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 .
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.
Claims 2, 3, 14, and 15 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.
Independent claim 1 first claims “a well site” in the preamble. Claims 2 and 3, then claim “the location is a well site at which the proppant will be used to fracture a well”. The well site is defined with an indefinite article, causing lack of clarity as to whether the claim is referring to the same “well site” in each instance.
Independent claim 13 first claims “a well site” in the preamble. Claims 14 and 15, then claim “the location is a well site at which the proppant will be used to fracture a well”. The well site is defined with an indefinite article, causing lack of clarity as to whether the claim is referring to the same “well site” in each instance.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, 12-14, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by WO 2019/15662, as cited by applicant.
Regarding claim 1, WO ‘652 teaches a proppant delivery system for delivering proppant to a well site comprising:
a first vehicle, 118, having a first container, 102, configured to carry a first load of proppant, 114, and deliver the first load of proppant to a location; and
a second vehicle, 120, configured to deliver a second container, 104, at the location to receive a portion of the first load into the second container, the second container remaining on the second vehicle during loading of the second container, see figure 1.
Regarding claim 2, WO ‘652 teaches the location is a well site at which the proppant will be used to fracture a well, see page 6, line 33 “… a flexible auger material handling system 100 at, for example, a hyrdocrabon, such as oil, well service, or operations site.”.
Regarding claim 4, the WO ‘652 reference teaches the second container is smaller than the first container, see the embodiment shown figure 4, which shows second container, 104, is smaller than first container, 410.
Regarding claim 5, the WO ‘652 teaches the second container is larger than the first container, see embodiment shown in figure 2B, which shows second container, 204, is larger than first container, 102.
Regarding claim 9, WO ‘652 teaches the portion of the first load is delivered into the second container by an electrically, mechanically or pneumatically-driven conveyance device, see auger 124.
Regarding claim 10, WO ‘652 teaches the first vehicle is a truck, 118, see figure 133.
Regarding claim 12, WO ‘652 teaches the second vehicle, 120, is an electrically or mechanically- driven conveyance device, the WO ‘652 teaches the vehicle, 120, is a truck, which is understood to be driven by some mechanical device, such as an engine.
Regarding claim 13, WO ‘652 teaches a method of delivering a proppant to a well site, the method comprising:
delivering a first load of proppant, 114, to a location;
delivering a portion of the first load into a second container, 104, while the second container remains on a mover, 120; and
transporting the second container on the mover to a storage area, see page 5, lines 22-25, page 7, lines 3+.
Regarding claim 14, WO ‘652 teaches the location is a well site at which the proppant will be used to fracture a well, see page 5, lines 22-25.
Regarding claim 19, WO ‘652 teaches delivering the portion of the first load into the second container further comprises: moving the portion of the first load into the second container using an electrically, mechanically or pneumatically-driven conveyance device, see auger 124 and page 7, lines .
Claim(s) 1, 3, 7, 8, 13, 15, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2016/0254352.
Regarding claim 1, US ‘352 teaches a proppant delivery system for delivering proppant to a well site comprising:3
a first vehicle, 88, having a first container, 70, 72, 74, 94 and 96, configured to carry a first load of proppant, and deliver the first load of proppant to a location; and
a second vehicle, 104, configured to deliver a second container at the location to receive a portion of the first load into the second container, the second container remaining on the second vehicle during loading of the second container, see figure 3 and paragraphs 0056 and 0057.
Regarding claim 3, US ‘352 teaches the location is a location remote from a well site at which the proppant will be used to fracture a well, see figure 3 and abstract which says that the proppant delivery method has the steps of “transporting a load of proppant in a vessel to a desired location, moving the load of proppant from the vessel into a container so as to create a proppant-loaded container, unloading the proppant-loaded container into a pneumatic bulk trailer, and transporting the unloaded proppant in the pneumatic bulk trailer to the well site.”
Regarding claim 7, US ‘352 teaches second containers that are stackable on other similar containers at the first site to store the proppant for later use, see figure 3 and paragraph 0057 and 0058.
Regarding claim 8, US ‘352 teaches the portion of the first load is delivered into the second container by an intermediate storage bin, 98 and 100, positioned above the second container, see paragraph 0056 and 0057.
Regarding claim 13, US ‘352 teaches a method of delivering a proppant to a well site, the method comprising:
delivering a first load of proppant to a location;
delivering a portion of the first load into a second container, 104, 108, while the second container remains on a mover; and
transporting the second container on the mover to a storage area, see abstract, figure 3 and paragraphs 0056-0058.
Regarding claim 15, US ‘352 teaches the location is a location remote from a well site at which the proppant will be used to fracture a well, see figure 3 and abstract which says that the proppant delivery method has the steps of “transporting a load of proppant in a vessel to a desired location, moving the load of proppant from the vessel into a container so as to create a proppant-loaded container, unloading the proppant-loaded container into a pneumatic bulk trailer, and transporting the unloaded proppant in the pneumatic bulk trailer to the well site.”
Regarding claim 18, US ‘352 teaches delivering the first load of proppant into an intermediate storage bin, 98 and 100, prior to the portion of the first load being delivered to the second container; wherein delivering the portion of the first load into the second container further comprises dropping the portion of the first load from the intermediate storage bin into the second container, see figure 3 and paragraphs 0056 and 0057 .
Regarding claim 20, US ‘352 teaches stacking the second container on another similar container at the storage area, see figure 3 and paragraphs 0057 and 0058.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2019/156652, as cited by applicant.
Regarding claim 6 and 16, the WO ‘652 reference does not specifically teach that the portion of the first load received into the second container is a less than one fourth of the first load, but does teach embodiments where the first container load is unloaded into multiple second containers, see figures 8A and 8B, for example. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to set the value of the load received by the second container to be one fourth or less than the load of the first container, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value or range, where the general conditions of a claim are met, involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 11 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2019/156652, as cited by applicant, in view of US 2018/0072491.
Regarding claim 11, WO ‘652 teaches the second vehicle is a forklift, see embodiment show in figure 8B, which teaches a forklift, 820, for moving, lifting, transporting containers, see page 18, lines 10-26. WO ‘652 does not teach that the second container remains on the forklift during loading. US ‘491 teaches a proppant delivery system for delivering proppant including a forklift which holds a container, 1800, and manipulates the container during filling of the container, see figures 18A through 18C and paragraphs 0071 and 0072.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the forklift of WO ‘652 to hold the second container during loading, as taught by US ‘491, in order to ensure that the container is properly filled with proppant during loading.
Regarding claim 17, WO ‘652 teaches the second vehicle is a forklift, see embodiment show in figure 8B, which teaches a forklift, 820, for moving, lifting, transporting containers, see page 18, lines 10-26. WO ‘652 does not teach that the second container remains on the forklift during loading. US ‘491 teaches a proppant delivery system for delivering proppant including a forklift which holds a container, 1800, and manipulates the container during filling of the container, see figures 18A through 18C and paragraphs 0071 and 0072.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the forklift of WO ‘652 to hold the second container during loading, as taught by US ‘491, in order to ensure that the container is properly filled with proppant during loading.
Claim(s) 21 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0264352 in view of US 2018/0072491.
Regarding claim 21, US ‘352 teaches a proppant delivery system for delivering proppant from a proppant source to a location, the system comprising:
a first vehicle, 88, having a first container, 70, 72, 74, 76, configured to carry a first load of proppant from a proppant source and deliver the first load of proppant to a location over at least one roadway; and
a second vehicle, 86, configured to move a plurality of second containers, 116, at the location, each of the second containers configured to receive a portion of the first load until the first load is removed from the first container;
wherein the location is a well site at which the proppant will be used to fracture a well, or a site remote from the well site;
wherein the second container is smaller than the first container;
wherein the second vehicle is a forklift, 86.
US ‘352 does not teach that the second container remains on the forklift during loading. US ‘491 teaches a proppant delivery system for delivering proppant including a forklift which holds a container, 1800, and manipulates the container during filling of the container, see figures 18A through 18C and paragraphs 0071 and 0072.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the forklift of US ‘352 to hold the second container during loading, as taught by US ‘491, in order to ensure that the container is properly filled with proppant during loading.
Furthermore, the US ‘352 reference does not specifically teach that the portion of the first load received into the second container is a less than one fourth of the first load. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to set the value of the load received by the second container to be one fourth or less than the load of the first container, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value or range, where the general conditions of a claim are met, involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 22, US ‘352 teaches the portion of the first load received by each of the second containers is delivered by an intermediate storage bin, 98 and 100, positioned above each second container as the second container remains on the second vehicle, see figure 3 and paragraphs 0056 and 0057.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art cited on the PTO-892 and not relied upon are included in the file to show additional examples of proppant delivery systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAITLIN S JOERGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5 (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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571)272-7097. 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.
/KAITLIN S JOERGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
2 January 2026