Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/995,960

SUBSEA PHASE-SEPARATION AND DENSE GAS REINJECTION BY USING A PUMP

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 11, 2022
Examiner
LAMBE, PATRICK F
Art Unit
3679
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
VETCO GRAY SCANDINAVIA AS
OA Round
4 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
364 granted / 585 resolved
+10.2% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
629
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
32.5%
-7.5% vs TC avg
§112
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 585 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . The amended claims filed 10/29/25 are acknowledged; claims 1-17 are currently pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unnam (WO 2015095886).in view of Hopper (US 20050145388). CLAIM 1: Unnam discloses a scalable modular fluid separation system (Fig. 5). The system at least comprising a) a first subsea separator (200) with an inlet (on line 52) for receiving well fluids from a separator inlet stream; b) a gas stream outlet (to 54) of the first subsea separator; c) a first liquid stream outlet (to 53) of the first subsea separator; d) a second subsea separator (300) with an inlet in fluid communication with the first liquid steam outlet of the first subsea separator (see Fig. 5); e) a second liquid stream outlet (to 55; see Fig. 4) of the second subsea separator; and f) a third liquid stream outlet (to 59; see Fig. 4) of the second subsea separator. A gas stream is directed from the first subsea separator to a reinjection well, a first liquid stream is directed from the first subsea separator to the second subsea separator, a second liquid stream is directed from the second subsea separator to at least one of a liquid receiving facility and a reinjection well, and a third liquid stream is directed from the second subsea separator to an oil receiving facility is functional language. The invention is directed to a fluid separation system, what happens to the streams after they leave the system does not change the physical structure of the system. Unnam fails to disclose a gas stream in selective fluid communication with a reinjection well. Hopper discloses a scalable modular fluid separation system. Hopper discloses a gas stream in selective fluid communication with a reinjection well (see paragraphs 0042, 0077, 0078). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the system of Unnam to direct the gas to a reinjection well as in Hopper with a reasonable expectation of success as Hopper teaches the reinjection of gas is an appropriate use of gas that has been separated from subsea fluids. CLAIM 3: Unnam fails to disclose a booster pump is in communication with the gas stream outlet of the first subsea separator, where the booster pump is a dense gas pump. Hopper discloses a dense gas pump as a booster pump in a gas stream outlet (39, gas pump per paragraph 0091 to pump the dense gas). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the separation system of Unnam with the dense gas pump of Hopper with a reasonable expectation of success as Hopper teaches pump can be used to maintain pressure in the line (paragraph 0091). CLAIM 4: An inlet manifold (see Unnam Fig. 4, showing manifold for 55), where the inlet manifold is in communication with an inlet for receiving well fluids from a separator inlet stream. CLAIM 5: The first subsea separator is a subsea 2-phase gas to liquid separator (Unnam, paragraph 0023). CLAIM 6: The second subsea separator is a subsea 2-phase oil-water separator (Unnam, paragraph 0023) and wherein the second liquid stream outlet is a water stream outlet and the third liquid stream outlet is an oil stream outlet (see Fig. 5). CLAIM 7: The water stream is directed from the second subsea separator to a water pump (750) where the water stream is boosted by the water pump and the water is directed to a reinjection well (see Fig. 5), and the oil stream is directed from the second subsea separator to an oil pump (450) where the oil stream is boosted by the oil pump and the oil is directed to an oil receiving facility (see Fig. 5). CLAIM 8: The first liquid stream is directed from the first liquid stream outlet of the first subsea separator to an inlet of a the second subsea separator to provide a two stage gas-oil-water separation station where the liquid is separated into: a) a water stream and where the water stream is directed to a water pump where the water stream is boosted by the water pump and the water is directed to a reinjection well, and b) an oil stream and where the oil stream is directed to an oil pump where the oil stream is boosted by the oil pump and the oil is directed to an oil receiving facility (see Fig. 5). CLAIM 9: The system further comprises: a) several 2-phase subsea separators each with an inlet for receiving well fluids from an associated well (400, see Fig. 5); b) a gas stream piping from a gas stream outlet of each of the 2-phase subsea separators (see Fig. 5); c) a gas reinjection module in communication with the gas stream outlet of the several 2- phase subsea separators (see Fig. 5); d) a liquid stream piping from a liquid stream outlet of each of the 2-phase subsea separator (see Fig. 5); e) a liquid pumping module in communication with the liquid stream outlet of the several 2-phase subsea separators (see Fig. 5); wherein the gas streams are directed from each of the 2-phase subsea separators to a gas reinjection module inlet where each of the gas streams are directed to a booster pump and directed to a reinjection well, and each of the liquid streams are directed from each of the 2-phase subsea separators to a liquid pumping module inlet where each of the liquid streams are directed to a liquid pressure booster and the liquid is directed to one of a liquid receiving facility, an oil receiving facility and a reinjection well (see Fig. 5; discussion above). CLAIM 10: The gas reinjection module inlet is an inlet manifold, and where the liquid pumping module inlet is an inlet manifold (see Fig. 5, piping making manifold). CLAIM 12: The scalable modular fluid separation system further comprises: a) several 3-phase subsea separators each with an inlet for receiving well fluids from an associated well (see paragraph 0030); b) a gas stream piping from a gas stream outlet of each of the 3-phase subsea separators (see Fig. 5); c) a gas reinjection module in communication with the gas stream outlet of the several 3- phase subsea separators (Fig. 5); d) a water stream piping from a water stream outlet of each of the 3-phase subsea separators (Fig. 5); e) a water reinjecting module in communication with the water stream outlet of the several 3-phase subsea separators (Fig. 5); f) an oil stream piping from a water stream outlet of each of the 3-phase subsea separators (Fig. 5); g) an oil pumping module (450) in communication with the oil stream outlet of the several 3- phase subsea separators, wherein the gas streams are directed from each of the 3-phase subsea separators to a gas reinjection module inlet where each of the gas streams are directed to a booster pump and directed to a reinjection well, and each of the water streams are directed from each of the 3-phase subsea separators to a water pumping module inlet where each of the water streams are directed to a water pressure booster and the water is directed to a reinjection well, and each of the oil streams are directed from each of the 3-phase subsea separators to an oil pumping module inlet where each of the oil streams are directed to an oil pressure booster and the oil is directed to an oil receiving facility (Fig. 5). CLAIM 13: The gas reinjection module inlet is an inlet manifold, the water pumping module inlet is an inlet manifold, and where the oil pumping module inlet is an inlet manifold (see Fig. 5). CLAIM 15: The scalable modular fluid separation system further comprises: a) several two stage gas-oil-water separation stations each with an inlet for receiving well fluids from an associated well (400; Fig. 5); b) a gas stream piping from a gas stream outlet of each of the two stage gas-oil-water separation (Fig. 5); c) a gas reinjection module in communication with the gas stream outlet of the several two stage gas-oil-water separation stations (Fig. 5); d) a water stream piping from a water stream outlet of each of the two stage gas-oil-water separation stations (Fig. 5); e) a water reinjecting module in communication with the water stream outlet of the several two stage gas-oil-water separation stations (Fig. 5); f) an oil stream piping from a water stream outlet from each of the two stage gas-oil-water separation stations (Fig. 5); g) an oil pumping module (450) in communication with the oil stream outlet of the several two stage gas-oil-water separation stations, wherein the gas streams are directed from each of the two stage gas-oil-water separation stations to a gas reinjection module inlet where each of the gas streams are directed to a booster pump and directed to a reinjection well, and each of the water streams are directed from each of the two stage gas-oil-water separation stations to a water pumping module inlet where each of the water streams are directed to a water pressure booster and the water is directed to a reinjection well, and each of the oil streams are directed from each of the two stage gas-oil-water separation stations to an oil pumping module inlet where each of the oil streams are directed to an oil pressure booster and the oil is directed to an oil receiving facility (Fig. 5). CLAIM 16: The gas reinjection module inlet is an inlet manifold, the water pumping module inlet is an inlet manifold, and where the oil pumping module inlet is an inlet manifold (see Fig. 5). CLAIMS 2, 11, 14, and 17: The elements of claims 1, 9, 12, and 15 as discussed above. Unnam does not disclose the use of heat exchangers. Hopper discloses a scalable modular fluid separation system Hopper discloses using heat exchangers (paragraph 0062). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the separation system of Unnam with the heat exchangers of Hopper with a reasonable expectation of success as Hopper teaches that the maintaining a minimum temperature is important to prevent waxing, asphatines and hydrates from forming in the system (paragraph 0062). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 10/29/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts the prior art fails to disclose a connection for the gas to the reinjection well. As discussed above, that feature is fully discussed in the previously cited art of Hopper. One of ordinary skill in the art would find the gas stream being reinjected as an obvious use of the gas as both systems deal with fluid separation systems for subsea systems. 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 PATRICK F LAMBE whose telephone number is (571)270-1932. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-4. 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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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. /PATRICK F LAMBE/Examiner, Art Unit 3676 /TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 11, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 17, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 24, 2024
Response Filed
Aug 31, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 06, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 29, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595711
CUTTING TOOL AND CONTROLS FOR DOWNHOLE MECHANICAL SERVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12540521
Electrical Drilling and Production Systems and Methods
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12503928
SELF CLEANING FRACKING PLUG AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12497878
ELECTRICALLY POWERED PUMPING UNIT WITH REMOVABLE PUMP MODULES
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12460506
VALVES FOR WELL SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF OPERATING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+29.4%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 585 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month