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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Applicant’s claims, filed on 11/28/2023.
Claims 1-22 have been amended.
Claims 9-17 have been withdrawn in response to the restriction requirement dated 10/21/2025.
Claims 1-8, and 18-22 are currently pending and have been examined.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of the group directed to a drilling rig comprising of an energy chain for drilling boreholes in the reply filed on 10/21/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the elected and nonelected groups share the same special technical features and are linked to form a single general inventive concept. This is not found persuasive because the restriction requirement is based on the lack of a common inventive feature among the groups. Specifically, claims 9-17 are directed to energy supply lines, whereas claims 1-8 and 18-22 are directed to an energy chain. As such, the nonelected claims do not share the same corresponding technical feature required for unity of invention. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to for the following:
Figures 6-8 are recited as cross-sectional views however the figures do not include any cross hatching.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The ”unwinding protection device is configured to detect a counter torque” recited in claim 3 has been determine to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f), and the specification appears to provide the structure of a lever arm, feed drive, worm gear, and protective switch (Fig. 13).
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.
Claim 6 and 19 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 6 recites the limitations one connection and the other connection. It is unclear which connection the “one” and “the other” is referring to in order to meet the claimed invention, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The “one” or “the other” is indefinite as it does not clearly indicate if the connection is the “first connection” or the “the second connection” as recited in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation locking devices are provided between the chain links in each case in order to lock together chain links lying against one another via the bearing surfaces. It is unclear how the locking device functions or the required structure to lock the chain links against each other to meet the claimed invention, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Precopia (US5538092).
Claim 1. Precopia discloses: Mobile drilling rig for drilling boreholes into a subsurface (Fig. 1), comprising;
a drive unit for the provision of energy (17 air compressor or drilling fluid pump, Fig. 1),
a drilling unit (15 rotary drilling device, Fig. 1) having a drive motor and a drill head driven by said motor (motor and drill head is inherent to a rotary drilling device powered by air or fluid) and
an energy chain (9 flexible drill pipe, Fig. 1) with energy supply that connect the drive motor to the drive unit for the transmission of the energy, wherein the drive motor converts the energy into mechanical work for driving the drill head (inner bore of flexible drill pipe is fluidically coupled to the rotary drilling device and drive unit to provide air or hydraulic fluid to actuate the rotary drilling device, Fig. 1-4; Col. 2, lines 8-11).
Claim 2. Precopia discloses: Drilling rig according to claim 1, wherein the drilling rig comprises a winding device for winding and unwinding the energy chain (7 rotary wheel, Fig. 1).
Claim 4. Precopia discloses: Drilling rig according to claim 1, wherein the drilling rig comprises a guide unit for guiding the drilling unit and the energy chain into a borehole to be drilled (3 drilling tower, Fig. 1).
Claim 18. Precopia discloses: Energy chain for a drilling rig according to claim 1, comprising a plurality of hollow chain links (20 segments, Fig. 2) which are connected to one another via joints (32 or 36 end, Fig. 3), wherein energy supply lines for the transmission of energy are guided in or on the chain links (inner bore of segment guides air or hydraulic fluid, Fig. 3), wherein the chain links are connected to one another in a hinge-like manner via uniaxial joints (universal movement; Col. 2, lines 27-31).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Precopia (US5538092) in view of Slonneger (US2657011).
Claim 3. Precopia discloses: Drilling rig according to claim 2. Precopia does not disclose:
an unwinding protection device, wherein the unwinding protection device is configured to detect a counter torque exerted by the energy chain on the winding device, wherein the winding device is configured to interrupt the unwinding of the energy chain as soon as the unwinding protection device detects a counter torque of the energy chain.
Slonneger discloses an apparatus for controlling the rotation of the cable reels of well drilling rigs, and in provision for maintaining a constant rate of feed and a constant drilling load upon the drilling bit of such a rig. Therefore, Slonneger teaches: an unwinding protection device (cable reel controller, Fig. 2), wherein the unwinding protection device is configured to detect a counter torque (torque caused by the cable paying out too rapidly; Col. 6, lines 15-19) exerted by the energy chain (14 cable, Fig. 2) on the winding device (16 drum, Fig. 2), wherein the winding device is configured to interrupt the unwinding of the energy chain as soon as the unwinding protection device detects a counter torque of the energy chain (cable is paying out too rapidly i.e. creating a counter torque, drum is slowed down; Col. 6, lines 15-47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the rotary wheel of Precopia by incorporating the cable reel controller as taught by Slonneger with a reasonable expectation of success in order to actuate a brake to slow the wheel when counter torque is sensed as taught by Slonneger (Col. 6, lines 15-47).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Precopia (US5538092) in view of Gosse (US6062309).
Claim 5. Precopia discloses: Drilling rig according to claim 1. Percopia does not disclose: a torque support is arranged between the energy chain and the drilling unit, wherein the torque support causes a support on the borehole wall in the event of increased torques during drilling work or in the event of blockage of the drilling unit and thus prevents a torque increased by the drilling work or a torque generated by the blockage from being introduced into the connected energy chain.
Gosse discloses a mandrel-operated torque roller anchor for insertion into the casing of a well, which when set resists axial movement and prevents rotation of itself and the string above it in one direction, but permits such motion when rotated in the other direction. Therefore, Gosse teaches: a torque support (2 anchor, Fig. 1) is arranged between the energy chain and the drilling unit (threads for connection to parts of the string; Col. 3, liens 5-18), wherein the torque support causes a support on the borehole wall in the event of increased torques during drilling work or in the event of blockage of the drilling unit (20 slips engage with wall of 38 casing, Fig. 9-10) and thus prevents a torque increased by the drilling work or a torque generated by the blockage from being introduced into the connected energy chain (anchor prevents transmission of torque/rotation of the string above it in one direction but permits rotation in the opposite direction, Col. 1, lines 53-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Prcopia by incorporating the anchor between the rotary drilling device and flexible drill pipe as taught by Gosse with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent increased torque to transfer to the flexible drill pipe during drilling work or a blockage as taught by Goose (Col. 1, lines 53-57).
Claim 6. Precopia in view of Goose teach: Drilling rig according to claim 5, wherein a first connection of the torque support is provided for connection to the drilling unit (Goose: 10 threads, Fig. 1) and a second connection of the torque support is provided for connection to the energy chain (Goose: 8 threads, Fig. 1), wherein a disc-shaped clamping element having wedge segments (Goose: 20 slips, Fig. 10-11) that can be pivoted outward radially is connected to one connection Goose: (20 slips are coupled to connections, Fig. 10-11), and a cam ring (Goose: 4 mandrel, Fig. 10-11) is connected to the other connection (Goose: 4 mandrel is coupled to connections, Fig. 1), wherein the torque support is triggered by the cam ring being rotated relative to the clamping element, as a result of which the wedge segments pivot outward and jam against the borehole wall (Goose: 4 mandrel rotation caused 20 slips to pivot and engage 38 casing, Fig. 10-11; Col. 4, lines 33-57)
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Precopia (US5538092) in view of Bobo (US2833517).
Claim 7. Precopia discloses: Drilling rig according claim 1, wherein the drilling rig comprises a circulation system for flushing drilling water (17 pump for drilling fluid, Fig. 1). Precopia does not disclose: the circulation system is configured to supply flushing drilling water to the drilling unit in a circulating manner in a flushing drilling process.
Bobo recites drilling fluid circulation processes and systems. Therefore, Bobo teaches: the circulation system is configured to supply flushing drilling water to the drilling unit in a circulating manner in a flushing drilling process (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Precopia by incorporating the drilling fluid circulation system as taught by BoBo with a reasonable expectation of success in order circulate drilling fluid as a flushing fluid as taught by Bobo (Fig. 1).
Claim 8. Precopia in view of Bobo teaches: Drilling rig according to claim 7, wherein the circulation system comprises
at least one settling tank (Bobo: 16 tank, Fig. 1; Col. 3, lines 4-5) and
at least one sewage pump (Bobo: 18 pump, Fig. 1), wherein the sewage pump is configured to suck flushing drilling water from the settling tank and supply it under pressure to the drilling unit in the borehole (Bobo: Fig. 1), wherein the settling tank is configured to collect drill cuttings flushed out of the borehole and flushing drilling water and to separate the drill cuttings from the flushing drilling water (Bobo: Col. 3, lines 4-5).
Claims 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Precopia (US5538092) in view of Cormack (WO2014131085).
Claim 19. Precopia discloses: Energy chain according to claim 18, wherein the joints are arranged externally on bearing surfaces (34 ball and 36 socket are bearing surfaces, Fig. 3) of the chain links. Precopia does not disclose: locking devices are provided between the chain links in each case in order to lock together chain links lying against one another via the bearing surfaces.
Cormack discloses a vertebrae chain including a plurality of interconnected vertebrae. The vertebrae when under compression rigidly interlock such that the vertebrae chain can be driven into a surface, where a drive may include protrusions for engaging intrusions on the vertebrae to provide a positive urging force, and the vertebrae are different lengths. Therefore, Cormack teaches: locking devices are provided between the chain links in each case in order to lock together chain links lying against one another via the bearing surfaces (load bearing profiles lock the vertebrae in a rigid alignment between the vertebrae, Fig. 5C; [0199]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the flexible drill pipe of Precopia by incorporating the interlocking bearing surfaces as taught by Coramck with a reasonable expectation of success in order lock the flexible drill pipe into a rigid configuration as taught by Cormack ([0199]).
Claim 20. Precopia discloses: Energy chain according to claim 18. Precopia does not disclose: wherein drive segments or toothed racks are arranged on the chain links, via which a feed of the energy chain can be carried out. Cormack further teaches: wherein drive segments or toothed racks are arranged on the chain links (intrusions or end features of the vertebrae for protrusions on the drive to engage and create an urging force, [0165]), via which a feed of the energy chain can be carried out.
Claim 21. Precopia discloses: Energy chain according to claim 18. Precopie does not disclose: wherein the chain links are of different lengths, or each sixth chain link is longer than the five chain links arranged therebetween. Cormack further teaches: the chain links are of different lengths (links are different lengths as illustrated in Fig. 9A-9C), or each sixth chain link is longer than the five chain links arranged therebetween.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Precopia (US5538092) in view of Jelsma (US4880067).
Claim 22. Precopia discloses: A mobile drilling rig for drilling boreholes into a subsurface, comprising
a drive unit for a provision of energy,
a drilling unit having a drive motor and
a drill head connected to the drive motor (motor and drill head is inherent to a rotary drilling device powered by air or fluid), wherein the drilling unit comprises a plurality of energy supply lines that connect the drive motor to the drive unit for transmission of energy, wherein the drive motor converts energy transmitted via the energy supply lines into mechanical work for driving the drill head;
an energy chain having a plurality of hollow chain links which are connected to one another via joints, wherein the energy supply lines are guided in or on the chain links for a transmission of energy, wherein the chain links are connected to one another in a hinge-like manner via uniaxial joints, wherein the drive motor converts the energy into mechanical work for driving the drill head (see previously rejected claims 1 and 18). Precopia does not disclose: a drill head connected to the drive motor via a drive shaft.
Jelsma discloses a non-rotating drill string formed from a plurality of independent, cylindrical sections pivotally connected together by a latch mechanism. The adjacent ends are partially beveled such that the sections can bend in a single direction. A downhole mud motor (PDM) drives the drill bit through the use of a flexible drive shaft for drilling a hole. Therefore, Jelsma teaches: a drill head (56 drill bit, Fig. 6) connected to the drive motor (51 mud motor, Fig. 3) via a drive shaft (74 flexible drive shaft, Fig. 4 or mud motor drive shaft, not shown; Col. 3, lines 45-49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have substituted the rotary drilling device of Precopia with the mud motor drill assembly as taught by Jelsma with a reasonable expectation of success in order create a hole with drill head connected to the mud motor via a drive shaft as taught by Jelsma (Fig. 3-6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Craig whose telephone number is (571)270-0747. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thurs 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM 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.
/DANIEL T CRAIG/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676