CTNF 18/306,057 CTNF 79348 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-42-04 AIA 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 15 May 2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 6 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 are made due to Applicant’s amendment of the pending claimed invention. Although Applicant’s arguments are moot in regards to the new grounds of rejection of the instant amended independent claim 1 and 11, the Examiner wishes to respond to some of Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art and obviousness rationale made by the Examiner. Applicant argues that statements made by the Examiner regarding the addition of mass to the bottom portion of the metering module of the ESP system of Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al. and C amacho Cardenas et al., that a person of ordinary skill in the art of vibration suppression that the modal response must be studied on a case-by-case basis, and that locations of notes and antinodes are heavily dependent on exact geometry and material composition of the mechanical structure as well as properties of an external medium and the nature of force induced on the mechanical structure, and that a skilled person would not be able to determine how to distribute mass for the particular configuration and composition of a system without extensive study, and that the dampening means disclosed by Roshdy employs particle damping to counteract undesirable vibrations. Applicant provides no evidence or further explanation of exactly what constitutes any alleged “extensive study” required regarding the distribution of mass in the disclosed system, or give any particular engineering and/or design reasons to form the bottom portion of the metering module of a heavier material relative to a remainder portion of the metering module. Applicant further argues that the Examiner incorrectly equates the design process of the system described in the instant disclosure, and that the Examiner allegedly employed improper hindsight. Again, the instant disclosure does not provide any aspects of any alleged design process of the disclosed system. Overall, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Examiner maintains that there is no extensive study required, and that one of ordinary skill in the art with the knowledge of basic structural engineering of mechanical systems, along with the applied prior art references to employ a heavier material at the bottom of the metering module to a remainder portion of the metering module. It is noted the Applicant failed to specifically address the Examiner’s statements that it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the instant invention, that mechanical systems have a distributed weight/mass profile, and that the weight/mass distribution will oscillated/vibrate in certain modes of vibration/oscillation when induced by forces acting on the mechanical system, and, as such, by changing/altering the mass/weight distribution in locations of the mechanical system, can reduce and/or elimination vibrational modes/oscillations, but lowering natural frequencies away from excitation frequencies, and that counter-weights/masses or balancing weights/masses can be employed to achieve reduced and/or elimination of vibrational modes/oscillations. In addition, Roshdy clearly supports this skilled knowledge, wherein vibration levels of the ESP have less to do with bearing design of the motor driving the ESP, but more to do with factors such as distribution of mass, stiffness and damping elements at particular locations (see paras 0031 and 0045 of Roshdy) in the ESP and its beam structure which is susceptible to multiple vibration modes, having nodes and antinodes (see para 0045 of Roshdy). As such, adding mass/weight (i.e. employing a heavier material) to locations on the metering module, or at any other location, including the bottom portion of the metering module, is easily contemplated by one of ordinary skill in the art, if it is determined added mass/weight would provide vibration mitigation by routine experimentation. In addition, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date that the beam structure of the system disclosed by Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al. and Camacho Cardenas et al. essentially acts like a pendulum, being supported/hung at/from the top portion of the pendulum-like system, wherein the center-of-gravity of the system is directly related to the stability of the entire pendulum-like system. Roshdy supports this basic structural analysis in para 0045, stating: “It may be desirable to change the position of the particle damping unit because the ESP structure is very flexible due to its length-to-diameter ratio and the fact that it is supported only from one location hanging vertically in the well.” As such, adding mass to the bottom/lower portion of the pendulum-like system, would significantly increase the stability of the entire pendulum-like-system, due to the increased lower center-of-gravity created by the added mass/weight to the bottom/lower portion. In addition, the pendulum-like system, wherein the lower/bottom portion is heavier, the added weight creates a restorative torque/force, so that any external forces acting on the pendulum-like system that potentially pushed the pendulum-like system off-center, will immediately be countered by gravity pulling on the heavier bottom portion straight down in the direction of gravity, thus mitigating vibrational/motions. In addition to the above basic mechanical analysis known by those of ordinary skill, adding mass/weight to the bottom of hanging structural beam-like systems increases overall tension in the entire beam-like system, which prevents the beam-like system from buckling or flexing under lateral external forces. As such, contrary to Applicant’s statements regarding “extensive study” in regards to distribution/placement of mass for the structural configuration disclosed by the prior art, the Examiner did not employ hindsight, but employed both explicit disclosure of Roshdy, along ordinary and basic structural knowledge regarding the behavior of beam-like mechanical systems, thus it would have been obvious to try and add additional weight/mass to the bottom of the metering module, by using a heavier material relative to the remainder portion of the metering module, to reduce vibrational motions of the metering module. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Instant amended independent claims 1 and 11 recite the limitations: “wherein the vibration control mechanism is configured to prevent an external vibration from being transmitted to the plurality of dynamic pressure sensors” and “preventing an external vibration from being transmitted to the plurality of dynamic pressure sensors, using the vibration control mechanism,” respectively. The instant filed disclosure lacks written description for these limitations in regards to an “external vibration,” and thus is considered new matter. Instant filed specification paragraphs 0033 and 0037-0039 disclose that effects of any “external vibration” is compensated/calibrated/mitigated/removed only by “external vibration measurements” wherein these external vibration measurements are made by accelerometers, or by subtracting signals from the dynamic pressure sensors, and not by the “vibration control mechanism” which is located/disposed “between the downhole sensor module connects to the metering module.” This is also evidenced by instant dependent claims 6 and 16, which clearly recite that the external vibration is compensated for by an accelerometer, and not by the vibration control mechanism. All dependent claims are similarly rejected due to their dependency from instant independent claims 1 and 11. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 8, 10, 11, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2017/0058664 to Xiao et al., U.S. 20210010841 to Gandarillas et al., U.S. 2019/0326906 to Camacho Cardenas et al. and U.S. 2023/0304491 to Roshdy. Xiao et al. disclose a system and method for determining a flow rate of a fluid in a well (see entire reference) including an electrical submersible pump/ESP (12) disposed in the well; the ESP having a vertical axis; a motor (16) disposed/attached on/to the ESP; a downhole sensor module (22) attached/connected to the motor; a metering module/assembly (34) attached to, and extending from the downhole sensor module comprising a plurality of at least three dynamic pressure sensors (48, 50, 54, 56) (as recited in instant dependent claims 10 and 20) along a vertical axis, and connected to an outer diameter of the metering module which inherently are configured/capable of measuring pressure changes/fluctuations/dynamic measurements of the fluid; and a processor/controller (84A) (see paras 0034-0036) configured to receive pressure data from the plurality of dynamic pressure sensors, and using the processor to determine the flow rate based on the measurement of pressure fluctuations/changes in the fluid (as recited in instant independent claims 1 and 11). Xiao et al. does not explicitly disclose that the plurality of dynamic pressure sensors comprise a piezoelectric element; wherein a bottom portion of the metering module is formed from a heavier material relative to a remainder portion of the metering module or a vibration control mechanism disposed in a location between where the downhole sensor module connects to the metering module wherein the vibration control mechanism is configured to prevent an external vibration from being transmitted to the plurality of dynamic pressure sensors (as recited in instant independent claims 1 and 11); wherein the metering module is a hollow tube, flat-sided cylinder, or prism (as recited in instant dependent claims 8 and 18) . Gandarillas et al. disclose a system and method to determine flow rate of a fluid (see entire reference) having a metering module/sensing device (26) including a plurality of dynamic/unsteady pressure/strain sensors (32) associated with unsteady/dynamic pressures associated with vortical and/or other disturbances traveling in the fluid flow (22), wherein each of the dynamic pressure/strain sensors comprise a piezoelectric element (piezofibers (e.g. rectangular piezo ceramic rods) (see para 0040) which inherently are piezoelectric elements) to measure pressure/strain within a hollow tube due to the fluid flow (24) (as recited in instant dependent claims 8 and 18); wherein fluid flow parameters can be determined based on the sensor signals via a processor (28), the parameters being, but not limited to: volumetric flow rate, fluid speed of sound, mass flow rate, consistency or composition of the fluid flow, density of the fluid flow, the Mach number of the fluid flow, the size of a particle traveling within the flow, etc. (see para 0039, 0061-0063 and 0069). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the instant invention to employ the teachings of Gandarillas et al., by employing a hollow tube and measurements from dynamic/unsteady pressure/strain sensors to measure and determine a flow rate in the system/method disclosed by Xiao et al., thus providing accurate measurements of flow parameters, including flow rate, with higher accuracy, and which performs well for a variety of different velocity fluid flows traveling in a pipe (see paras 0005 and 0006), thus meeting additional limitations of instant independent claims 1 and 11, and all the limitations of instant dependent claims 8 and 18). Camacho Cardenas et al. disclose an ESP system (see entire reference, in particular, Fig.2, Fig. 4 and Fig. 8) employing a plurality of types of measurement sensors (see paras 0048 and 0049), including a multi-axis accelerometer (see para 0090); wherein the plurality of types of measurement sensors can include a vibration sensors/equipment (430), which includes measuring vibration via pressure waves (i.e. via dynamic pressure sensors) (see paras 0075 and 0081); wherein the ESP and its associated components can include vibration control/reduction mechanisms (450) on components of the ESP, which are dimensioned/chosen with respect to a vibration type, vibration displacement, vibration velocity, vibration frequency, vibration acceleration, etc. (see para 0118); wherein the vibration control/reduction mechanisms may be self-adjusting (e.g. responsive to an external vibration to reduce overall vibration) (see paras 0070 and 0077); the vibration control/reduction mechanism can be attached to a housing, or an external mechanism attached to the housing of motorized equipment or optionally other equipment that may experience undesirable vibration (see para 0078); wherein external and/or internal vibrations are damped by one or more types of damping mechanisms can be chosen based on types of materials undergoing vibration (see para 0083-0085); and, as an example, the ESP system may include multiple vibration control/reduction mechanisms of one or more types, for example, located at one or more axial locations of the ESP, being attached to housing which is intended to be “stationary,” or external to an ESP and attached to an ESP housing (see para 0086). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the instant invention to dispose a vibration control/reduction mechanism in an axial location, or multiple axial locations along the ESP, between the motor, pump, and modules, including between the downhole sensor module connects to the metering module being configured to prevent an external and/or internal vibration from being transmitted to the plurality of dynamic pressure sensors on the metering module disclosed by Xiao et al., as taught by Camacho Cardenas et al., thus reducing vibrations of the metering module and other components of the ESP which can lead to fatigue and possible breakage/premature failure of the metering module and mounted dynamic pressure sensors, as well as components of the ESP (see para 0073 of Camacho Cardenas et al.), thus meeting some of the remaining limitations recited in instant independent claims 1 and 11. In specific regards to the remaining limitations of instant independent claims 1 and 11, wherein a bottom portion of the metering module is formed from a heavier material relative to a remainder portion of the metering module, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the instant invention, that mechanical systems have a distributed weight/mass profile, and that the weight/mass distribution will oscillated/vibrate in certain modes of vibration/oscillation when induced by forces acting on the mechanical system, and, as such, by changing/altering the mass/weight distribution in locations of the mechanical system, can reduce and/or elimination vibrational modes/oscillations, but lowering natural frequencies away from excitation frequencies, and that counter-weights/masses or balancing weights/masses can be employed to achieve reduced and/or elimination of vibrational modes/oscillations. As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to add mass/weight to a bottom portion of the metering module, or to other portions of the system including the ESP and other components, of the system disclosed by Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al. and Camacho Cardenas et al. to reduce and/or eliminate vibrations/oscillations of the metering module and/or other parts of the system. In addition, Roshdy discloses and ESP system (see entire reference) which employs dampening means to reduce vibrations of the ESP system, wherein the dampening means can be internal or external (i.e. integral and standalone) of ESP components (see paras 0014 and 0032), wherein vibration levels of the ESP have less to do with bearing design of the motor driving the ESP, but more to do with factors such as distribution of mass, stiffness and damping elements in the ESP structure, and the damping means employed by Roshdy address structural vibrations (see para 0032) the dampening means can be simply attached/placed to/at a lower/bottom end of the ESP (see paras 0043-0045); and may be positioned at other locations of the ESP assembly, since it may be desirable to change the position/location of the dampening means because the ESP structure may be highly-flexible due to its length-to-diameter ratio and the fact that it is supported only from one location hanging vertically in the well, and these factors result in a “beam” and/or “pendulum-like” structure that has multiple vibration modes in the operating range of the ESP, and the mass and the location of the dampening means is important, and careful design will push modes (notes and antinodes) of vibration away from running speed in addition to providing general damping to the ESP system, wherein the amplitude of vibration is minimal at the nodes and is highest at the antinodes, and, as such, placement of dampening means, or weight/mass at the antinodes, which will provide for maximized vibration damping (see para 0045). As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to add mass/weight to the bottom portion of the metering module relative to a remainder portion of the metering module, making it heavier, of the ESP system/method disclosed by Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al. and Camacho Cardenas et al., as taught by Roshdy, especially if it is determined there is high vibration at the bottom end of the metering module (i.e. an antinode), thus reducing vibration of the ESP system, since effect of vibrations reduces the reliability of the metering module and ESP system in operation in the field, but also recues expense associated with failures of factor acceptance tests and system integration tests (see para 0007 of Roshdy), thus meeting the remaining limitations recited in instant independent claims 1 and 11 . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2017/0058664 to Xiao et al., U.S. 20210010841 to Gandarillas et al., U.S. 2019/0326906 to Camacho Cardenas et al. and U.S. 2023/0304491 to Roshdy as applied to claim s 1 and 11 above, and further in view of U.S. 2005/0061060 to Gysling et al. Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al., Camacho Cardenas et al. and Roshdy disclose a system and method for measuring a flow rate of a fluid in a well having all of the elements and method steps recited previously. Camacho Cardenas et al. further disclose employing a plurality of types of measurement sensors (see paras 0048 and 0049), including a multi-axis accelerometer (see para 0090) which are inherently capable/configured to measuring acceleration by one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to measure acceleration in any desired direction, or all directions, based on required/desired acceleration measurements by design including in a first perpendicular direction and a second perpendicular direction of a fluid flow direction (meeting some of the limitations recited in instant dependent claims 6 and 16). Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al., Camacho Cardenas et al. and Roshdy do not explicitly disclose the accelerometer being at a location coinciding with the plurality of dynamic pressure sensors and wherein the processor is further configured to use the acceleration to compensate for the external vibration (as further recited in instant dependent claims 6 and 16). Gysling et al. disclose a system and method for measuring a flow rate (see entire reference) employing piezoelectric dynamic pressure sensors (118-121) (see Figs. 15, 16, 19 and 20, note the similarity of instant Fig. 2 and Fig. 20 of Gysling et al.); wherein the dynamic pressure sensors are manufactured by PCB Piezotronics, specifically Model 106B, which is a high sensitivity, acceleration compensated integrated/co-located circuit piezoelectric quartz pressure sensor (see para 0183). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify the dynamic pressures sensors disclosed by Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al., Camacho Cardenas et al. and Roshdy, with the Model 106B pressure sensor taught by Gysling et al., thus providing an acceleration compensated pressure measurement via the processor to compensate for an external vibration affecting the dynamic pressure sensors, as well as providing the ability for measuring low pressure acoustic phenomena in the hydraulic system, which has the unique capability to measure small pressure changes of less than 0.001 psi under high static conditions, wherein the 106B has a 300 mV/psi sensitivity and a resolution of 91 dB (0.0001 psi) (see para 0183), thus increasing the overall accuracy of the system and method for determining a flow rate disclosed by Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al., Camacho Cardenas et al. and Roshdy, meeting all the remaining limitations recited in instant dependent claims 6 and 16 . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 3, 4, 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2017/0058664 to Xiao et al., U.S. 20210010841 to Gandarillas et al., U.S. 2019/0326906 to Camacho Cardenas et al. and U.S. 2023/0304491 to Roshdy as applied to claim s 1 and 11 above, and further in view of CN 110108410 to Zhang et al. (see previously provided reference and English translation). Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al., Camacho Cardenas et al. and Roshdy disclose a system and method for determining/measuring flow rate of a fluid in a well having all of the recited elements and method steps stated previously. Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al., Camacho Cardenas et al. and Roshdy do not explicitly disclose providing a vibration isolating/control mount for each of the plurality of dynamic pressure sensors which are threaded into the metering module (as recited in instant dependent claims 3 and 13) or wherein the vibration isolating/control mount is an elastomer plug fitted into the metering module (as recited in instant dependent claims 4 and 14). However, based on the teachings of Camacho Cardenas et al., a vibration isolating/control/reduction mechanism/mount, being mounted between any desired component of the ESP, which one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the instant invention would include sensor and sensor components/modules and the mounting thereof, especially if the sensors require isolation from vibrations to function properly/accurately, and not experience fatigue/failure due to vibrations, thus meeting the limitations recited in instant dependent claims 3 and 13). In addition, Zhang et al. disclose a vibration control/isolating mechanism (Figs. 1-3, and entire English translation) for pressure sensors, including a vibration isolating mount/body (2, 3) is an elastomer plug/funnel-shaped barrel ring pad structure made of high-elasticity material and screw threading aspects for mounting components for isolating a pressure sensor. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to employ the teachings of Zhang et al., providing isolating mounting of the dynamic pressure sensors to the metering module disclosed by Xiao et al., Gandarillas et al., Camacho Cardenas et al. and Roshdy, thus preventing the dynamic pressure sensors from vibrations due to high-impact accelerations which cause measurement errors (see Background and Summary of Zhang et al.), thus meeting the limitations recited in instant dependent claims 4 and 14 . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is invited to review PTO form 892 accompanying this Office Action listing Prior Art relevant to the instant invention cited by the Examiner . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner John Fitzgerald whose telephone number is (571) 272-2843. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:00 AM to 3:30 PM E.S.T. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor John Breene, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-4107. 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. The central 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. /JOHN FITZGERALD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/306,057 Page 2 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/306,057 Page 3 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/306,057 Page 4 Art Unit: 2855
Prosecution Insights