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 .
Response to Amendments/Arguments
The Examiner acknowledges the amendments and arguments. The previous rejection has been updated to show the pig lock of Lankston. The limitations of the location of the pig lock was not amended into the claim, thus the claim is still rejected and made final.
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.
Claims 16-19, 21, 23, and 25-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ying (CN106523853A) in view of Lankston (US 4,401,133).
Regarding claim 16, Ying discloses a pig launcher comprising a tubular pig housing adapted to hold a number of pigs arranged in a line (Item 21), and a kicker branch pipe inlet for each of the number of pigs spaced along a longitudinal axis of the tubular pig housing (best shown in Figure 2, inlet port from bottom of valve (15-20) to 21);
a main connector (Item 12) connectable to a fluid flow line at an end of the tubular pig housing;
a kicker valve for each of the number of pigs (Item 15-20), each kicker valve including a control pressure inlet, a flow inlet (top of valve) and a flow outlet (bottom of valve);;
a kicker header (Item 9) connected to the flow inlet of each of the kicker valves; and
a kicker branch pipe connected between the flow outlet of each of the kicker valves and the kicker branch pipe inlet for each of the number of pigs (pipe section between the bottom of the valve and the inlet of Item 21).
Ying fails to explicitly disclose each kicker valve including a control pressure inlet and a kicker valve control pipe connected to the control pressure inlet on each of the kicker valves and to a kicker system connector AND a pick lock in the pig housing position to maintain at least one of the pigs within the housing. Ying fails to explicitly disclose how the valves are actuated.
Lankston teaches a pig launcher wherein each valve (Item 62) including a control pressure inlet (Item 62a) and a kicker valve control pipe (item 70) connected to the control pressure inlet on each of the kicker valves and to a kicker system connector (flanges or pipe segments in the system that are commonly used. This is discussed by Column 4 Lines 23-24, “standard practice”. An example of this can be item 252, and the inlet/outlet of the cylinder to make the system work properly. This can be threaded connection, push to connect, or swaged fitting, to name a few examples). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simply substitute the non disclosed actuated valves of Ying for the hydraulically driven valves of Lankston. Such a substitution would lead to the predictable result of the valves actuating properly. Valves are known to be actuated by electricity, pneumatics, or hydraulics.
Lankston further teaches a pig lock in the pig housing position to maintain at least one of the pigs within the housing (Figure 2 Item 120 and 122). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ying to include the pig lock as taught by Lankston. The pig lock of Lankston allows for only one pig to be launched at a time, thus avoiding an error of multiple pigs being launched (Lankson Column 4 Lines 38-68).
Regarding claim 17, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launcher of claim 16, wherein each kicker valve control pipe and the kicker header is connected to one single kicker system connector for all the kicker valve control pipes (Ying Figure 2).
Regarding claim 18, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launcher of claim 16, wherein the kicker header is connected to the kicker system connector (Ying Figure 2).
Regarding claim 19, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launcher of claim 16 further including a flushing bypass branch with a bypass valve between an inlet end of the kicker header and an outlet end of the tubular pig housing (Ying Item 15 can be a bypass once the pig is gone).
Regarding claim 21, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launcher of claim 16 further including a kicker connector hub saver (Ying Item 4 Figure 4) with a hub connector at a first end connected to the kicker system connector and a kicker connector hub saver hub at a second end.
Although not a claim objection or indefinite, hub saver is a term the Examiner is unaware of. It appears to be a flange for connecting to other piping, and will be treated that way. If this is a term of the art with additional requirements, please let the Examiner know.
Regarding claim 23, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launcher of claim 16 further including a main connector hub saver with a hub connector at a first end (Ying Item 24) connected to the main connector and a main connector hub saver hub at a second end (Ying Item 13).
Regarding claim 25, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launcher of claim 16, wherein the number of pigs the pig housing is adapted to hold corresponds to the number of kicker valves (The number of pigs in the cylinder is up to the user. 3 pigs are shown with at least 3 valves).
Regarding claim 26, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launcher of claim 25, wherein the number of pigs the pig housing is adapted to hold and the number of kicker valves is six (six valves are shown in Ying). Further it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the number of valves and correlating pigs of Ying to be more or less. Such a modification is viewed as a duplication of parts, which has been held to be of routine by one of ordinary skill in the art. In operation there would be no difference between 6 valves and 10 valves, except the piping and overall size/capacity.
Regarding claim 27, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launcher of claim 16, adapted to be installed on a seabed with a longitudinal axis of the pig housing horizontally (translation line 10 indicates this is for underwater use. The system is depicted as being horizontal. And the system is capable of operating from a seabed.).
Regarding claim 28, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the pig launching system with a pig launcher of claim 16, further including a subsea control module with a subsea control module fluid port for each of the kicker valve control pipes in fluid connection with the kicker system connector (Ying Item 12, paragraph 30).
Regarding claim 29, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the use of a pig launcher according to claim 16 to launch at least one pig into a fluid flow containing pipeline (Ying Paragraph 2).
Regarding claim 30, Ying in view of Lankston disclose the subsea production field comprising at the pig launcher according to claim 16 (Ying Paragraph 2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/4/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant amended a pig lock into claim 16. The pig lock, as discussed above is taught by Lankston. The location as further discussed in claim 24 overcomes the prior art. As such the rejection to claim 16 is necessitated by amendment and made final. The Examiner tried contacting the applicant to resolve this issue and avoid a final, but applicant never responded to the Examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20, 22, 24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 20 and 22 recite a poppet valves located at each kicker valve. Although this seems to be an obvious substitution, since poppet valves are known to act as pressure relief valves and are commonly used in pneumatic system to ensure proper operating pressures. The Examiner could not find support for adding a poppet valve to the kicker valves in an underwater scenario. Thus this is viewed as non obvious. For claim 24, the location of the pig lock is not found to be an obvious modification to Ying in view of Lankston.
Conclusion
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 TOM R RODGERS whose telephone number is (313)446-4849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8AM-5PM EST.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/TOM RODGERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723