DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 112(a) and 112(b):
The amendments to claims 1, 15 and 20 overcomes the rejection under 112(a); however, the amendments to the claims raise new 112(b) issues discussed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 103
The Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of claims 1, 15 and 20 have been considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1, 15 and 20, the Applicant argues that “Wilson '105 does not teach or suggest a diverter body configured to divert high pressure fluid from an annulus away from a drill floor through one or more diverter ports. In contrast, Wilson '105 teaches that its drilling mud outlet 20 returns drilling mud and "reservoir fluids" to the platform [drilling rig]". Id. at para. [0072](comment added). Therefore, Wilson is not configured to divert high pressure fluids away from the drill floor, but is configured to return fluids directly to the drill floor. “
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above arguments. The claim does not specify what the “drill floor” entails; as such “drill floor” is being interpreted as the location where the system shown in Fig. 1, comprising RCD 1 and BOP 18, are located. Wilson discloses the claimed “diverter body” because RDC 1, while different in nomenclature, comprises the same structures and functions of the claimed “diverter body”. The RCD 1 of Wilson comprises an outlet port 20. Drilling mud is returned back to the platform at the surface via a drilling mud returns hose (not shown) that is connected to the drilling mud return outlet port 20. As such, the mud is diverted away from the “drill floor”, which is the area where the system of Fig. 1 is located, by the outlet port 20. The Applicant has failed to point out what specific structures the prior art is missing that makes Wilson structurally and/or functional different from the instant claimed invention. The Applicant continuous to put emphasis on the differences in nomenclature, i.e. “diverter” vs “RCD”, but has not demonstrated how the claimed “diverter body” is structurally and functionally different from the “RCD 1” that comprises the outlet port 20 for diverting returning mud of Wilson.
For at least the above reasons, the rejections to claims 1, 15 and 20 will be maintained.
Regarding claims 10 and 12, Wilson teaches the limitations of claims 1, 15 and 20. Therefore, the rejection to claims 10 and 12 will also be maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-17 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 15 and 20, the claims recite the limitation (or substantially similar to) “a diverter assembly configured to be fixed mechanically to a drill floor, a component of a drilling rig, or to one or more of a structural beam underneath and supporting said drill floor” where only two options in this claim limitations requires “a drill floor”; however; “a component of a drilling rig” does not require “a drill floor”. As such, the claim does not positively require “a drill floor”; However, the claims also recite “divert high pressure fluid from said annulus away from said drill floor” (claim 1, lines 7-8). As such, it is unclear if the claim requires a “drill floor” or not due to the conflicting languages used in the claims. Furthermore, “drill floor” is a limitation of the preamble noting the structural function of the diverter, but is not positively recited in the claim thus further rendering the claim indefinite.
Claims 1-14, 16, 17, 19 and 21-22 are also rejected under this statute as the claims depend from claims 1, 15 and 20.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11, 13-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wilson et al. (US Publication No.20220381105).
Regarding claim 1, Wilson teaches a diverter assembly (RCD system 1 comprising outlet 20 for diverting drilling mud; pp[0027], Fig. 1) configured to be fixed mechanically to a drill floor, a component of a drilling rig, or to one or more of a structural beam underneath and supporting said drill floor (a lower end (10L) of the RCD 1 is adapted for connection with a BOP (18) of a wellhead, i.e. “a component of a drilling rig”, via a mechanical connection joint 14; Abstract, pp[0068]) comprising:
a diverter body (10), wherein the diverter body is fluidly coupled to an annulus of a wellbore (drilling mud returning from the annulus between the outer surface of the drill string and the inner surface 12 of the throughbore 11; pp[0071]), wherein said diverter body (10) includes one or more diverter outlet ports (20) fluidly coupled to the annulus of said wellbore, wherein said diverter body is configured to divert high pressure fluid from said annulus (drilling mud, i.e. a high pressure fluid, and cuttings returns up the annulus and will exit out the drilling mud returns outlet port 20; pp[0072]) away from said drill floor though said one or more diverter outlet ports (The drilling mud is returned back to the surface to the platform at the surface via a drilling mud returns hose (not shown) which is connected to the drilling mud return outlet port 20. As such, the mud is diverted away from the “drill floor”, which is the area where the system of Fig. 1 is located, via the outlet port 20; pp[0072] - therefore, the diverter is configured to divert high pressure fluid away from a drill rig floor which is all the claim requires given the 112(b) above); and a canister assembly (300 comprising with upper 304 and lower 302 inflatable RCD packers; pp[0098], Fig. 1E) mechanically coupled (via locking dogs 68; pp[0084], Fig. 1) to the diverter body (10; Fig. 1), wherein the canister assembly (300) is removable from the diverter body (300 can be retrieved from the diverter body 10; pp[0084], [0088]), wherein the canister assembly comprises an upper plate (as shown below in the annotated version of Fig. 1) and a lower plate (as shown below),wherein the canister assembly comprises a plurality of inflatable inner seals (304 and 302) positioned between the upper plate (as shown below) and the lower plate (as shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
550
604
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 (annotated)
Regarding claim 2, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of inflatable inner seals (302, 304) is positioned on an inner surface of the canister assembly (Seals 302 and 304 are positioned within an inner surface of 300; Fig. 1E).
Regarding claim 3, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of inflatable inner seals (302 and 304) is arranged to form a fluid seal between the canister assembly (300) and a drill string (the pair of inflatable packers 304, 302 are inflated to seal against the outer surface of the drill string; pp[0077]).
Regarding claim 4, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of inflatable inner seals is configured to seal against multiple pipe diameters of a drill string (the upper and lower RCD seals is formed from a resilient material and which is inflatable such that when in an inflated state has an inner diameter which is a friction fit such that it comprises an inner diameter that matches the outer diameter of the work string; Claim 21. As such, the inflatable seals will inflate to seals against multiple pipe diameters.).
Regarding claim 5, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of inflatable inner seals is adapted to be inflated simultaneously (actuation of the lower inflatable RCD packer 302 can be achieved at exactly the same time as actuation of the upper inflatable RCD packer 304 by pumping hydraulic fluid from the accumulator 316; pp[0080]).
Regarding claim 6, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of inflatable inner seals is adapted to be inflated selectively independently (the seals 304, 302 on the RCD 300 would be deflated but only after the lower static annular packer seal 202 has been inflated; pp[0090]).
Regarding claim 7, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of inflatable inner seals is configured to be inflated by fluid actuation (actuation of the lower inflatable RCD packer 302 can be achieved at exactly the same time as actuation of the upper inflatable RCD packer 304 by pumping hydraulic fluid from the accumulator 316; pp[0080]).
Regarding claim 8, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of inflatable inner seals is adapted to be serviced by the removal of the canister assembly from the diverter body (the RCD 300 is to be retrieved from the RCD system 1 (for example in order to be replaced by a new RCD 300 having new seals 304, 302; pp[0081]).
Regarding claim 9, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of inflatable inner seals is adapted to be replaced by the removal of the canister assembly from the diverter body (the RCD 300 is to be retrieved from the RCD system 1 (for example in order to be replaced by a new RCD 300 having new seals 304, 302; pp[0081]).
Regarding claim 11, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the canister assembly (300) is removable from the diverter body along an axis (17; Fig. 1) of the canister assembly (pulling upwards by the drill string can pull the RCD 300 upwards out of the system outer housing 10 and such pulling will overcome the biasing action of the springs of the key 352 and therefore the RCD 300 can be pulled upwards out of the system outer housing 10 along the axis 17; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the canister assembly is selectable based on a pipe size to be enclosed within the canister assembly (the upper and lower RCD seals (of 300) are formed from a resilient material and which is inflatable such that when in an inflated state has an inner diameter which is a friction fit such that it comprises an inner diameter that matches the outer diameter of the work string; Claim 21. As such, canister assembly 300 is selected such the work string can be enclosed by the canister assembly.).
Regarding claim 14, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1, wherein the canister assembly comprises a middle plate (a shown below in the annotated version of Fig. 1) wherein one of the plurality of inflatable inner seals (304) is positioned between the upper plate (shown below) and the middle plate (shown below) and one of the plurality of inflatable inner seals (302) is positioned between the middle plate and the lower plate (shown below).
PNG
media_image2.png
558
622
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 (annotated)
Regarding claim 15, Wilson teaches a diverter assembly (RCD system 1 comprising outlet 20 for diverting drilling mud; pp[0027], Fig. 1) configured to be fixed mechanically to a drill floor, a component of a drilling rig, or to one or more of a structural beam underneath and supporting said drill floor (a lower end (10L) of the RCD 1 is adapted for connection with a BOP (18) of a wellhead, i.e. “a component of a drilling rig”, via a mechanical connection joint 14; Abstract, pp[0068]), comprising:
a diverter body (10), wherein the diverter body is fluidly coupled to an annulus of a wellbore (drilling mud returning from the wellbore and which is located in the annulus between the outer surface of the drill string and the inner surface 12 of the throughbore 11 of the subsea RCD system 1; pp[0071]), wherein said diverter body includes one or more diverter outlet ports fluidly coupled to the annulus of said wellbore, wherein said diverter body is configured to divert high pressure fluid from said annulus (drilling mud, i.e. a high pressure fluid, and cuttings returns up the annulus and will exit out the drilling mud returns outlet port 20; pp[0072]) away from said drill floor though said one or more diverter outlet ports (The drilling mud is returned back to the surface to the platform at the surface via a drilling mud returns hose (not shown) which is connected to the drilling mud return outlet port 20. As such, the mud is diverted away from the “drill floor”, which is the area where the system of Fig. 1 is located, via the outlet port 20; pp[0072]); and
a canister assembly (combination of 190 and 300; pp[0095][0098], Fig. 1) mechanically coupled (via locking dogs 64, 68; pp[0106], Fig. 1) to the diverter body (10; Fig. 1), wherein the canister assembly (300) is removable from the diverter body (190 and 300 can be retrieved from the diverter body 10; pp[0084], [0088],[0106]), wherein the canister assembly comprises at least one inflatable inner seal (302, 304) positioned on an inner surface of the canister assembly (inflatable packer 302,304 is positioned within an inner surface of 300; Fig. 1E), wherein the diverter body (10) comprises at least one inflatable outer seal (202 will be “outer” to a drill pipe string; pp[0085]), wherein the at least one inflatable outer seal (202) is positioned on an inner surface of the diverter body (202 is positioned within 10; Fig. 1), wherein the canister assembly (190, 300) comprises an upper plate (as shown in the annotated version of Fig. 1 below) and a lower plate (as shown below), wherein the at least one inflatable inner seal (302, 304) is positioned between the upper plate and the lower plate (shown below);
wherein the at least one inflatable inner seal comprises a plurality of inflatable inner seals (302, 304),
wherein the canister assembly comprises a middle plate (shown below in the annotated Fig.1), wherein one of the plurality of the plurality of inflatable inner seals (304) is positioned between the upper plate and the middle plate and one of the plurality of inflatable inner seals (302) is positioned between the middle plate and the lower plate (shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
527
775
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 (annotated)
Regarding claim 16, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 15, wherein the at least one inflatable inner seal is arranged to form a fluid seal between the canister assembly and a drill string (the pair of inflatable packers 304, 302 are inflated to seal against the outer surface of the drill string; pp[0077]).
Regarding claim 17, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 15, wherein the at least one inflatable outer seal is arranged to form a fluid seal between the canister assembly and the diverter body (the RCD 300 is to be retrieved from the RCD system 1 (for example in order to be replaced by a new RCD 300 having new seals 304, 302; pp[0081]).
Regarding claim 19, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 15, wherein the at least one inflatable outer seal comprises a plurality of inflatable outer seals (202 is an “outer seal” because the seal is “outer” to the drill string. Furthermore, two or more inflatable lower annual packer seals 202 can be provided in series; pp[0085], [0091]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson et al. (US Publication No.20220381105) in view of McHugh (U.S. Publication No. 20120174993).
In regards to claim 10, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1.
Wilson is silent regarding wherein the canister assembly is removable from the diverter body by axial rotation of the canister assembly.
McHugh, drawn to a retrievable insert for a wellhead, discloses that retrievable insert comprises a locking mechanism which is removable from the diverter body by axial rotation of the locking mechanism (the locking mechanism 20 may be a threaded or bayonet configuration; pp[0033]).
Therefore, 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 coupling mechanism of Wilson such that the locking mechanism of McHugh is substituted for the dogs of Wilson as it would require simple substitution of one known locking configuration for another known locking configuration to obtain the same predictable results of locking the canister assembly to the diverter body. MPEP 2141 (III)(B).
Regarding claim 12, Wilson teaches the diverter assembly of claim 1.
Wilson is silent regarding wherein the canister assembly is configured to be axially coupled to or removed from the diverter body by a breach lock assembly, wherein the canister assembly comprises one or more breach lock tabs and one or more breach lock slots.
McHugh, drawn to a retrievable insert for a wellhead, discloses that the retrievable insert comprises a locking mechanism is configured to be axially coupled to or removed from the wellhead by a breach lock assembly, wherein the canister assembly comprises one or more breach lock tabs and one or more breach lock slots (the locking mechanism 20 may be a threaded or bayonet configuration; pp[0033]).
Therefore, 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 coupling mechanism of Wilson such that the locking mechanism of McHugh is substituted for the dogs of Wilson as it would require simple substitution of one known locking configuration for another known locking configuration to obtain the same predictable results of locking the canister assembly to the diverter body. MPEP 2141 (III)(B).
Claim(s) 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson et al. (US Publication No.20220381105).
Regarding claim 20, Wilson teaches a diverter body system configured to be fixed mechanically to a drill floor, a component of a drilling rig, or to one or more of a structural beam underneath and supporting said drill floor (a lower end (10L) of the RCD 1 is adapted for connection with a BOP (18) of a wellhead, i.e. “a component of a drilling rig”, via a mechanical connection joint 14; Abstract, pp[0068]), comprising:
a diverter body (10), wherein the diverter body is fluidly coupled to an annulus of a wellbore (drilling mud returning from the wellbore and which is located in the annulus between the outer surface of the drill string and the inner surface 12 of the throughbore 11 of the subsea RCD system 1; pp[0071]), wherein said diverter body includes one or more diverter outlet ports fluidly coupled to the annulus of said wellbore, wherein said diverter body is configured to divert high pressure fluid from said annulus (drilling mud, i.e. a high pressure fluid, and cuttings returns up the annulus and will exit out the drilling mud returns outlet port 20; pp[0072]) away from said drill floor though said diverter outlet port (The drilling mud is returned back to the surface to the platform at the surface via a drilling mud returns hose (not shown) which is connected to the drilling mud return outlet port 20. As such, the mud is diverted away from the “drill floor”, which is the area where the system of Fig. 1 is located, via the outlet port 20; pp[0072]); and
a canister assembly (300) configured to mechanically couple (via locking dogs 68; pp[0084], Fig. 1) to the diverter body (10; Fig. 1), wherein each of the plurality of canister assemblies is removable from the diverter body (300 can be removed; pp[0084], [0088]), wherein each of the plurality of canister assemblies comprises at least one inflatable inner seal (302, 304) configured to form a fluid seal between the canister assembly and a pipe passing through the diverter body (the pair of inflatable packers 304, 302 are inflated to seal against the outer surface of the drill string; pp[0077]), wherein each of the plurality of canister assemblies comprises an upper plate (shoulder at 201, shoulder at 305) and a lower plate (shoulder at 205, shoulder at 307), wherein the at least one inflatable inner seal (302, 304) is positioned between the upper plate (as shown in the annotated version of Fig. 1 below) and the lower plate (shown below);
wherein the at least one inflatable inner seal comprises a plurality of inflatable inner seals (302, 304), wherein each of the plurality of canister assemblies comprises a middle plate (shown below), wherein one of the plurality of inflatable inner seals (304) is positioned between the upper plate and the middle plate and one of the plurality of inflatable inner seals (302) is positioned between the middle plate and the lower plate (shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
527
775
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 (annotated)
Wilson discloses a second sealing section (190) that has two or more inner inflatable seals (202; pp[0091], Fig.1). However, Wilson does not disclose that the second two seals will have the same form as the first canister (300) with the upper, middle and lower plate.
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 second canister of Wilson to include two inflatable packers as explicitly taught by Wilson such that it has the same form as the first canister, also as taught by Wilson, as the reference provides the structural guidance to include more than one packer as well as due to ease of manufacturing and operation for pressure control during drilling (pp[0093], Fig.1). Furthermore, 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 second canister of Wilson such that it has the same form as the first canister since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 21, Wilson teaches the diverter body system of claim 20, wherein each of the plurality of canister assemblies is configured to seal against a specific diameter of the pipe (the upper and lower RCD seals is formed from a resilient material and which is inflatable such that when in an inflated state has an inner diameter which is a friction fit such that it comprises an inner diameter that matches the outer diameter of the work string; Claim 21. As such, the inflatable seals will inflate to seals against multiple pipe diameters.).
Regarding claim 22, Wilson teaches the diverter body system of claim 20, wherein one of the plurality of canister assemblies is selectable based on a specific diameter of the pipe (the upper and lower RCD seals (of 190, 300) are formed from a resilient material and which is inflatable such that when in an inflated state has an inner diameter which is a friction fit such that it comprises an inner diameter that matches the outer diameter of the work string; Claim 21. As such, canister assembly 190, 300 are selected such the work string can be enclosed by the canister assembly.).
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 Lamia Quaim whose telephone number is (469)295-9199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM - 6PM 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.
/LAMIA QUAIM/ Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/TARA SCHIMPF/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676