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 .
Responses to Amendments and Arguments
The amendments filed 07/16/2026 have been entered. Claims 1, 10-11 and 18 are amended, and Claims 5-7, 9, 15-17 and 20 are canceled. Claims 1-4, 8, 10-14, and 18-19 remain pending in the application.
Applicant's argument and amendments filed 07/16/2026 with respect to
the rejection of claims 1-20 directed to a judicial exception under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. (See the detailed response presented below).
On pages 6-11 of Applicant’s response, Applicant alleges that without acquiescing to the position of the Examiner, amended independent claim 1 recites, among other things, the following labelled limitations. … amended independent claim 1 does not recite an allegedly abstract idea and thus does not fall into a judicial exception to patent eligible subject matter. … In view of the above, amended independent claim 1 is not directed to a judicial exception to patent eligible subject matter. … These limitations clearly result in an improvement to at least one technical field by providing an automated tool that actively transmits real-time data measured by sensors during rotation to determine health reports that may contain maintenance notifications to a user for potential adjustments, and does add significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the alleged abstract idea.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The “position sensor”, the “resistance sensor”, the “temperature sensor”, the “computer processor”, the “automated rotating tool”, the “central monitoring system”, the “display”, and the “solar panel” are recited at a high-level of generality as generic computer components and techniques performing a generic computer function for collecting routine data and calculating/inferring the health report, transmit the alert to a display such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The limitations of “measure position data … measure a torque … measure temperature and pressure data …” and “control and rotate the automated rotating tool at a predefined schedule to observe integrity data …” are an insignificant pre-solution activity to collect routine data (i.e., parameters, integrity data) from the sensors and the automated rotating tool. The limitation of “during rotation by the automated rotating tool, receive, in real-time, a plurality of parameters measured by the position sensor, the resistance sensor, and the temperature and pressure sensor” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic computer function to receive data, measured by the sensors, in real-time, where the data is used for performing a math process related to determining the health report. These insignificant extra-solution activities addressed above do not present tangible or physical elements/components and/or integration of improvements to be indicative of specific features/structure/acts how and or with what to, for example, process the plurality of parameters and the integrity data, and/or determine the health report. (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)).
Applicant’s amendments and arguments filed 07/16/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
On pages 11-13 of the Remarks, Applicant alleges that McStay, Kajaria, and Cella fail to show or suggest the previously listed required limitations (i)-(iii) and (v) of independent claim 1. … McStay does not teach an automated rotating tool, as set forth in the claims. McStay has no actuator and no mechanism for actively rotating a valve. … McStay further does not teach a position sensor mounted on a stem of a handwheel, as recited in limitation (i). … Further, McStay does not teach a resistance sensor or any sensor that measures torque required to rotate a valve, as recited in limitation (ii). … Kajaria fails to supply that which McStay lacks. Kajaria is directed to a hydraulic override system for operating valves in confined spaces. Kajaria does not teach a resistance sensor, a position sensor mounted on a stem of a handwheel, or receiving data during rotation of a valve, as recited in limitations (i)-(iii) and (v).
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
At least paragraphs 0027-0028, 0031 and Fig. 2 of Kajarla teach a plurality of sensors to measure position data, temperature and pressure data related to wellhead valve, as well as teach a rotating tool (operators 202 204) to rotate the wellhead valve. At least paragraphs 0029, 0030-0031, 0034 of Kajarla teaches “during rotation by the automated rotating tool, receive, in real-time, a plurality of parameters measured by the position sensor, the resistance sensor, and the temperature and pressure sensor” (Para 0029, “multiple sensors may be provided for measuring a particular parameter”; paragraphs 0030-0031 teach sensors to measure conditions related to wellhead 130 related system performance wellhead 130 control devices to alter the operation of such device; Para 0031, “The processing unit 400 may operate directly on the sensor data in real time or may store the sensor data in the data warehouse 420 through the communications system 410”; Para 0034, “real time production data 470 and/or historical data 480 (e.g., regarding production or component operation) may also be employed in the condition monitoring model 440”). (See the detailed rationale set forth below).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The current 35 USC 101 analysis is based on the current guidance (Federal Register vol. 79, No. 241. pp. 74618-74633). The analysis follows several steps. Step 1 determines whether the claim belongs to a valid statutory class. Step 2A prong 1 identifies whether an abstract idea is claimed. Step 2A prong 2 determines whether any abstract idea is integrated into a practical application. If the abstract idea is integrated into a practical application the claim is patent eligible under 35 USC 101. Last, step 2B determines whether the claims contain something significantly more than the abstract idea. In most cases the existence of a practical application predicates the existence of an additional element that is significantly more.
The 35 USC 101 analysis between each element of claims and its combination is presented in the table below
Claim number and elements
Judicial exception (Step 2A Prong one)
Practical application (Step 2A Prong two)/ Significantly more (Step 2B)
Claim 1
Step2A Prong one: Yes
Step 2A Prong two: No / Step 2B: No
A health monitoring system for a wellhead valve, the system comprising:
a position sensor mounted on a stem of the wellhead valve configured to measure position data indicating whether the wellhead valve is open, closed, or partially open;
a resistance sensor disposed within a central hub of a handwheel of the wellhead valve configured to measure a torque required to rotate the wellhead valve;
a temperature and pressure sensor disposed within a body of the wellhead valve configured to measure temperature and pressure data;
an automated rotating tool configured to rotate the wellhead valve;
Step 1: Yes, statutory class
“a position sensor”, “a resistance sensor”, “a temperature sensor”, “a computer processor” and “automated rotating tool” are high level of generalities.
“measure position data … measure a torque … measure temperature and pressure data …” are an insignificant pre-solution activity to collect routine data.
“rotate the wellhead valve” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic function of a rotating tool.
a central monitoring system comprising a computer processor connected to the position sensor, the resistance sensor, the temperature and pressure sensor, and the automated rotating tool configured to
control and rotate the automated rotating tool at a predefined schedule to observe integrity data;
process, via the computer processor, the plurality of parameters and integrity data;
during rotation by the automated rotating tool, receive, in real-time, a plurality of parameters measured by the position sensor, the resistance sensor, and the temperature and pressure sensor;
determine, via the computer processor, a health report related to the wellhead valve based, at least in part, on the processed plurality of parameters; and
transmit, via the computer processor, an alert comprising a maintenance notification based on the health report using a wireless connection to a display; and
abstract idea
math
math
“a central monitoring system” is a high level of generality.
“control and rotate the automated rotating tool at a predefined schedule to observe integrity data …” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to collect routine data (integrity data).
“process, via the computer processor, the plurality of parameters and integrity data …” is a math process and/or data processing itself performed by a generic computer program of a generic computer.
“receive, in real-time, a plurality of parameters measured by …” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic function of a generic computer to receive data in real-time, where the data is used for performing a math process related to determining the health report.
“determine, via the computer processor, a health report related to the wellhead valve ….” Is a math process.
“transmit, via the computer processor, an alert comprising a maintenance notification …” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic computer function to transmit a mathematical/inferred result to a display.
“a display” is a high level of generality.
a solar panel coupled to the automated rotating tool and the central monitoring system configured to harness solar energy to power the automated rotating tool and the central monitoring system.
“a solar panel” is a high level of generality.
“the central monitoring system configured to harness solar energy to power the plurality of sensors, the automated rotating tool, and the central monitoring system” is an insignificant extra-solution activity merely recited to provide power source to elements.
Claims 1-4, 8, 10-14, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-4, 8, 10-14, and 18-19 are directed to an abstract idea. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as addressed below and presented in the above table.
Step 2A: Prong One
Regarding Claim 1, the limitations recited in Claim 1, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mathematical calculations and/or the mind, as presented in the above table. Nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind and/or the mathematical calculations. For example, “… process, via the computer processor, the plurality of parameters and integrity data; …; determine, via the computer processor, a health report related to the wellhead valve based, at least in part, on the processed plurality of parameters” in the context of this claim may encompass mathematical calculations related to data processing for the collected data (i.e., parameters and integrity data) and manually calculating or inferring the health report based on the processed routine data (i.e., the parameters and integrity data), where processing and determining steps may be performed by a mathematical algorithm or an arithmetic computer program.
Step 2A: Prong Two
This judicial exception is abstract ideal itself and not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the specification details use of a computer processor to perform the mathematical calculations using a mathematical algorithm and/or an arithmetic computer program to perform “… process, via the computer processor, the plurality of parameters and integrity data; … determine, via the computer processor, a health report related to the wellhead valve based, at least in part, on the processed plurality of parameters”. The “position sensor”, the “resistance sensor”, the “temperature sensor”, the “computer processor”, the “automated rotating tool”, the “central monitoring system”, the “display”, and the “solar panel” are recited at a high-level of generality as generic computer components and techniques performing a generic computer function for collecting routine data and calculating/inferring the health report, transmit the alert to a display such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
The limitations of “measure position data … measure a torque … measure temperature and pressure data …” and “control and rotate the automated rotating tool at a predefined schedule to observe integrity data …” are an insignificant pre-solution activity to collect routine data (i.e., parameters, integrity data) from the sensors and the automated rotating tool. The limitation of “rotate the wellhead valve” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic function of a generic tool such as a rotating tool. The limitation of “transmit, via the computer processor, an alert comprising a maintenance notification …” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic computer function to transmit a mathematically processed data/result to a display, where the display is a high-level generality to perform a generic computer function of a generic computer component. The limitation of “the central monitoring system configured to harness solar energy to power the automated rotating tool, and the central monitoring system” is an insignificant extra-solution activity merely recited to provide a power source to elements. The limitation of “during rotation by the automated rotating tool, receive, in real-time, a plurality of parameters measured by the position sensor, the resistance sensor, and the temperature and pressure sensor” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic computer function to receive data, measured by the sensors, in real-time, where the data is used for performing a math process related to determining the health report. These insignificant extra-solution activities addressed above do not present tangible or physical elements/components and/or integration of improvements to be indicative of specific features/structure/acts how and or with what to, for example, process the plurality of parameters and the integrity data, and/or determine the health report. (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). There is no showing of integration into a practical application such as an improvement to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, or use of a particular machine.
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitations of “measure a plurality of parameters comprising resistance data, pressure data, temperature data, and position data” and “control and rotate the automated rotating tool at a predefined schedule to observe integrity data …” are an insignificant pre-solution activity to collect routine data (i.e., parameters, integrity data) from the sensors and the automated rotating tool, and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, as AI-Salmani et al. (US 20200149389 A1) teach. See MPEP 2106.05(d). The limitation of “rotate the wellhead valve” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic function of a generic tool such as a rotating tool. The limitation of “transmit, via the computer processor, an alert comprising a maintenance notification …” is an insignificant extra-solution activity to perform a generic computer function to transmit a mathematically processed data/result to a display, where the display is a high-level generality to perform a generic computer function of a generic computer component. The limitation of “the central monitoring system configured to harness solar energy to power the plurality of sensors, the automated rotating tool, and the central monitoring system” is an insignificant extra-solution activity merely recited to provide a power source to elements, and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, as at least paragraph [1838] of Cella et al. (US 20230196230 A1) teach. See MPEP 2106.05(d). As discussed above, with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, using the computer processor to perform the processes of “… process, via the computer processor, the plurality of parameters and integrity data; determine, via the computer processor, a health report related to the wellhead valve based, at least in part, on the processed plurality of parameters” amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept cannot provide statutory eligibility. Claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Regarding Claims 2-4, 8, and 10, the limitations are further directed to an abstract idea, as described in claim 1. The additional elements of “a Wi-Fi or a cellular connectivity” in claim 8, and “a pressure sensor” in claim 10 are high level of generalities to perform a generic computer function to collect routine data (i.e., measured sensor data). For the reasons described above with respect to Claim 1, the judicial exceptions are not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea
Regarding Claim 11, it is a method type claim having similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 1 above.
Regarding Claims 12-14, 18 and 20, the limitations are further directed to an abstract idea, as described in claims 2-4, 8, and 10. For the reasons described above with respect to claims 2-4, 8, and 10, the judicial exceptions are not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
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 1-4, 8, 10-14, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCSTAY et al. (US 20100051286 A1, hereinafter referred to as “MCSTAY”) in view of Kajaria et al. (US 20210102439 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Kajaria”) and Cella et al. (US 20230196230 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Cella”).
Regarding Claim 1, MCSTAY teaches a health monitoring system (Figs. 4 and 5) for a wellhead valve, the system comprising:
…
a temperature and pressure sensor disposed within a body of the wellhead valve configured to measure temperature and pressure data (Para 0038, “two independent sensors may be used to measure the same parameter (e.g., pressure or temperature)”; Para 0029, “multiple sensors may be provided for measuring a particular parameter”; paragraphs 0030-0031 teach sensors to measure conditions related to wellhead 130 related system performance wellhead 130 control devices to alter the operation of such device; Para 0038, “”two independent sensors may be used to measure the same parameter (e.g., pressure or temperature) … pressure indications from a pressure sensor may or may not be consistent with expected values resulting from choke or valve position”);
…
a central monitoring system (Fig. 4, condition monitoring unit 180) comprising a computer processor (Fig. 4, processing unit 400, para 0030,” The condition monitoring unit 180 includes a processing unit 400”) connected to the position sensor, the resistance sensor, the temperature and pressure sensor and the automated rotating tool (The condition monitoring unit 180 operates as a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system that accesses sensors … wellhead 130 control devices; Para 0029, “multiple sensors may be provided for measuring a particular parameter”; paragraphs 0030-0031) configured to
control and rotate the automated rotating tool at a predefined schedule to observe integrity data (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the integrity data is indicative of condition/operation data related to components such as wellhead valve (see paragraph 0031 of the instant application). Under this interpretation, paragraphs and 0027 and 0031 teach condition data related to components such as valves to be used for determining a health metric, “Based on the sensor data, the processing unit 400 determines the health of the Christmas tree 120 and or the individual components (e.g., valves, chokes, pumps, etc.)”; Para 0027, “One or more leak detection sensors 320 may be provided for monitoring connection integrity”);
during rotation by the automated rotating tool, receive, in real-time, a plurality of parameters measured by the position sensor, the resistance sensor, and the temperature and pressure sensor (Para 0029, “multiple sensors may be provided for measuring a particular parameter”; paragraphs 0030-0031 teach sensors to measure conditions related to wellhead 130 related system performance wellhead 130 control devices to alter the operation of such device; Para 0031, “The processing unit 400 may operate directly on the sensor data in real time or may store the sensor data in the data warehouse 420 through the communications system 410”; Para 0034, “real time production data 470 and/or historical data 480 (e.g., regarding production or component operation) may also be employed in the condition monitoring model 440”);
process, via the computer processor, the plurality of parameters and integrity data (Para 0031, “the processing unit 400 employs a condition monitoring model 440 that directly processes the data from the sensors 430 to determine a health metric. … Health metrics are calculated by comparing data for all parameters from the sensors to a model built from known-good data. The model may employ a hierarchy structure where parameters …. data related to a common component (e.g., valve, pump, or choke) or process (e.g., production flow parameters)”; Para 0034, “real time production data 470 and/or historical data 480 (e.g., regarding production or component operation) may also be employed in the condition monitoring model 440, component models 450, or process models 460. The historical data 480 may be employed to identify trends with a particular component”);
determine, via the computer processor, a health report related to the wellhead valve based, at least in part, on the processed plurality of parameters (Para 0031, “the processing unit 400 may employ to determine health metrics. In a first embodiment, the processing unit 400 employs a condition monitoring model 440 that directly processes the data from the sensors 430 to determine a health metric. One type of model that may be used to determine a health metric for the Christmas tree 120 is a recursive principal components analysis (RPCA) model. Health metrics are calculated by comparing data for all parameters from the sensors to a model built from known-good data. The model may employ a hierarchy structure where parameters are grouped into related nodes. The sensor nodes are combined to generate higher level nodes. For example, data related to a common component (e.g., valve, pump, or choke) or process (e.g., production flow parameters)”; Para 0034-0035, “The information derived from the condition monitoring model 440 … used to provide future operational recommendations for a component or system (e.g., maintenance schedule, load, duty cycle, remaining service life, etc.).); and
transmit, via the computer processor, an alert alarm condition information comprising a maintenance notification based on the health report using a wireless connection to a display (Para 0036, “The condition monitoring unit 180 may generate alarms when a particular component or process exceeds an alarm threshold based on the determined health metric. … The alarm condition information may be communicated by the communications system 410 to operations personnel (e.g., visual indicator, electronic message, etc.).).
MCSTAY fails explicitly disclose, but Kajarla teaches
a position sensor mounted on a stem of the wellhead valve configured to measure position data indicating whether the wellhead valve is open, closed, or partially open (Para 0027, “The sensors may obtain valve position information to provide information to an operator that is controlling the removable actuators 114 from a remote location.”; Para 0031, “The position sensor may relay a position of the valve (e.g., open, closed, ½ open, etc.) to the control panel, thereby providing improved operational information for the operator”);
a resistance sensor disposed within a central hub of a handwheel of the wellhead valve configured to measure a torque required to rotate the wellhead valve (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation is explicitly or inherently taught by at least paragraph 0027, because sensors associated with the actuators teach driving the wellhead valve by adjusting fluid pressure);
…
an automated rotating tool (Fig. 2, 202, 204) configured to rotate the wellhead valve (Fig. 2, wellhead valves 108, operators 202 204; Para 0028, “the valves 108 are axially stacked, but staggered, such that respective operators 202, 204 are both visible. In other words, the valves 108 are positioned such that the operators 202, 204 are circumferentially misaligned, which provides access to both of the valves 108 simultaneously without increasing an overall height of the configuration. The illustrated operators 202, 204 in FIG. 2 are hand wheels”).
MCSTAY and Kajarla are all considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of monitoring a Christmas tree assembly installed on a subsea hydrocarbon well and a wellhead valve control system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MCSTAY to incorporate the teachings of and Kajarla by providing position sensor to monitor a position of the valve (e.g., open, closed, ½ open, etc.), as taught by Kajaria at least at paragraphs 0027 and 0031, providing sensors associated with the actuators to drive and adjust the wellhead valve, as taught by Kajaria at least at paragraph 0027, and providing operators (i.e., automated rotating tool) to rotate the wellhead valve, as taught by Kajaria at least at Fig. 2 and paragraph 0028.
MCSTAY in view of Kajarla fails explicitly disclose, but Cella teaches a solar panel coupled to the automated rotating tool and the central monitoring system configured to harness solar energy to power the automated rotating tool and the central monitoring system (Para 1838, “the sensor kit 29800 may include external power sources … the external power sources may be deployed to power the sensors 28702, the edge device 28704, and any other devices”).
Cella is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of power sources such as solar panels to provide a power to sensors and any other devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MCSTAY in view of Kajarla to incorporate the teachings of Cella by providing solar panels to provide a power to sensors and any other devices, as taught by Cella at least at paragraph 1838.
Regarding Claim 2, MCSTAY teaches wherein the health report comprises a quantitative calculation regarding a condition of the wellhead valve (Para 0031-0032, “Health metrics are calculated by comparing data for all parameters from the sensors … a metric may be calculated for every node in the hierarchy, and is a positive number that quantitatively measures how far the value of that node is within or outside 2.8-.sigma. of the expected distribution”).
Regarding Claim 3, MCSTAY teaches wherein the alert comprises a maintenance notification based on a pre-set threshold for the health report (Para 0036, “generate alarms when a particular component or process exceeds an alarm threshold based on the determined health metric”).
Regarding Claim 4, MCSTAY teaches wherein the maintenance notification comprises a remote diagnostic indicating to a user for a replacement operation (Para 0035, “communicate to the system controls (i.e., managed by the topside control module 170 and/or subsea control module 240) to automatically adjust one or more production parameters. The information may also be used to provide future operational recommendations for a component or system (e.g., maintenance schedule, load, duty cycle, remaining service life, etc.). Rules based on the determined metrics may be used to facilitate these predictions; Para 0036, “The alarm condition information may be communicated by the communications system 410 to operations personnel (e.g., visual indicator, electronic message, etc.).”).
Regarding Claim 8, MCSTAY in view of Kajarla fails to explicitly disclose, but Cella teaches wherein the wireless connection comprises a Wi-Fi or a cellular connectivity (Para 0056, “network connectivity”; Para 0418, “network type selection (e.g., selecting among available local, cellular, satellite, Wi-Fi”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MCSTAY in view of Kajarla to incorporate the teachings of Cella by providing the wireless connection such as cellular or Wi-Fi, as taught by Cella at least at paragraph 0418.
Regarding Claim 10, MCSTAY teaches wherein a pressure sensor is configured to measure a fluid pressure on a first side and a second side of the wellhead valve (Para 0038, “multiple sensor validation 520 may be performed by comparing the sensor data from the redundant sensor validation 510 to data from other sources, such as other sensors, that provide an indication of the measured parameter. For example, pressure indications from a pressure sensor may or may not be consistent with expected values resulting from choke or valve position”).
Regarding Claim 11, it is a method type claim and has similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 12, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 2 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 13, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 3 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 3 above.
Regarding Claim 14, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 4 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 4 above.
Regarding Claim 18, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 10 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 10 above.
Regarding Claim 19, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 8 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 8 above.
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Al-Salmani et al. (US 20200149389 A1) teaches a wellhead monitoring system which includes a conversion assembly, the conversion assembly including an actuator element for modifying an operating mode of a valve from manual to remote, where the system also includes one or more sensors, associated at least one of a fracturing tree or the conversion assembly, the one or more sensors obtaining wellhead operating conditions, and the system further includes a control unit, adapted to receive information from the one or more sensors, the control unit presenting the information, on a display, and transmitting the information to a remote system for analysis.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BYUNG RO LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3707. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:00pm.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached on (571) 270-5628. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-2555.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BYUNG RO LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights