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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/29/26 and 2/17/26 have been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed 1/29/26, with respect to the rejection of claims 11-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 11-20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 1/29/26, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-12 and 13-21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues a new limitation which has not yet been considered: determining chemical composition of the liquid. Applicant argues that Ritzmann fails to teach determining the chemical composition of the liquid (emphasis added by applicant). Applicant argues that this distinguishes over Ritzmann because Ritzmann teaches detection of composition of the formation gas (emphasis added by applicant). However, the new limitation does not overcome the most recent rejection.
This new limitation is taught by Rowe: Rowe teaches drilling assembly 100 wherein a fluid sample is sent to an analyzer 158. The fluid sample includes both gas and liquid [0026, 0029, 0034]. The gas is extracted using a flash column [0034, 0052] and the liquid portion can be passed through a pyrolysis unit 410 before being analyzed by the mass spectrometer [0040]. Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4, 8-10, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritzmann et al. (US20180088096) in view of Ochoa et al. (US20200378201) further in view of Cartellieri (US20090294175) further in view of Rowe et al. (US20160160641).
Claim 1: Ritzmann teaches a method for analyzing a drilling fluid used in a drilling operation within a subterranean formation (Title), the method comprising: flowing the drilling fluid through a fluid conduit coupled to a drilling assembly (Fig. 1 shows the drilling fluid 9 flowing to the surface through a conduit to reach the drilling fluid sampler 13); flowing a drilling fluid sample (formation fluid) of the drilling fluid from the fluid conduit, wherein the drilling fluid sample comprises a liquid (formation fluid); determining a chemical composition of the drilling fluid using gas chromatography (GC) of the drilling fluid sample, wherein determining the chemical composition of the drilling fluid using GC comprises: a gaseous drilling fluid sample ([0010] gas extractor 14); and introducing the gaseous drilling fluid sample to a GC system comprising a GC column (gas analyzer 15 includes a chromatograph [0010]) to determine the chemical composition (composition [0010]) of the drilling fluid.
Ritzmann fails to teach continuously flowing a drilling fluid sample of the drilling fluid from the fluid conduit, wherein the drilling fluid sample comprises a liquid; sending the drilling fluid sample to a bypass, or determining a chemical composition of the drilling fluid using gas chromatography (GC) of the drilling fluid sample.
However, Ochoa teaches obtaining extracted gas from a continuously flowing drilling fluid (sampling fluid 115a) wherein the sample can be either passed to a chromatograph 180 or to a bypass (exhaust 105) [0020-0021].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a continuously flowing drilling fluid sample and bypass, as taught by Ochoa, with the device of Ritzmann in order to improve gas extraction efficiency (Ochoa [0006-0007]).
Ritzmann in view of Ochoa fails to teach wherein the GC comprises a GC column.
However, Cartellieri teaches downhole gas chromatography for downhole fluids including a GC 210, Fig. 2, having a column 228.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the device of Cartellieri with the device of Ritzmann in view of Ochoa in order to effectively separate different components of the downhole fluid (Cartellieri [0036]).
Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri fails to teach wherein determining the chemical composition of the liquid.
However, Rowe teaches drilling assembly 100 wherein a fluid sample is sent to an analyzer 158. The fluid sample includes both gas and liquid [0026, 0029, 0034]. The gas is extracted using a flash column [0034, 0052] and the liquid portion can be passed through a pyrolysis unit 410 before being analyzed by the mass spectrometer [0040].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to destruct the liquid portion of the sample, as taught by Rowe, with the device of Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri in order to thermochemically decompose organic material within the drilling fluid sample, which may aide in the analysis of the liquid portion of the drilling fluid sample (Rowe [0040]).
Claim 2: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the method of claim 1. Ritzmann teaches determining a formation characteristic using the determined chemical composition ([0012] These known correlations combine the fluid composition with measured or anticipated formation properties, such as, but not limiting, pressure and temperature (e.g., PVT analysis) in order to derive the fluid characteristics such as, but not limiting, density, T1 nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) relaxation time, T2 NMR relaxation time, diffusion coefficient, hydrogen index, bubble point, API gravity or specific gravity, gas specific gravity, viscosity, and/or gas-oil-ratio.).
Claim 3: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the method of claim 2. Ritzmann teaches wherein determining the formation characteristic using the determined chemical composition comprises comparing the determined chemical composition to a data set corresponding to known chemical compositions of subterranean formations ([0008, 0012] Once the chemical composition of each gas sample is obtained, a property of the formation fluid at the depth corresponding to each gas sample may be determined from the chemical composition of the gas sample using a correlation known in the art. Once a formation fluid property of interest is determined using a known correlation, that formation property of interest may also be entered into the computer processing system 16, which can provide a log of the formation fluid property of interest versus depth. Alternatively, the computer processing system 16 may be configured to apply the known correlation to the chemical composition of each gas sample already entered.)
Claim 4: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the method of claim 1. Ritzmann teaches wherein determining the chemical composition of the drilling fluid using the GC comprises receiving an output of a GC system at an information handling system coupled to the GC system; and comparing the output of the GC system to a data set corresponding to known chemical compositions ([0008, 0012] Once the chemical composition of each gas sample is obtained, a property of the formation fluid at the depth corresponding to each gas sample may be determined from the chemical composition of the gas sample using a correlation known in the art. Once a formation fluid property of interest is determined using a known correlation, that formation property of interest may also be entered into the computer processing system 16, which can provide a log of the formation fluid property of interest versus depth. Alternatively, the computer processing system 16 may be configured to apply the known correlation to the chemical composition of each gas sample already entered.).
Claim 8: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the method of claim 1. Ritzmann teaches wherein the fluid conduit comprises an annulus (annulus between the drill tubular 5 and the wall of the borehole 2, Fig. 1) in a wellbore or a flow conduit fluidly connected therewith.
Claim 9: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the method of claim 8. Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri fails to teach wherein the fluid conduit contains the drilling fluid exiting a wellbore of the drilling operation and upstream of any bulk solids separation apparatus configured to remove one or more components from the drilling fluid.
However, teaches a shale shaker 152 and a plurality of access points 160a-g wherein samples can be taken for analysis or the analyzer can be attached to fluid channels such that the drilling fluid passes through the analyzer [0026].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to analyze the fluid upstream of the solids removal, as taught by , in order to separate formation gases from the solids ([0034]).
Claim 10: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the method of claim 1. Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri fails to teach wherein destructing the drilling fluid sample to provide the gaseous drilling fluid sample comprises introducing the drilling fluid sample to a flash column, and increasing the drilling fluid sample to a temperature above a boiling point of the drilling fluid sample, such that the drilling fluid sample is converted to a gas as the gaseous drilling fluid sample.
However, Rowe teaches drilling assembly 100 wherein the fluid sample includes both gas and liquid [0026, 0029, 0034]. The gas is extracted using a flash column [0034, 0052] and the liquid portion can be passed through a pyrolysis unit 410 (increasing the drilling fluid sample to a temperature above a boiling point of the drilling fluid sample, such that the drilling fluid sample is converted to a gas as the gaseous drilling fluid sample) before being analyzed [0040].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to destruct the liquid portion of the sample, as taught by , with the device of Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri in order to thermochemically decompose organic material within the drilling fluid sample, which may aide in the analysis of the liquid portion of the drilling fluid sample ([0040]).
Claim 21: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the method of claim 1. Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri fails to teach wherein the destructing comprises introducing the drilling fluid sample into a flash column wherein the drilling fluid sample is destructed to provide a gaseous drilling fluid sample, and wherein the gaseous drilling fluid sample is introduced into the GC column.
However, Rowe teaches drilling assembly 100 wherein a fluid sample is sent to an analyzer 158. The fluid sample includes both gas and liquid [0026, 0029, 0034] and the gas is extracted using a flash column [0034, 0052] before being sent to the analyzer 158.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to destruct the liquid portion of the sample, as taught by Rowe, with the device of Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri in order to characterize the formation ( [0026]).
Claims 5, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe in view of Fratini et al. (US20180311598) further in view of DiFoggio et al. (US8145429) further in view of Reed (US20140080115).
Claim 5: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the method of claim 1.
The difference between the device of Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe is continuously pumping, via a sample pump, a portion of the drilling fluid from the drilling fluid conduit through a gross filter upstream of the sample pump and a regenerative fine filter downstream from the sample pump to provide a continuous flow of the drilling fluid sample, wherein the gross filter and the regenerative fine filter remove solids from the portion of the drilling fluid, and wherein the regenerative fine filter removes smaller particles from the portion of the drilling fluid sample than the gross filter.
However, Fratini, DiFoggio, and Reed teach a known technique applicable to the device of Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe. Fratini teaches, Fig. 1A, a pump 106 which uses filters 102, 104 to protect the pump 106 from sand. Likewise, DiFoggio teaches the use of a filter 56 in order to prevent the entry of particulate matter or other solids from entering the injector 40 of the chromatograph. Choosing an appropriate filter size is taught by Reed which provides a method for determining the state of particulates by determining the resistance of a filter in a reacting system or for characterizing particulates and a method of correlating particulate size and numbers with filter resistance by means of, for example, multiple filters having different pore sizes.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use filters to protect pumps and chromatograph equipment because filters are known to removes solids and particulates of target sizes.
Clam 7: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed teaches the method of claim 5. Reed teaches wherein a pump provides a constant flow rate of less than or equal to about 3000 mL/min to a filter ([0141, 0146]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to choose an appropriate flow rate for the pump in order to be able to remove particulate and maintain a clean stream of fluid downstream from the filter (Reed [0139]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed further in view of Pelletier et al. (20210207478).
Claim 6: Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed teaches the method of claim 5 but fails to teach wherein the regenerative fine filter comprises a roll of filtration material continuously drawn into a path of the drilling fluid sample, such that a fresh section of the roll of filtration material is continuously exposed to the continuously flowing drilling fluid sample.
Fratini teaches wherein the filter 102 comprises multiple filters in parallel (102 and 104 are operated in parallel, see Fig. 1A, 2A, 3A), such that one of the two filters is filtering the drilling fluid sample while the other of the two filters is being regenerated ([0036-0038]). A regenerative filter comprising roll of filter material is taught by Pelletier (Fig. 4, roll assembly 202).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a regenerative filter, as taught by Fratini, including one known in the art such as a roll filter taught by Pelletier, with the device of Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe in order to protect the pump from ingesting entrained solids, and is automatically purged of filtered solids without requiring a low pressure destination for purged solids and purging fluid (Fratini [0010]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe.
Claim 11: Graves teaches a system (Fig. 1) for analyzing a drilling fluid used in a drilling operation within a subterranean formation, the system comprising: a gas chromatograph (GC) system (gas extractor and analyzer 158) in fluid communication with a drilling assembly (drilling system 100) and configured to produce a GC output (composition of the extracted gas [0025]); a flash column configured to destruct the fluid sample ([0023] Graves teaches the use of a flash column as a gas extraction mechanism 158 that allows for the separation and expansion of gas from liquids and solids.); and an information handling system (information handling system 160) communicably coupled to the GC system, wherein the information handling system comprises a processor and a memory device coupled to the processor, and the memory device contains a set of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to receive the output of the GC system; and determine a chemical composition of the drilling fluid using the output of the GC system ([0025] The information handling system 160 may comprise a processor and a memory device communicably coupled to the processor containing a set of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to receive the output signals from the extractor and analyzer 158, determine the chemical composition of the extracted gas, and determine at least one downhole condition based, at least in part, on the determined chemical composition.)
Graves fails to teach a bypass line, wherein a portion of the drilling fluid is continuously extracted from a fluid conduit coupled to the drilling assembly and a drilling fluid sample of the portion of the drilling fluid is introduced to the GC system or the bypass line.
However, Ochoa teaches obtaining extracted gas from a continuously flowing drilling fluid (sampling fluid 115a) wherein the sample can be either passed to a chromatograph 180 or to a bypass (exhaust 105) [0020-0021].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a continuously flowing drilling fluid sample and bypass, as taught by Ochoa, with the device of Graves in order to improve gas extraction efficiency (Ochoa [0006-0007]).
Graves in view of Ochoa fails to teach wherein the GC system comprises an injector, a flash column, a gas chromatography column, and a detector, wherein the flash column destructs the drilling fluid sample to provide a gaseous drilling fluid sample, and wherein the gaseous drilling fluid sample is introduced into the GC column.
However, Cartellieri teaches a GC system which comprises an injector, a column, a gas chromatography column, and a detector, wherein the column is configured to destruct a sample of the drilling fluid to provide a gaseous sample, and wherein the gaseous sample is introduced into the GC column.
Cartellieri teaches downhole gas chromatography for downhole fluids including a GC 210, Fig. 2, having a column 228, an injector 226, and a detector 230 [0032] wherein the column is configured to substantially entirely destruct a sample of the drilling fluid to provide a gaseous sample, and wherein the gaseous sample is introduced into the GC column ([0033] The injector 226 introduces the sample from the collector 208 to the column 228).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the device of Cartellieri with the device of Graves in order to effectively separate different components of the downhole fluid (Cartellieri [0036]).
Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri fails to teach determining a chemical composition of the liquid (as opposed to the gas).
However, Rowe teaches drilling assembly 100 wherein a fluid sample is sent to an analyzer 158. The fluid sample includes both gas and liquid [0026, 0029, 0034]. The liquid portion of the sample is passed through a pyrolysis unit 410 before being analyzed by the mass spectrometer [0040].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to destruct the liquid portion of the sample, as taught by , with the device of Ritzmann in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri in order to thermochemically decompose organic material within the drilling fluid sample, which may aide in the analysis of the liquid portion of the drilling fluid sample (Rowe [0040]).
Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe further in view of Ritzmann.
Claim 12: Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the system of claim 11, but fails to teach wherein determining the chemical composition of the drilling fluid using the GC comprises receiving an output of a GC system at an information handling system coupled to the GC system; and comparing the output of the GC system to a data set corresponding to known chemical compositions.
However, Ritzmann teaches determining the chemical composition of the drilling fluid using the GC comprises receiving an output of a GC system at an information handling system coupled to the GC system; and comparing the output of the GC system to a data set corresponding to known chemical compositions ([0008, 0012] Once the chemical composition of each gas sample is obtained, a property of the formation fluid at the depth corresponding to each gas sample may be determined from the chemical composition of the gas sample using a correlation known in the art. Once a formation fluid property of interest is determined using a known correlation, that formation property of interest may also be entered into the computer processing system 16, which can provide a log of the formation fluid property of interest versus depth. Alternatively, the computer processing system 16 may be configured to apply the known correlation to the chemical composition of each gas sample already entered.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use teachings of Ritzmann with the device of Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe in order to improve efficiency of drilling production resources (Ritzmann [0001]).
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe further in view of Ritzmann further in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed.
Claim 14: Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the system of claim 11, but fails to teach wherein the portion of the drilling fluid is continuously extracted from the fluid conduit via a sample pump, and wherein a gross filter is positioned upstream of the sample pump and a regenerative fine filter is positioned downstream from the sample pump, wherein the gross filter and the regenerative fine filter remove solids from the portion of the drilling fluid, and wherein the regenerative fine filter removes smaller particles from the portion of the drilling fluid sample than the gross filter.
Ritzmann teaches a pump for a drilling fluid sampler in order to obtain a sample [0010]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a pump, as taught by Ritzmann, for the obvious benefit of moving fluid to obtain a sample.
The difference between the device of Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Ritzmann is continuously pumping, via a sample pump, a portion of the drilling fluid from the drilling fluid conduit through a gross filter upstream of the sample pump and a regenerative fine filter downstream from the sample pump to provide a continuous flow of the drilling fluid sample, wherein the gross filter and the regenerative fine filter remove solids from the portion of the drilling fluid, and wherein the regenerative fine filter removes smaller particles from the portion of the drilling fluid sample than the gross filter.
However, Fratini, DiFoggio, and Reed teach a known technique applicable to the device of Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Ritzmann. Fratini teaches, Fig. 1A, a pump 106 which uses filters 102, 104 to protect the pump 106 from sand. Likewise, DiFoggio teaches the use of a filter 56 in order to prevent the entry of particulate matter or other solids from entering the injector 40 of the chromatograph. Choosing an appropriate filter size is taught by Reed which provides a method for determining the state of particulates by determining the resistance of a filter in a reacting system or for characterizing particulates and a method of correlating particulate size and numbers with filter resistance by means of, for example, multiple filters having different pore sizes.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use filters to protect pumps and chromatograph equipment because filters are known to removes solids and particulates of target sizes.
Claim 15: Graves in view of Ochoa further in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe further in view of Ritzmann further in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed teaches the system of claim 14. Graves teaches wherein the apparatus is positioned adjacent to a wellbore of the drilling system, and wherein the flow conduit from which the portion of the drilling fluid is continuously extracted is upstream of a bulk solids removal of the drilling operation, wherein the bulk solids removal is configured to remove bulk solids from the drilling fluid ([0022-0023], Fig. 1) a gas extractor and analyzer 158 which is connected to a drilling fluid conduit 148 at a position upstream of a bulk solids separation (shale shaker 152).
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graves in view of Cartellieri.
Claim 16: Graves teaches an analyzer for analyzing a drilling fluid used in a drilling operation within a subterranean formation, the analyzer comprising: a gas chromatography (GC) system (gas extractor and analyzer 158, Fig. 1), wherein the GC system is in fluid communication with a fluid conduit (return line 148), wherein the fluid conduit is in fluid communication with a drilling assembly (drilling system 100) at least partially disposed within the subterranean formation (formation 108, Fig. 1) including a flash column [0023] as a gas extraction mechanism 158 that allows for the separation and expansion of gas from liquids and solids, wherein the flash column is configured to destruct a sample of the drilling fluid to provide a gaseous sample; wherein the drilling fluid comprises a liquid (Graves [0017] The terms “gas” or “fluid,” as used herein, are not limiting and are used interchangeably to describe a gas, a liquid, a solid, or some combination of a gas, a liquid, and/or a solid.)
Graves fails to teach wherein the GC system comprises an injector, a gas chromatography column, and a detector, and wherein the gaseous sample is introduced into the GC column.
Cartellieri teaches a GC system which comprises an injector, a flash column, a gas chromatography column, and a detector, wherein the flash column is configured to substantially entirely destruct a sample of the drilling fluid to provide a gaseous sample, and wherein the gaseous sample is introduced into the GC column.
Cartellieri teaches downhole gas chromatography for downhole fluids including a GC 210, Fig. 2, having a column 228, an injector 226, and a detector 230 [0032], wherein the column is configured to substantially entirely destruct a sample of the drilling fluid to provide a gaseous sample, and wherein the gaseous sample is introduced into the GC column ([0033] The injector 226 introduces the sample from the collector 208 to the column 228).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the device of Cartellieri with the device of Graves in order to effectively separate different components of the downhole fluid (Cartellieri [0036])
Graves in view of Cartellieri fails to teach and wherein the gaseous sample is introduced into the GC column to determine the chemical composition of the liquid.
However, Rowe teaches drilling assembly 100 wherein a fluid sample is sent to an analyzer 158. The fluid sample includes both gas and liquid [0026, 0029, 0034]. The gas is extracted using a flash column [0034, 0052] and the liquid portion can be passed through a pyrolysis unit 410 before being analyzed by the mass spectrometer [0040].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to destruct the liquid portion of the sample, as taught by Rowe, with the device of Graves in view of Cartellieri in order to thermochemically decompose organic material within the drilling fluid sample, which may aide in the analysis of the liquid portion of the drilling fluid sample ([0040]).
Claim 17: Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the analyzer of claim 16. Graves fails to teach wherein the injector, the flash column, the gas chromatography column, and the detector of the GC system are positioned within a common housing.
However, Cartellieri teaches wherein the injector, the gas chromatography column, and the detector of the GC system are positioned within a common housing (downhole evaluation system 134 is shown as a single housing within the downhole sub 106, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to position the injector, the flash column, the gas chromatography column, and the detector of the GC system within a common housing for the obvious benefit of protecting the analyzer from damage.
Claims 18, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe further in view of Ritzmann further in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed.
Claim 18: Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe teaches the analyzer of claim 17, but fails to teach upstream of the GC system, drilling fluid sampling apparatus configured to provide the sample of the drilling fluid to the GC system, wherein the drilling fluid sampling apparatus comprises a gross filter, a sample pump downstream from the gross filter, and a regenerative fine filter downstream from the sample pump, wherein the gross filter and the regenerative fine filter remove solids from a portion of the drilling fluid continuously extracted from the fluid conduit, and wherein the regenerative fine filter removes smaller particles from the portion of the drilling fluid than the gross filter.
Ritzmann teaches a pump for a drilling fluid sampler in order to obtain a sample [0010]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a pump, as taught by Ritzmann, for the obvious benefit of moving fluid to obtain a sample. Ritzmann fails to teach wherein the portion of the drilling fluid is continuously extracted from the fluid conduit via a sample pump, and wherein a gross filter is positioned upstream of the sample pump and a regenerative fine filter is positioned downstream from the sample pump, wherein the gross filter and the regenerative fine filter remove solids from the portion of the drilling fluid, and wherein the regenerative fine filter removes smaller particles from the portion of the drilling fluid sample than the gross filter.
The difference between the device Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Ritzmann is continuously pumping, via a sample pump, a portion of the drilling fluid from the drilling fluid conduit through a gross filter upstream of the sample pump and a regenerative fine filter downstream from the sample pump to provide a continuous flow of the drilling fluid sample, wherein the gross filter and the regenerative fine filter remove solids from the portion of the drilling fluid, and wherein the regenerative fine filter removes smaller particles from the portion of the drilling fluid sample than the gross filter.
However, Fratini, DiFoggio, and Reed teach a known technique applicable to the device of Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Ritzmann. Fratini teaches, Fig. 1A, a pump 106 which uses filters 102, 104 to protect the pump 106 from sand. Likewise, DiFoggio teaches the use of a filter 56 in order to prevent the entry of particulate matter or other solids from entering the injector 40 of the chromatograph. Choosing an appropriate filter size is taught by Reed which provides a method for determining the state of particulates by determining the resistance of a filter in a reacting system or for characterizing particulates and a method of correlating particulate size and numbers with filter resistance by means of, for example, multiple filters having different pore sizes.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use filters to protect pumps and chromatograph equipment because filters are known to removes solids and particulates of target sizes.
Claim 19: Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe further in view of Ritzmann further in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed teaches the analyzer of claim 18.
Cartellieri teaches wherein the injector, the gas chromatography column, and the detector of the GC system are positioned within a common housing (downhole evaluation system 134 is shown as a single housing within the downhole sub 106, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to position the injector, the flash column, the gas chromatography column, and the detector of the GC system within a common housing for the obvious benefit of protecting the analyzer from damage.
Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe further in view of Ritzmann further in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed fails to teach with sufficient specificity wherein the gross filter, the pump, the regenerative fine filter, or a combination thereof is or is not positioned in the common housing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to not position a filter within the common housing with a reasonable expectation of success for the obvious benefit of maintaining access to the filter for cleaning or repair.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe further in view of Ritzmann further in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed further in view of Ochoa.
Claim 20: Graves in view of Cartellieri further in view of Rowe further in view of Ritzmann further in view of Fratini further in view of DiFoggio further in view of Reed teaches the analyzer of claim 18, but fails to teach wherein the drilling fluid sampling apparatus is configured to continuously introduce a portion of the drilling fluid from the flow conduit to the gross filter and the regenerative fine filter via the sample pump, to produce a filtered sample, and wherein the filtered sample is either introduced into the GC as the sample or sent to a bypass line for removal from the system.
However, Ochoa teaches obtaining extracted gas from a continuously flowing drilling fluid (sampling fluid 115a) wherein the sample can be either passed to a chromatograph 180 or to a bypass (exhaust 105) [0020-0021].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a continuously flowing drilling fluid sample and bypass, as taught by Ochoa, with the device of claim 18 in order to improve gas extraction efficiency (Ochoa [0006-0007]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN MORELLO whose telephone number is (313)446-6583. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/JEAN F MORELLO/Examiner, Art Unit 2855 3/14/26
/KRISTINA M DEHERRERA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855