DETAILED ACTION
Claims 31-41 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/29/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Examiner inadvertently overlooked 35 U.S.C. § 112 issues corresponding to claim. See 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejections herein.
Furthermore, claims 32-34 and 40 have claim objection issues, as presented herein.
Claim Objections
Claim 32 (and, similarly claims 33-34 and 40) is/are objected to because of the following informalities and should likely read as follows: “[...] wherein the fracturing port cover is a sleeve lining at least a portion of the interior of the wellbore [[casing]]tubular.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 31-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 31 recites: “[...] a turbine generator coupled to the fracturing port cover electronics proximate the fracturing port cover, the turbine generator operable to power the fracturing port cover electronics; and
a fluid port for coupling fractures proximate the one or more fracturing ports and a fluid flow power source, wherein the fracturing port cover is operable to redirect fluid to the fluid flow power source via the fluid port.”
Examiner notes the claim appears to recite two separate elements, i.e., “a turbine generator” and “a fluid flow power source”. However, paragraph [0034] of the instant specification recites: “[...] the second power sources 235a, 235b could be fluid flow power sources, such as a turbine generator”, implying that the “fluid flow power source” is the “turbine generator”. Therefore, there is a lack of support for having the two separate elements, i.e., “fluid flow power source” and “turbine generator” both be connected to a “fracturing port cover”, as claimed. Due to claim 31 being rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), the corresponding dependent claims are also rejected.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 31-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 31 recites: “[...] a turbine generator coupled to the fracturing port cover electronics proximate the fracturing port cover, the turbine generator operable to power the fracturing port cover electronics; and
a fluid port for coupling fractures proximate the one or more fracturing ports and a fluid flow power source, wherein the fracturing port cover is operable to redirect fluid to the fluid flow power source via the fluid port.”
Examiner notes the claim appears to recite two separate elements, i.e., “a turbine generator” and “a fluid flow power source”, causing confusion in light of the instant specification, as the instant specification’s paragraph [0034] recites that the “fluid flow power source” is the “turbine generator”. Examiner will give its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the instant specification and will assume for the claim limitations to read as follows:
“[...] a fluid flow power source being a turbine generator coupled to the fracturing port cover electronics proximate the fracturing port cover, the turbine generator operable to power the fracturing port cover electronics; and
a fluid port for coupling fractures proximate the one or more fracturing ports and [[a]]the fluid flow power source, wherein the fracturing port cover is operable to redirect fluid to the fluid flow power source via the fluid port.” Due to claim 31 being rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), the corresponding dependent claims are also rejected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 31 is would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: See reasons for allowance in Office action dated 07/29/2025.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEEL PATEL whose telephone number is (469)295-9168. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00AM-5:00PM CST.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/NEEL GIRISH PATEL/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676