DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
The line quality of all the drawings, when zoomed in, illustrate an inconsistent line quality. 37 CFR 1.84 (Standards for Drawings), section L (Character of lines, numbers, and letters) states: “All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined”. The drawings should be viewed in the USPTO’s patent center in order to see this problem.
The cross hatching corresponding to the elements in figure 5B is incorrect as they are all angled in the same, continuous manner. “The various parts of a cross section of the same item should be hatched in the same manner and should accurately and graphically indicate the nature of the material(s) that is illustrated in cross section. The hatching of juxtaposed different elements must be angled in a different way.” — See 37 CFR 1.84, section (h), subsection (3).
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 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(s) 4, 6-7 and 17-18 is/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.
Claims 4 (and, similarly claim 17) recites: “[...] wherein each reinforcing element engagement surface is configured with radiused transitions that extend from a transverse orientation to an axial orientation, the radiused transitions thus guiding transition of the reinforcing elements from the axial orientation to the transverse orientation without creating a sharp transition zone”. It is unclear as to what the metes and bounds of the limitation is as one skilled in the art would construe multiple interpretations of the limitation, specifically as to what the orientation is with respect to. For example, absent specific detail as to what reference point(s) the orientation is being taken place from, the “transverse orientation” and “axial orientation” can be orientations with respect to certain claimed element(s), or specific axes (i.e., radial, longitudinal, lateral, etc.) of the tool or wellbore. For examination purposes, the Examiner will give its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the instant specification and will assume for the claimed “axial orientation” to correspond to the longitudinal axis of the assembly. Due to claims 4 and 17 being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the corresponding dependent claims are also rejected.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Purcell (US Patent Number 3,084,717; herein “Purcell”).
In regard to claim 1, Purcell discloses: An accumulator assembly (as shown in figure 1), comprising:
a first cylindrical casing (80);
a second cylindrical casing (100 | Examiner notes, absent specific detail, the flexible tube “100” is structured and functions as a casing — see column 2, line 39-42 and column 3, lines 12-32 and figure 1) co-axially positioned within the first cylindrical casing (as shown in figure 1), wherein a cylindrical space (i.e., annular space of the cylindrical space) is formed between (i.e., radially between) the first cylindrical casing and the second cylindrical casing, the space defining a gas volume (column 3, lines 12-32 and figure 1);
first and second end caps (i.e., “first end cap” is the combination of 82, 101, 103, and “second cap” analogues to the “first end cap” on the opposite comprising the combination of 81, 95, 97) attached to and closing the distal ends of the first and second cylindrical casings (as shown in figure 1), each end cap having four radially outwardly extending sides (i.e., flat square sides — as shown in figure 2) defining reinforcement support flanges (i.e., protruding rim/lip of each end cap — as shown in figures 1), wherein each reinforcement support flange includes a reinforcing element engagement surface (i.e., surfaces of the end cap flanges which are connected/fixated via tie bolts 87 — column 2, line 39- column 3, line 32 and claim 1); and
a reinforcing element (tie bolts 87) extending around (i.e., proximate to or about) each of two opposing support flanges (as shown in figure 1), such that the reinforcing element engagement surfaces define a pathway for the reinforcing elements (i.e., longitudinal extending pathway to secure the apparatus — as shown in figure 1), the reinforcing elements retaining the first and second end caps to axial ends of the inner and outer casings (column 2, line 39- column 3, line 32, claim 1, and figure 1).
In regard to claim 2, Purcell further discloses: wherein an interior of the second cylindrical casing defines a fluid volume, the accumulator assembly further including a piston (105) mounted within the second cylindrical casing and movable against the fluid volume (column 2, line 39- column 3, line 32).
In regard to claim 3, Purcell further discloses: wherein the reinforcing elements are further configured to control axial stress created when pressure inside the accumulator is increased beyond that of an environment outside the accumulator (Examiner notes that the encasement comprising the tie bolts is configured to hold the apparatus together in the assembled/operating condition and intrinsically control/hold the apparatus together when at least some arbitrary axial stress from any internal pressure(s) occurs — column 2, line 39- column 3, line 32).
In regard to claim 14, Purcell further discloses: wherein the first and second end caps are attached to the first cylindrical casing by one of a threaded connection, welding, brazing, a press fit, and an O-ring (i.e., such as, but not limited to, the threads associated with the tie bolts and/or seals 96/103 — column 2, line 39- column 3, line 32 and figure 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purcell (US Patent Number 3,084,717; herein “Purcell”) in view of Rajabi et al. (US Publication Number 2009/0126816 A1; herein “Rajabi”).
In regard to claim 5, Purcell discloses the preceding claims.
However, Purcell is silent in regard to: wherein a carbon fiber layer is attached to an outer surface [[for]]of the first cylindrical casing.
Nonetheless, Rajabi teaches a similar type of accumulator (paragraphs [0030, 0038] and figure 3) to that of Purcell. Rajabi teaches for its analogous cylindrical casing (300) to have an “[...] an over-wrap 302, as desired. The over-wrap 302 is typically formed of a strong lightweight material, such as carbon fiber, E-glass, or other suitable material as known in the art” (paragraph [0038]).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the first cylindrical casing, as taught by Purcell, to include for an a carbon fiber layer is attached to its outer surface, as taught by Rajabi, to allow for the casing to be “[...] formed from a material that is optimized for strength in relation to directional stresses, such as one of an axial stress and a hoop stress” (paragraph [0038] of Rajabi).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 4, 6-7 and 17-18 is/are would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 8-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 15-16 and 19-20 are allowed.
In regard to claims 8 and 15, Purcell is the closest reference (see at claim 1 rejection herein, as Purcell teaches a majority of the claimed accumulator assembly). Purcell teaches its piston (105) to come in contact with “a pre-loaded check valve” (i.e., comprising 35, 36 — as shown in figure 3) configured as an over-pressure bypass (Examiner notes that the “check valve” is configured and acts as an over-pressure bypass in light of at least the gravity disclosed therein, absent specific detail | see column 2, line 39- column 3, line 32 of Purcell). However, Purcell fails to teach for the piston itself to include/have “a pre-loaded check valve” (configured as an over-pressure bypass), as claimed. The prior art of record, either singularly or in combination thereof, does not teach, nor would be obvious to modify the reference to meet the limitation(s), as such a modification would require an improper reliance on hindsight reasoning.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references in the PTO-892 relate to accumulator assemblies with reinforcing elements to contain the accumulator assemblies.
Chalasani et al. (US Patent Number 5,219,000; herein “Chalasani”) teaches a similar type of accumulator comprising a cup-shaped piston, as claimed (40 — column 2, lines 29-58 and figure 1).
Kriickewitt et al. (US Patent Number 4,611,634; herein “Kriickewitt”) teaches that accumulator assemblies can comprise of a sensor and alarm system within the accumulator assembly configured to alert an operator when the check valve is actuated in an over-pressure situation (column 2, lines 27-30, 38-43, column 4, lines 58-65, and claims 1 & 4-7).
Rajabi et al. (US Publication Number 2009/0126816 A1; herein “Rajabi”) teaches for its accumulator cylindrical casing (300) to have an “[...] an over-wrap 302, as desired. The over-wrap 302 is typically formed of a strong lightweight material, such as carbon fiber, E-glass, or other suitable material as known in the art” (paragraph [0038]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEEL PATEL whose telephone number is (469)295-9168. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00AM-5:00PM 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.
/NEEL GIRISH PATEL/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676