an upstream valve and a downstream valve positioned along the bypass line.
Tsunoda, in the field of sampling systems for sampling fluid flowing through a pipe as seen at 6, Fig. 1 and described at paragraphs [0015], [0016], teaches that it is known to use an upstream valve and a downstream valve positioned along the bypass line (see any of Figs. 2, 4 comprising valve 12 in the upstream side of the sampling system and valve 13 in the downstream side of the sampling system, see for instance annotated Figure above, see paragraphs [0019] – [0020], [0023]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the upstream and downstream valve positioned along the bypass line of Tsunoda into Pearson, in order to efficiently and accurately control the fluid flow within the pipe of the sampling system. The modification allows for an accurate and reliable fluid measurement.
Pearson in view of Tsunoda as modified above further teaches:
a device base (see frame or skid 15, see Col. 6, lines 59 – 62 of Pearson) positioned along the bypass line between the upstream valve and the downstream valve (see arrangement at Fig. 1 of Pearson illustrating the arrangement of the conduits including the bypass lines mounted or supported on the base 15, see also modification above, thus portion of the base 15 overlaps in between the valves, hence reading on the invention as claimed), wherein the device base comprises:
a first opening to the bypass line (see for instance openings at either of flange sections 93 or 95 along the flow path as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, line 52 – Col. 8, lines 1 – 11 of Pearson);
a second opening to the bypass line (see openings at either of flange sections 93 or 95 along the flow path as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, line 52 – Col. 8, lines 1 – 11 of Pearson); and
a support structure (see multiple structures within the frame or base 15 that can be considered as the claimed support structure, see arrangement at Fig. 1 of Pearson) supporting at least one of the first and second openings (see for instance upper plate portion of the frame or skid 15 that supports the components of the apparatus 14 including that of the bypass line and/or see for instance corresponding flange regions at return conduit 94 and/or flowmeter region 74 that is arranged to connect with the corresponding flange sections 93 and 95 of the turbulent flow pipe viscometer section of pipe 92 and/or the laminar flow viscometer arrangement at conduit sections 68, 80, 82 which includes connection regions between the corresponding suction conduit 86 and return conduit 84 of Pearson, hence reading on the invention as claimed); and
a plurality of removable apparatuses (see turbulent flow pipe viscometer comprising a section of pipe 92 that is removably installed in the bypass line connecting the first and second opening, see Col. 7, line 52 – Col. 8, line 11 of Pearson, note that the pipe section 92 can be replaced by other pipe sections 97 as described at Col. 8, lines 1 – 11 of Pearson, hence reading on the “plurality of removable apparatuses” as claimed), each removable apparatus formed to be interchangeably installed in the device base and to fluidly connect the first opening to the second opening when installed (see Col. 8, lines 1 – 11 and arrangement at Fig. 1 of Pearson);
a sampling line fluidly connected to the bypass line between the device base and the downstream valve (see sampling pipe 14, Figs. 2, 4 connected to the bypass line 11 of Tsunoda, see annotated Figure above, see paragraphs [0019], [0024] of Tsunoda); and
a sampling valve disposed along the sampling line (see sampling valve 16, Figs. 2, 4 of Tsunoda disposed along the sampling line 14, see annotated Figure above, see paragraphs [0019], [0024] of Tsunoda), the sampling valve configured for drainage and testing of a fluid from the bypass line (see paragraph [0027] of Tsunoda describing the sampling method including discharging the fluid from the bypass line through the sampling valve).
Even though Pearson teaches a turbulent flow pipe viscometer comprising a pipe 92 arranged between flanges 93 and 95 (i.e., which are fluidly connected to the first opening and the second opening as claimed) as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, lines 52 – Col. 8 line 11, Pearson in view of Tsunoda does not explicitly teach, a first viscometer fluidly connected to the first opening and a second viscometer fluidly connected to the second opening.
Terui, in the field of water treatment system, teaches a first viscometer (see first measuring section at 5, Fig. 1 for measuring the viscosity of the raw water, see also Figs. 1, 4 – 7 and paragraph [0044]) fluidly connected to the first opening (see opening at any of the input side of the devices stirring unit 1, Figs. 1 and 6, line mixer 10, Fig. 5 and/or static mixer 20, Fig. 7) and a second viscometer (see second measuring section 6, Figs. 1, 4 – 7 and paragraph [0044]) fluidly connected to the second opening (see opening at the outlet side of any of the devices of stirring unit 1, Figs. 1 and 6, line mixer 10, Fig. 5 and/or static mixer 20, Fig. 7, in addition, see corresponding paragraphs at [0028], [0035], [0044], [0058] – [0071]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a first viscometer and a second viscometer of Terui into Pearson in view of Tsunoda, in order to be able to accurately measure and determine changes in viscosity before and after flowing through a device. The modification further allows the user to effectively and efficiently take corrective action as per user’s desire.
Regarding Claim 11, Pearson as modified above teaches the claimed invention except for further comprising a wellhead valve on the wellhead, wherein the flow line is connected to the wellhead via the wellhead valve. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use a wellhead valve on the wellhead, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). The modification allows for more controlled flow of fluid within the system.
Regarding Claim 12, Pearson as modified above teaches further comprising a production line valve on the wellhead (see three valves connecting the discharge manifold 62 to production lines 34 – 36, Fig. 1), wherein the production line is fluidly connected to the wellhead via the production line valve (see arrangement at Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 14, Pearson as modified above teaches wherein the removable apparatus is connected to the first opening and the second opening via flange connections (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating flange connections at flanges 93, 95).
Regarding Claim 15, Pearson as modified above teaches wherein at least one removable apparatus of the plurality of removable apparatuses comprises a choke having a turn (see for instance the laminar flow viscometer arrangement having different sized conduits 68, 80, 82 in a loop arrangement, see Col. 7, lines 6 – 51, and/or 92, 97, Fig. 1 having different effective diameter as described at Col. 8, lines 1 – 11, thus reading on the invention as claimed).
Insofar as Pearson may be construed as not explicitly stating a choke, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a choke, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). The modification allows for more controlled flow of fluid within the system. Note also that the different parameters of the pipe allow for choking effect of the fluid, hence reading on the invention as claimed.
Regarding Claim 16, Pearson teaches a method (see abstract, Col. 8, lines 25 – 40 and Fig. 1), comprising:
providing a flow line (see flow line at multiple conduits as described at Col. 6, lines 12 – 41, see Fig. 1) fluidly connecting an injection pump (see charging pump 32, Fig. 1, see Col. 6, lines 12 – 38) to a wellhead (see wellhead 17 at well 16, Fig. 1, see Col. 6, lines 12 – 41);
providing a production line (see for instance conduits 34 – 36, 42 Fig. 1) fluidly connected to the wellhead (see arrangement at Fig. 1);
connecting a testing assembly (see viscometer apparatus 14 connected to the flow line and production line, see Col. 6, lines 12 – 68) to the flow line and the production line (see arrangement at Fig. 1), wherein the testing assembly (14) comprises:
a bypass line (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating a “suction conduit 86” that branches out from the conduit 64 and forming multiple bypass line portions such as path involving the “laminar flow viscometer arrangement” at conduit sections 68, 80, 82 and another path forming the “turbulent flow pipe viscometer” section comprising a section of pipe 92, see description at Col. 7, line 4 – Col. 8, line 11, thus any one of the paths involving the “laminar flow viscometer arrangement” and/or the “turbulent flow pipe viscometer” arrangement reads on the bypass line as claimed, see also Col. 8, lines 25 – 40 describing continuous or intermittent sampling of the fluid, hence reading on the invention as claimed) extending from a flow divider valve (see for instance inlet manifold 60) along the flow line (14) to a downstream connection (see downstream connection at discharge manifold 62 and main connecting manifold 64) along the production line (see arrangement at Fig. 1).
Insofar as Pearson may be construed as not explicitly teaching a “flow divider valve”, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a flow divider valve, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Even though Pearson teaches inlet manifold 60 and discharge manifold 62 and conduit sections in between to measure the viscosity of the fluid either continuously or intermittently, Pearson is silent regarding the system comprising an upstream valve and a downstream valve positioned along the bypass line.
Tsunoda, in the field of sampling systems for sampling fluid flowing through a pipe as seen at 6, Fig. 1 and described at paragraphs [0015], [0016], teaches that it is known to use an upstream valve and a downstream valve positioned along the bypass line (see any of Figs. 2, 4 comprising valve 12 in the upstream side of the sampling system and valve 13 in the downstream side of the sampling system, see for instance annotated Figure above, see paragraphs [0019] – [0020], [0023]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the upstream and downstream valve positioned along the bypass line of Tsunoda into Pearson, in order to efficiently and accurately control the fluid flow within the pipe of the sampling system. The modification allows for an accurate and reliable fluid measurement.
Pearson in view of Tsunoda as modified above further teaches:
a device base (see frame or skid 15, see Col. 6, lines 59 – 62 of Pearson) positioned along the bypass line between the upstream valve and the downstream valve (see arrangement at Fig. 1 of Pearson illustrating the arrangement of the conduits including the bypass lines mounted or supported on the base 15, see also modification above, thus portion of the base 15 overlaps in between the valves, hence reading on the invention as claimed), wherein the device base comprises:
a first opening to the bypass line (see for instance openings at either of flange sections 93 or 95 along the flow path as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, line 52 – Col. 8, lines 1 – 11 of Pearson);
a second opening to the bypass line (see openings at either of flange sections 93 or 95 along the flow path as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, line 52 – Col. 8, lines 1 – 11 of Pearson); and
a support structure (see multiple structures within the frame or base 15 that can be considered as the claimed support structure, see arrangement at Fig. 1 of Pearson) supporting at least one of the first and second openings (see for instance upper plate portion of the frame or skid 15 that supports the components of the apparatus 14 including that of the bypass line and/or see for instance corresponding flange regions at return conduit 94 and/or flowmeter region 74 that is arranged to connect with the corresponding flange sections 93 and 95 of the turbulent flow pipe viscometer section of pipe 92 and/or the laminar flow viscometer arrangement at conduit sections 68, 80, 82 which includes connection regions between the corresponding suction conduit 86 and return conduit 84 of Pearson, hence reading on the invention as claimed);
a plurality of removable apparatuses (see turbulent flow pipe viscometer comprising a section of pipe 92 that is removably installed in the bypass line connecting the first and second opening, see Col. 7, line 52 – Col. 8, line 11 of Pearson, note that the pipe section 92 can be replaced by other pipe sections 97 as described at Col. 8, lines 1 – 11 of Pearson, hence reading on the “plurality of removable apparatuses” as claimed), each removable apparatus formed to be interchangeably installed in the device base and to fluidly connect the first opening to the second opening when installed (see Col. 8, lines 1 – 11 and arrangement at Fig. 1 of Pearson);
a sampling line fluidly connected to the bypass line between the device base and the downstream valve (see sampling pipe 14, Figs. 2, 4 connected to the bypass line 11 of Tsunoda, see annotated Figure above, see paragraphs [0019], [0024] of Tsunoda); and
a sampling valve disposed along the sampling line (see sampling valve 16, Figs. 2, 4 of Tsunoda disposed along the sampling line 14, see annotated Figure above, see paragraphs [0019], [0024] of Tsunoda),
flowing a fluid through the flow line and the bypass line (see Col. 8, lines 25 – 40 of Pearson and/or see paragraphs [0026] – [0028] of Tsunoda and arrangement of flow at Figs. 2, 4);
closing the upstream valve and the downstream valve to seal the fluid in a portion of the bypass line (see paragraph [0027] of Tsunoda stating using the two valves 12 and 13 being closed fully and sealing the water between the valves 12 and 13 of the bypass pipe 11, see modification above, hence reading on the invention as claimed);
opening and closing the sampling valve to release the fluid from the portion of the bypass line to the sampling line (see paragraphs [0026] – [0028] of Tsunoda and arrangement of flow at Figs. 2, 4);
draining a sample of the fluid from the sampling valve (see paragraph [0027] of Tsunoda describing the sampling method including discharging the fluid from the bypass line through the sampling valve); and
testing a property of the sample (see Col. 8, lines 25 – 40 of Pearson stating “ the fluid flowing through the conduit 64 may be continuously or intermittently sampled by the laminar flow viscometer and turbulent flow viscometer means connected to the conduit 64”, see also paragraphs [0004], [0018], [0026] – [0028] of Tsunoda).
Even though Pearson teaches a turbulent flow pipe viscometer comprising a pipe 92 arranged between flanges 93 and 95 (i.e., which are fluidly connected to the first opening and the second opening as claimed) as illustrated at Fig. 1, see Col. 7, lines 52 – Col. 8 line 11, Pearson in view of Tsunoda does not explicitly teach, a first viscometer fluidly connected to the first opening and a second viscometer fluidly connected to the second opening.
Terui, in the field of water treatment system, teaches a first viscometer (see first measuring section at 5, Fig. 1 for measuring the viscosity of the raw water, see also Figs. 1, 4 – 7 and paragraph [0044]) fluidly connected to the first opening (see opening at any of the input side of the devices stirring unit 1, Figs. 1 and 6, line mixer 10, Fig. 5 and/or static mixer 20, Fig. 7) and a second viscometer (see second measuring section 6, Figs. 1, 4 – 7 and paragraph [0044]) fluidly connected to the second opening (see opening at the outlet side of any of the devices of stirring unit 1, Figs. 1 and 6, line mixer 10, Fig. 5 and/or static mixer 20, Fig. 7, in addition, see corresponding paragraphs at [0028], [0035], [0044], [0058] – [0071]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a first viscometer and a second viscometer of Terui into Pearson in view of Tsunoda, in order to be able to accurately measure and determine changes in viscosity before and after flowing through a device. The modification further allows the user to effectively and efficiently take corrective action as per user’s desire.
Regarding Claim 17, Pearson in view of Tsunoda in view of Terui as modified in claim 16 above teaches the claimed invention except for, prior to closing the upstream valve and the downstream valve, reducing a pumping rate of the fluid and closing a wellhead valve to stop fluid flow from the wellhead to the production line. However, Pearson in view of Tsunoda teaches controlling fluid flow and operating valves accordingly (see Tsunoda arrangement at Figs. 2, 4) as desired by the user, therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reduce pumping rate of the fluid and closing a wellhead valve as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known method (method of operating fluid through controlled valve system of Tsunoda) to yield predictable results is obvious.
Regarding Claim 18, Pearson in view of Tsunoda in view of Terui as modified in claim 16 above teaches measuring a viscosity of the sample (see for instance outlet at return conduit 94, Fig. 1 of Pearson and/or description throughout Pearson which uses viscometer thus measuring viscosity of the fluid and/or see first and second measuring sections 5, 6 of Terui being viscosity of the fluid).
Regarding Claim 19, Pearson as modified in claim 16 above teaches further comprising removing the removable apparatus and installing a second removable apparatus in the device base to fluid connect the first opening to the second opening (see Col. 8. lines 2 – 11 describing removable connection at the first and second openings, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claim 20, Pearson in view of Tsunoda in view of Terui as modified in claim 16 above teaches the claimed invention except for, wherein at least 2 barrels of the fluid is flowed through the bypass line prior to closing the upstream valve and the downstream valve. However, Pearson in view of Tsunoda in view of Terui teaches controlling fluid flow and operating the valves accordingly (see Tsunoda arrangement at Figs. 2, 4, 5) as desired by the user, therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to flow at least 2 barrels of the fluid prior to closing the upstream valve and downstream valve as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known method (method of operating fluid through controlled valve system of Tsunoda) to yield predictable results is obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form accompanying this office action comprising the following relevant prior arts:
Dean et al. (U.S. 2013/0298644 A1) teaches an apparatus and method for measuring viscosity of a fluid including an inlet line, outlet line and pressure sensor that is configured to measure a pressure differential between an inlet and an outlet. The pressure sensor is adapted to determine the viscosity of the fluid according to the pressure differential.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARRIT EYASSU whose telephone number is (571)270-1403. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 9:00AM - 6:00PM.
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, Laura E. Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
/MARRIT EYASSU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855