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 10/09/2025.
Claims 1, 3, 9, 14, 18-19 have been amended.
Claims 2, 10-12, 15-16, and 20-37 have been canceled.
Claims 1, 3-9, 13-14, 17-19, and 39-42 are currently pending and have been examined.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/09/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 10/09/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-9, 13-14, 17-19, and 39-42 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each rejection previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed 07/09/2025.
The claims pending in the instant application have been broadened in scope relative to the previously examined claims. However, upon review, the claims are still directed to the originally elected invention, as determined by the election by original presentation in accordance to MPEP § 821.03. Therefore, examination of the claims on the merits proceeds. Applicant is reminded that any future amendment that shifts the claims to a nonelected invention may be considered improper under MPEP § 821.03 and may be refused entry.
However, upon further consideration, the amendments introduce new issues that a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
In response to Applicant’s argument that the prior art reference of Kverel fails to teach a solid oil self-lubricating bearing, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and the argument is not persuasive.
Kverel discloses a solid oil lubricant bearing that is heat resistant; provides low rolling and sliding friction; allows relatively high bearing speed and provides long bearing service life. Kverel explicitly discloses a solid oil (oil is the lubricant to produce the solid lubricant; Col. 2, lines 27-38) self-lubricating bearing (Fig. 1).
Therefore, the Examiner finds that it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention to have substituted McLeod’s bearing with the bearing of Kverel to arrive at the claimed invention. The argument against Kverel not teaching “solid oil self-lubricating bearing” is not persuasive, and the teaching maintained.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: typographical error.
Claim 14 improperly recites “method of claim” but is dependent on an apparatus claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 3-6, 14, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McLeod et al. (US20190024468) in view of Kverel (US10155914).
Claim 1. McLeod discloses: a core sampling tool (10: system, Fig. 1a) comprising:
a core barrel (30 core tube, Fig. 1a) having a proximal end; and
a core barrel head assembly (28 head assembly, Fig. 1a) coupled to the proximal end of the core barrel (Fig. 1a), wherein the core barrel head assembly comprises:
a spindle (36 lockable spindle, Fig. 1a); and
at least one bearing (38 spindle bearings, Fig. 1a) that rotationally engages the spindle. McLeod does not disclose: solid oil self-lubricating bearing and the core barrel head assembly does not comprise a grease port or a grease fitting.
Kverel discloses a solid oil lubricant bearing that is heat resistant; provides low rolling and sliding friction; allows relatively high bearing speed and provides long bearing service life. Therefore, Kverel teaches: solid oil (oil is the lubricant to produce the solid lubricant; Col. 2, lines 27-38) self-lubricating bearing (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the spindle bearing of McLeod with the solid oil self-lubricating bearings of Kverel with a reasonable expectation of success as suggested by Kverel (Col. 2, lines 27-38) because both perform the same function in similar contexts. Such a substitution represents the use of a known element according to its established function, and the results would have been predictable. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding the limitation: the core barrel head assembly does not comprise a grease port or a grease fitting, Mcleod does not explicitly disclose whether the core barrel head assembly includes a grease port or fitting as McLeod does not illustrate or disclose any such feature. Therefore, the claim limitation is inherently met. Furthermore, the substitution of the spindle bearing of McLeod with the solid oil self-lubricating bearings of Kverel would inherently eliminate the need for a grease port or fitting (Kverel teaches away from the use of oil or grease lubrication; [0002]), as the self-lubricating bearing of Kverel does not require external lubrication. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that a grease port or fitting would not be necessary in the modified assembly.
Claim 3. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: the core sampling tool of claim 1, the spindle is a hollow spindle (McLeod: 218 spindle, Fig. 7-8; spindle is hollow as illustrated) that defines a bore (McLeod: 284 passage, Fig. 9b) that extends axially through the spindle.
Claim 4. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: the core sampling tool of claim 3, the core barrel head assembly further comprises a check valve assembly (McLeod: 328 valve ball, 326: valve seat; Fig. 9b) positioned distal of the hollow spindle.
Claim 5. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: the core sampling tool of claim 3, the core barrel head assembly further comprises a check valve assembly (McLeod: 246 valve ball, 244: valve seat; Fig. 7B) positioned proximal of the hollow spindle.
Claim 6. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: the core sampling tool of claim 1, wherein the spindle comprises a solid spindle (McLeod: 36 lockable spindle, Fig. 4a-4b; spindle is illustrated as solid) that does not define an axial bore extending through the spindle.
Claim 14. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: The method of claim 1, wherein the core barrel head assembly further comprises:
an elongate tube body (McLeod: 420 payload sub, Fig. 15b) having an outer surface, an interior cavity, a proximal end, and a distal end (Fig. 15b); and
a valve body (McLeod: 222 valve body, Fig. 15b) that is attached to the elongate tube body (Fig. 15b).
Claim 18. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: a drilling system (McLeod: Fig. 1a) comprising:
a drill string (McLeod: 18 drill string, Fig. 1a) having:
a drill bit (408: drill bit, Fig. 14b) at a distal end of the drill string;
the core sampling tool of claim 1 (see previously rejected claim 1), wherein the core barrel head assembly has a distal end, and wherein the core barrel has a distal end (McLeod; Fig. 1a); and
a core lifter case (McLeod: 400 core lifter, Fig. 13-14) at the distal end of the core barrel.
Claim 19. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: a method comprising:
positioning the drill string of the system of claim 18 (see previously rejected claim 18) within a borehole; and
receiving a core sample within the core barrel (McLeod: [0182-0208])
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McLeod et al. (US20190024468) in view of Kverel (US10155914) and further in view of Salvador (US10704349)
Claim 7. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: The core sampling tool of claim 6. McLeod and Kverel does not teach: the core barrel head assembly further comprises a check valve assembly positioned distal of the solid spindle.
Salvador discloses a core barrel head assembly comprising of a solid spindle and check valves proximal and distal of the spindle. Therefore, Salvador teaches: a check valve (68 check valve body, Fig. 1) assembly positioned distal of the solid spindle (2 spindle, 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 McLeod by incorporating the check valves proximal and distal of the spindle as taught by Salvador with a reasonable expectation of success in order to control fluid flow or pressure into and out of the tool as taught by Salvador (Col. 11, lines 27-39).
Claim 8. McLeod in view of Kverel and further in view of Salvador teach: The core sampling tool of claim 6. the core barrel head assembly further comprises a check valve assembly (Salvador: 64 lower body, Fig. 2; lower body may house valve or valves components; Col. 10, line 65 - Col. 11, line 2) positioned proximal of the solid spindle (Fig. 2).
Claim 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Havlick (US2532716) in view of Kverel (US10155914).
Claim 9. Havlick discloses: a core barrel head assembly (1 head section, Fig. 1) configured for coupling to a core barrel (13 core barrel, Fig. 1), the core barrel head assembly comprising:
an elongate tube body (18 sleeve, Fig. 2) having a proximal end and a distal end;
a bearing subassembly (20 ball bearing, Fig. 3) configured to engage the proximal end of the elongate tube body (Fig. 3);
a spindle subassembly (14 guide bolt, Fig. 3) that is rotationally engaged by the bearing subassembly (Fig. 3). Havlick does not disclose: one or more solid oil self-lubricating bearings.
Kverel teaches: one or more solid oil self-lubricating bearings (see previously rejected claim 1).
Regarding the limitation: the core barrel head assembly does not comprise a grease port or a grease fitting, Havlick does not explicitly disclose whether the core barrel head assembly includes a grease port or fitting as Havlick does not illustrate or disclose any such feature. Therefore, the claim limitation is inherently met. Furthermore, the substitution of the spindle bearing of Havlick for with the solid oil self-lubricating bearings of Kverel would inherently eliminate the need for a grease port or fitting (Kverel teaches away from the use of oil or grease lubrication; [0002]), as the self-lubricating bearing of Kverel does not require external lubrication. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that a grease port or fitting would not be necessary in the modified assembly.
Claim 13. Havlick in view of Kverel teach: A method comprising:
advancing a core sampling tool within a formation (Havlick: core passes upwardly through the bit into the inner barrel; Col. 4, lines 3-5), the core sampling tool comprising the core barrel head assembly of claim 9 and a core barrel (see previously rejected claim 9), wherein the core barrel head assembly is coupled to a proximal end of the core barrel (Havlick: Fig. 1-3); and
receiving core within the core barrel (Havlick: core passes upwardly through the bit into the inner barrel; Col. 4, lines 3-5),
wherein the method does not comprise delivering grease to or within the core barrel head assembly (see previously rejected claim 9).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McLeod et al. (US20190024468) in view of Kverel (US10155914) and further in view of Gaylard et al. (CA3055085).
Claim 17. McLeod in view of Kverel teach: The core sampling tool of claim 14. McLeod in view of Kverel does not teach: the core barrel head assembly further comprises:
an electronics compartment having an outer surface, wherein
the valve body defines an interior cavity, wherein
the electronics compartment is disposed within the interior cavity of the valve body,
wherein the electronics compartment is attached to the valve body so that the interior surface of the interior cavity of the valve body and the outer surface of the electronics department define a fluid passage,
wherein the valve body, the electronics compartment, or a combination of at least one interior surface of the valve body and at least one exterior surface of the electronics compartment defines at least one opening for providing fluid communication between the fluid passage and a distal end of the valve body.
Gaylard discloses a check valve for a core barrel assembly comprising of a data acquisition system within a cavity of the valve where fluid flows through an annulus formed by the exterior of the data acquisition system and the interior cavity in the valve. Therefore, Gaylard teaches: an electronics compartment (60 data acquisition system, Fig. 3b) having an outer surface (outers surface of 34 central tubular body, Fig. 3b), wherein
the valve body (18 check valve, Fig. 3b) defines an interior cavity (annular area between 16 inner core and exterior of 60), wherein
the electronics compartment is disposed within the interior cavity of the valve body (Fig. 3b),
wherein the electronics compartment is attached to the valve body so that the interior surface of the interior cavity of the valve body and the outer surface of the electronics department define a fluid passage (FP fluid flow path, Fig. 3b),
wherein the valve body, the electronics compartment, or a combination of at least one interior surface of the valve body and at least one exterior surface of the electronics compartment defines at least one opening for providing fluid communication between the fluid passage and a distal end of the valve body (Fig. 3b).
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 McLeod by incorporating the data acquisition system into the valve body as taught by Gaylard with a reasonable expectation of success in order to acquire data pertaining to the physical condition exterior of the valve of the as taught by Gaylard (Pg. 8, lines 4-10).
Claim 9 and 38-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drenth (US20130105227) in view of Kverel (US10155914).
Claim 9. Drenth discloses: a core barrel head assembly (200 inner core barrel, Fig. 2A) configured for coupling to a core barrel (205 core barrel, Fig. 1), the core barrel head assembly comprising:
an elongate tube body (252 core braking apparatus, Fig. 4) having a proximal end and a distal end;
a bearing subassembly (255 bearing assembly coupled between 257 and 261, Fig. 4) configured to engage the proximal end of the elongate tube body (bearing engage tubular structure at the proximal end, Fig. 4);
a spindle subassembly (251 spindle, Fig. 2B) that is rotationally engaged by the bearing subassembly (Fig. 4). Drenth does not disclose: one or more solid oil self-lubricating bearings.
Kverel teaches: one or more solid oil self-lubricating bearings (see previously rejected claim 1).
Regarding the limitation: the core barrel head assembly does not comprise a grease port or a grease fitting, Drenth does not explicitly disclose whether the core barrel head assembly includes a grease port or fitting as Drenth disclose any such feature. Therefore, the claim limitation is inherently met. Furthermore, the substitution of the spindle bearing of Drenth for with the solid oil self-lubricating bearings of Kverel would inherently eliminate the need for a grease port or fitting (Kverel teaches away from the use of oil or grease lubrication; [0002]), as the self-lubricating bearing of Kverel does not require external lubrication. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that a grease port or fitting would not be necessary in the modified assembly.
Claim 38. Drenth in view of Kverel teach: The core barrel head assembly of claim 9, further comprising a check valve subassembly (Drenth: 256 check valve, Fig. 4), wherein the check valve subassembly engages the distal end of the elongate tube body (Drenth: 256 engages 252 at the distal end of 252, Fig. 4) .
Claim 39. Drenth in view of Kverel teach: The core barrel head assembly of claim 9, wherein the spindle subassembly comprises a hollow spindle (Drenth: 242 inner channel, Fig. 4) and wherein the bearing subassembly comprises one or more self-lubricating bearings. Drenth in view of Kverel does not explicitly teach: having an inner diameter of at least 5/8 inch.
Regarding the limitation: spindle having an inner diameter of at least 5/8 inch; Drenth in view of Kverel does not explicitly teach. Drenth does disclose a spindle having an inner diameter, except for the specific value recited in claim 9 of 5/8 inch. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have a spindle with an inner diameter of at least 5/8 inch, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In other words, narrowing a general condition taught by the prior art to a specific numerical value has been held to be an obvious variation thereof. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 and In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215.
Claim 40. Drenth discloses: A core sampling tool (100 drilling system) comprising:
a core barrel having a proximal end (Fig. 1); and
a core barrel head assembly coupled to the proximal end of the core barrel (Fig. 1), wherein the core barrel head assembly comprises:
a spindle having a proximal end and a distal end (Fig. 1), wherein the spindle has a continuous, uninterrupted inner surface that defines a bore extending from the proximal end of the spindle to the distal end of the spindle (242 inner channel is continuous from proximal to distal end, Fig. 4),
wherein the bore is configured to communicate fluid between the proximal end of the spindle and the distal end of the spindle ( [0039]); and
a bearing subassembly, wherein the bearings rotationally engage the spindle (Fig. 4). Drenth does not disclose: the bearing subassembly comprises one or more self-lubricating.
Kverel further teaches: the bearing subassembly comprises one or more self-lubricating (see previously rejected claim 9).
Claim 41. Drenth in view of Kverel teach: The core sampling tube of claim 40, further comprising:
a housing (Drenth: 110 drill string, Fig. 1);
elongate tube body coupled to the housing (Drenth: 252 is coupled to 110, Fig. 1); and
a bushing (Drenth: 263 bushing, Fig. 4) received within the elongate tube body;
wherein at least a portion of the spindle is received within the elongate tube body, and wherein the spindle is slidably received within the bushing (Drenth: Fig. 4), wherein the bushing is configured to permit axial movement of the spindle relative to the elongate tube body (Drenth: [0043]).
Claim 42. Drenth in view of Kverel teach: The core sampling tube of claim 40, further comprising a spring (Drenth: 261 spring, Fig. 4) that is configured to bias the spindle away distally relative to the housing (Drenth: 261 spring bias the spindle in a uphole direction away from the distal end of the housing, Fig. 4), wherein the housing and the elongate tube body surround the spring (Drenth: Fig. 1).
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