DETAILED ACTIONS
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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the amendments/arguments submitted by the Applicant(s) on 03/31/2026.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1, 5-10, 14-19, 23, 27-38 are pending.
Claims 1, 5-8, 10-14-17, 19, 23 are amended.
Claims 2-4, 11-13, 20-22, and 24-26 are canceled.
Claims 27-38 are New.
Response to Arguments
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 101
Applicant’s argument/amendment regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejections of claims has been considered, and are persuasive. Therefore, 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejections of claims have been withdrawn.
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant’s Argument see remarks pages 12-13, filed on 03/31/2026.
with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C.§103 has been considered, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 has been considered, and are moot because the amendment has necessitated a new ground of rejections. The new rejections are set forth below.
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.
Claims 1, 8, 10, 17 and 19 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claims 1,10 and 19, the amended claims 1, 10 and 19 recites the limitations “wherein a given slope coefficient of a given curve for the given well serves as an alternative value that represents the stress shadow effect” and the limitations “wherein slope coefficients of the curves form alternative stress shadow effect values” are indefinite because it is unclear to determine whether limitation “a given curve” and the limitation “the curve” are referring to “curves that define the pressures as a function of the wellbore distance”.
Regarding Claims 8 and 17, the amended claims 8 and 17 recites the limitations “wherein the curves are generated using a stress shadow effect model” is indefinite because it is unclear to determine whether limitation “the curve” is referring to “curves that define the pressures as a function of the wellbore distance”. or “a given curve for the given well serves as an alternative value that represents the stress shadow effect”.
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, 5-8, 10, 14-17, 19, 23, 27-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WENG et al. (US 2018/0016895 A1, hereinafter Weng, previously cited) and in view of Rahimi-Aghdam et al. (US 2023/0399940 A1, hereinafter Rahimi (Provisional application No. 63/161,361, filed on Mar.15, 2021)).
Regarding Claim 1, Weng teaches,
A computer-implemented method for generating a stress shadow effect as a function of position (Weng, Figure 15, step, 1598, [0170] “The method (1500) also involves (1594) performing stress shadowing on the hydraulic fractures to determine stress interference between the hydraulic fractures (or with
other fractures), and (1598) repeating the generating (1584) based on the stress shadowing”) in a subsurface volume of interest (Weng, [0002] this disclosure is directed to techniques for performing fracture operations, such as perforating, injecting, fracturing, stimulating, monitoring, investigating, and/or characterizing
a subterranean formation”), the method being implemented in a computer system (Weng, Figure 17[0068], a computer 1722.1) that includes a stress shadow detection circuit, a graphical user interface, and non-transient electronic storage (Weng, Figure 17, [0075]. “The data may be collected in one or more databases and/or transmitted on or offsite “), the method comprising:
obtaining pressures generated during a hydraulic fracturing stage of well development for individual wells in the subsurface volume of interest, wherein a given pressure corresponds to a wellbore distance along a given well (Weng, figure 15, step-1582, fracture pressure data is considered, fracture pressure is measured at different well distances to estimate fracture width, see equation 1-6, [0122] “The stress field around a 2D fracture with internal pressure p can be calculated(…) see equation 6, and “where ax is stress in the x direction, p is internal pressure, and x, y, r:;, Li, L2 are the coordinates and distances in FIG. 2 normalized by the fracture half-height h/2”) ;
generating a stress shadow effect map by spatially attributing,(Weng, Figures 20-21, shadow effect map, [0004] Current hydraulic fracture monitoring methods and systems may map where the fractures occur and the extent of the fractures.), with the stress shadow detection circuit(Weng, Figure 17,), the alternative stress shadow effect values to locations of the individual wells,(Weng, Figure 15, [ 0170] The method (1500) also involves (1594) performing stress shadowing on the hydraulic fractures to determine stress interference between the hydraulic fractures ( or with other fractures), and (1598) repeating the generating (1584) based on the stress shadowing and/or the determined stress interference between the hydraulic fractures. The repeating may be performed to account for fracture interference that may affect fracture growth. Stress shadowing may involve performing, for example, a 2D or 3D DDM for each of the hydraulic fractures and updating the fracture growth pattern over time” also see FIG. 5.3 plots ay/p (y-axis) versus normalized distance from fracture (x-axis) using 2D DDM and Flac3D.
The location Lf of the fracture tip is depicted along line x/h.).
wherein the stress shadow effect map specifies the effect fracturing the given wellbore is having on the stresses (Weng, Figure 15, step 1590-1599, and “shadow effect” in [0097]-[0098], [0104]-[0107]).NOTE: Weng teaches the estimation fracture properties at different stages (Fig. 13) of fracturing, distances ([0107]), dimension([0151]) of the fracturing and of determining Shadowing effect using 2D DDM, 3D DDM models and Fracture data of the wellsite). in the subsurface volume of interest as a function of position,, (Weng, Figure 14, [0159] “FIGS. 14.1-14.4 are schematic diagrams 1400.1-1400-4 depicting a fracture network 1429 at various stages during a fracture operation. FIG. 14.1 shows a discrete fracture network (DFN) 1429 before treatment. FIG. 14.2 depicts a simulated DFN 1429 after a first treatment stage”).
the stress shadow effect map being a representation of the stress shadow effect that uses visual effects to depict the alternative stress shadow effect values; and displaying the stress shadow effect map in the graphical user interface. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the
geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques”).
Weng teaches measuring fracture pressure and incorporating the pressure value into shadow effect model to estimate stress shadow effect.
Weng is silent on generating curves that define the pressures as a function of the wellbore distance along the individual wells,
wherein a given slope coefficient of a given curve for the given well serves as an alternative value that represents the stress shadow effect in the subsurface volume of interest from fracturing the given well, the stress shadow effect comprising
an effect that fracturing a given wellbore of the given well has on stresses in the subsurface volume of interest, further wherein slope coefficients of the curves form alternative stress shadow effect values;
However, Rahimi teaches on generating curves that define the pressures as a function of the wellbore distance along the individual wells, (Rahimi, Figures 7-8,[0030]-Fig. 7 and [0031] FIG. 8 shows the relation between pressures in the fracture”). ,
wherein a given slope coefficient of a given curve for the given well serves as an alternative value that represents the stress shadow effect in the subsurface volume of interest from fracturing the given well, the stress shadow effect comprising (Rahimi, Figure 9, steps 960-993, [0189] At 960, which is an optional for the 3 segment
pressure decay determination, the acoustic NFCI measurements made at 920 can be used to calculate near wellbore pressure drop to provide a more accurate determination of fracture properties. [0190] At 970, the 3-segment model as described above (Eqs. 22-103) may be used to analyze the pressure decay
data and calculate the pressure properties of each stage (all previously collected data may be used in this element of the method.
an effect that fracturing a given wellbore of the given well has on stresses in the subsurface volume of interest, further wherein slope coefficients of the curves form alternative stress shadow effect values; (Rahimi, [0194] At 992, evaluate possible interaction between different fracture treatment stages and adjacent wells using the calculated values of NFCI, stress shadowing, and any measured
offset-well interactions. Offset well interactions require simultaneous pressure measurements made in at least 2 nearby wells”. NOTE: the pressure measurement over distance data is used in stress shadow model (Fig. 9step 970) to generate fracture dimensions. The slope of the curve pressure vs distance is the coefficient with unit PSI/ distance measurement unit. Instant application defines the stress shadow slope coefficient with the same units (see instant application specification [0044] “the stress shadow effect slope coefficient may be in units of psi per foot or a pressure unit per a distance unit”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s method incorporating a relationship of pressure with the distance as a coefficient slope into a model to predict stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress shadow effect accurately. (Rahimi, [0194],[0116]- [0126]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to include well known fracture pressure measurement and incorporating a model to estimate stress shadowing effect. There are many path to measure showing effect, considering the fracture pressure over distance is one of the known alternative path to estimate shadowing stress effect. subsequent equations to derive a slope coefficient and use in into model to estimate stress shadowing effect in order to yield the predicted results of generating accurate measurement, yet with higher accuracy (KSR).
Regarding Claim 5, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1,
wherein the stress shadow effect map is a temperature map. (Weng, Figure 17, 20;21, [0071] Sensors (S), such as gauges, may be positioned about oilfield 1700 to collect data relating to various oilfield operations as described previously. As shown, sensor (S) is positioned in one or more locations in the drilling tools and/or at rig 1728 to measure drilling parameters, such as weight on bit, torque on bit, pressures, temperatures, flow rates, compositions, rotary speed, and/or other parameters of the field operation. Sensors (S) may also be positioned in one or more locations in the circulating system”).
Regarding Claim 6, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1,
Weng is silent on wherein the pressures generated during the hydraulic fracturing stage of well development comprises instantaneous shut down pressure.
However, Rahimi teaches wherein the pressures generated during the hydraulic fracturing stage of well development comprises instantaneous shut down pressure. (Rahimi, [0125] “the Instantaneous Shut-in Pressure (ISIP)” is considered.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s ISIP analysis method incorporating into a model to predicting stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress plateau accurately. (Rahimi, [0125]-[0130).
Regarding Claim 7, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1,
Weng is silent on wherein a pressure value corresponds to a time at which fluid pressure declines after injection.
However, Rahimi teaches, wherein a pressure value corresponds to a time at which fluid pressure declines after injection. (Rahimi, [0126] [0126] One of the novel aspects of a method according to the present disclosure is dividing the post ISIP (instantaneous shut-in pressure) pressure decay into three segments according to the dominant source of the pressure decay in each of the segments).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s ISIP analysis method incorporating into a model to predicting stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress plateau accurately. (Rahimi, [0125]-[0130).
Regarding Claim 8, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1,
Weng is silent on wherein the curves are generated using a stress shadow effect model.
However, Rahimil teaches wherein the relationships are generated using a stress shadow effect model. (Rahimi Figure 9,step 970, [0190] At 970, the 3-segment model as described above (Eqs. 22-103) may be used to analyze the pressure decay data and calculate the pressure properties of each stage (all previously collected data may be used in this element of the method)”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s ISIP analysis method incorporating into a model to predicting stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing accurately. (Rahimi, [0125]-[0130).
Regarding Claim 10, Weng teaches,
A system comprising:
non-transient electronic storage; and a stress shadow detection circuit (Weng, Figure 17, [0075]. “The data may be collected in one or more databases and/or transmitted on or offsite, Figure 17[0068], a computer 1722.1)) configured by machine-readable instructions to:
obtaining pressures generated during a hydraulic fracturing stage of well development for individual wells in the subsurface volume of interest, wherein a given pressure corresponds to a wellbore distance along a given well (Weng, figure 15, step-1582, fracture pressure data is considered, fracture pressure is measured at different well distances to estimate fracture width, see equation 1-6, [0122] “The stress field around a 2D fracture with internal pressure p can be calculated(…) see equation 6, and “where ax is stress in the x direction, p is internal pressure, and x, y, r:;, Li, L2 are the coordinates and distances in FIG. 2 normalized by the fracture half-height h/2”) ;
generating a stress shadow effect map by spatially attributing,(Weng, Figures 20-21, shadow effect map, [0004] Current hydraulic fracture monitoring methods and systems may map where the fractures occur and the extent of the fractures.), with the stress shadow detection circuit(Weng, Figure 17,), the alternative stress shadow effect values to locations of the individual wells,(Weng, Figure 15, [ 0170] The method (1500) also involves (1594) performing stress shadowing on the hydraulic fractures to determine stress interference between the hydraulic fractures ( or with other fractures), and (1598) repeating the generating (1584) based on the stress shadowing and/or the determined stress interference between the hydraulic fractures. The repeating may be performed to account for fracture interference that may affect fracture growth. Stress shadowing may involve performing, for example, a 2D or 3D DDM for each of the hydraulic fractures and updating the fracture growth pattern over time” also see FIG. 5.3 plots ay/p (y-axis) versus normalized distance from fracture (x-axis) using 2D DDM and Flac3D.
The location Lf of the fracture tip is depicted along line x/h.).
wherein the stress shadow effect map specifies the effect fracturing the given wellbore is having on the stresses (Weng, Figure 15, step 1590-1599, and “shadow effect” in [0097]-[0098], [0104]-[0107]).NOTE: Weng teaches the estimation fracture properties at different stages (Fig. 13) of fracturing, distances ([0107]), dimension([0151]) of the fracturing and of determining Shadowing effect using 2D DDM, 3D DDM models and Fracture data of the wellsite). in the subsurface volume of interest as a function of position,, (Weng, Figure 14, [0159] “FIGS. 14.1-14.4 are schematic diagrams 1400.1-1400-4 depicting a fracture network 1429 at various stages during a fracture operation. FIG. 14.1 shows a discrete fracture network (DFN) 1429 before treatment. FIG. 14.2 depicts a simulated DFN 1429 after a first treatment stage”)
the stress shadow effect map being a representation of the stress shadow effect that uses visual effects to depict the alternative stress shadow effect values; and displaying the stress shadow effect map in the graphical user interface. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the
geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques”).
Weng teaches measuring fracture pressure and incorporating the pressure value into shadow effect model to estimate stress shadow effect.
Weng is silent on generating curves that define the pressures as a function of the wellbore distance along the individual wells,
wherein a given slope coefficient of a given curve for the given well serves as an alternative value that represents the stress shadow effect in the subsurface volume of interest from fracturing the given well, the stress shadow effect comprising
an effect that fracturing a given wellbore of the given well has on stresses in the subsurface volume of interest, further wherein slope coefficients of the curves form alternative stress shadow effect values;
However, Rahimi teaches on generating curves that define the pressures as a function of the wellbore distance along the individual wells, (Rahimi, Figures 7-8,[0030]-Fig. 7 and [0031] FIG. 8 shows the relation between pressures in the fracture”). ,
wherein a given slope coefficient of a given curve for the given well serves as an alternative value that represents the stress shadow effect in the subsurface volume of interest from fracturing the given well, the stress shadow effect comprising (Rahimi, Figure 9, steps 960-993, [0189] At 960, which is an optional for the 3 segment
pressure decay determination, the acoustic NFCI measurements made at 920 can be used to calculate near wellbore pressure drop to provide a more accurate determination of fracture properties. [0190] At 970, the 3-segment model as described above (Eqs. 22-103) may be used to analyze the pressure decay
data and calculate the pressure properties of each stage (all previously collected data may be used in this element of the method.
an effect that fracturing a given wellbore of the given well has on stresses in the subsurface volume of interest, further wherein slope coefficients of the curves form alternative stress shadow effect values; (Rahimi, [0194] At 992, evaluate possible interaction between different fracture treatment stages and adjacent wells using the calculated values of NFCI, stress shadowing, and any measured
offset-well interactions. Offset well interactions require simultaneous pressure measurements made in at least 2 nearby wells”. NOTE: the pressure measurement over distance data is used in stress shadow model (Fig. 9step 970) to generate fracture dimensions. The slope of the curve pressure vs distance is the coefficient with unit PSI/ distance measurement unit. Instant application defines the stress shadow slope coefficient with the same units (see instant application specification [0044] “the stress shadow effect slope coefficient may be in units of psi per foot or a pressure unit per a distance unit”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s method incorporating a relationship of pressure with the distance as a coefficient slope into a model to predict stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress shadow effect accurately. (Rahimi, [0194],[0116]- [0126]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to include well known fracture pressure measurement and incorporating a model to estimate stress shadowing effect. There are many path to measure showing effect, considering the fracture pressure over distance is one of the known alternative path to estimate shadowing stress effect. subsequent equations to derive a slope coefficient and use in into model to estimate stress shadowing effect in order to yield the predicted results of generating accurate measurement, yet with higher accuracy (KSR).
Regarding Claim 14, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of claim 10,
wherein the stress shadow effect map is a temperature map. (Weng, Figure 17, 20;21, [0071] Sensors (S), such as gauges, may be positioned about oilfield 1700 to collect data relating to various oilfield operations as described previously. As shown, sensor (S) is positioned in one or more locations in the drilling tools and/or at rig 1728 to measure drilling parameters, such as weight on bit, torque on bit, pressures, temperatures, flow rates, compositions, rotary speed, and/or other parameters of the field operation. Sensors (S) may also be positioned in one or more locations in the circulating system”).
Regarding Claim 15, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of claim 10,
Weng is silent on wherein the pressures generated during the hydraulic fracturing stage of well development comprises instantaneous shut down pressure.
However, Rahimi teaches wherein the pressures generated during the hydraulic fracturing stage of well development comprises instantaneous shut down pressure. (Rahimi, [0125] “the Instantaneous Shut-in Pressure (ISIP)” is considered.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s ISIP analysis method incorporating into a model to predicting stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress plateau accurately. (Rahimi, [0125]-[0130).
Regarding Claim 16, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of claim 10,
Weng is silent on wherein a pressure value corresponds to a time at which fluid pressure declines after injection.
However, Rahimi teaches, wherein a pressure value corresponds to a time at which fluid pressure declines after injection. (Rahimi, [0126] [0126] One of the novel aspects of a method according to the present disclosure is dividing the post ISIP (instantaneous shut-in pressure) pressure decay into three segments according to the dominant source of the pressure decay in each of the segments).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s ISIP analysis method incorporating into a model to predicting stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress plateau accurately. (Rahimi, [0125]-[0130).
Regarding Claim 17, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of claim 10,
Weng is silent on wherein the curves are generated using a stress shadow effect model.
However, Rahimil teaches wherein the relationships are generated using a stress shadow effect model. (Rahimi Figure 9, step 970, [0190] At 970, the 3-segment model as described above (Eqs. 22-103) may be used to analyze the pressure decay data and calculate the pressure properties of each stage (all previously collected data may be used in this element of the method)”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s ISIP analysis method incorporating into a model to predicting stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing accurately. (Rahimi, [0125]-[0130).
Regarding Claim 19, Weng teaches
A non-transitory machine-readable storage media storing instructions that, when executed by a stress shadow detection circuit, cause the stress shadow detection (Weng, Figure 17[0068], a computer 1722.1 [0075]. “The data may be collected in one or more databases and/or transmitted on or offsite) circuit to:
obtaining pressures generated during a hydraulic fracturing stage of well development for individual wells in the subsurface volume of interest, wherein a given pressure corresponds to a wellbore distance along a given well (Weng, figure 15, step-1582, fracture pressure data is considered, fracture pressure is measured at different well distances to estimate fracture width, see equation 1-6, [0122] “The stress field around a 2D fracture with internal pressure p can be calculated(…) see equation 6, and “where ax is stress in the x direction, p is internal pressure, and x, y, r:;, Li, L2 are the coordinates and distances in FIG. 2 normalized by the fracture half-height h/2”) ;
generating a stress shadow effect map by spatially attributing,(Weng, Figures 20-21, shadow effect map, [0004] Current hydraulic fracture monitoring methods and systems may map where the fractures occur and the extent of the fractures.), with the stress shadow detection circuit(Weng, Figure 17,), the alternative stress shadow effect values to locations of the individual wells,(Weng, Figure 15, [ 0170] The method (1500) also involves (1594) performing stress shadowing on the hydraulic fractures to determine stress interference between the hydraulic fractures ( or with other fractures), and (1598) repeating the generating (1584) based on the stress shadowing and/or the determined stress interference between the hydraulic fractures. The repeating may be performed to account for fracture interference that may affect fracture growth. Stress shadowing may involve performing, for example, a 2D or 3D DDM for each of the hydraulic fractures and updating the fracture growth pattern over time” also see FIG. 5.3 plots ay/p (y-axis) versus normalized distance from fracture (x-axis) using 2D DDM and Flac3D.
The location Lf of the fracture tip is depicted along line x/h.).
wherein the stress shadow effect map specifies the effect fracturing the given wellbore is having on the stresses (Weng, Figure 15, step 1590-1599, and “shadow effect” in [0097]-[0098], [0104]-[0107]).NOTE: Weng teaches the estimation fracture properties at different stages (Fig. 13) of fracturing, distances ([0107]), dimension([0151]) of the fracturing and of determining Shadowing effect using 2D DDM, 3D DDM models and Fracture data of the wellsite). in the subsurface volume of interest as a function of position,, (Weng, Figure 14, [0159] “FIGS. 14.1-14.4 are schematic diagrams 1400.1-1400-4 depicting a fracture network 1429 at various stages during a fracture operation. FIG. 14.1 shows a discrete fracture network (DFN) 1429 before treatment. FIG. 14.2 depicts a simulated DFN 1429 after a first treatment stage”)
the stress shadow effect map being a representation of the stress shadow effect that uses visual effects to depict the alternative stress shadow effect values; and displaying the stress shadow effect map in the graphical user interface. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the
geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques”).
Weng teaches measuring fracture pressure and incorporating the pressure value into shadow effect model to estimate stress shadow effect.
Weng is silent on generating curves that define the pressures as a function of the wellbore distance along the individual wells, wherein a given slope coefficient of a given curve for the given well serves as an alternative value that represents the stress shadow effect in the subsurface volume of interest from fracturing the given well, the stress shadow effect comprising
an effect that fracturing a given wellbore of the given well has on stresses in the subsurface volume of interest, further wherein slope coefficients of the curves form alternative stress shadow effect values;
However, Rahimi teaches on generating curves that define the pressures as a function of the wellbore distance along the individual wells, (Rahimi, Figures 7-8,[0030]-Fig. 7 and [0031] FIG. 8 shows the relation between pressures in the fracture”). ,
wherein a given slope coefficient of a given curve for the given well serves as an alternative value that represents the stress shadow effect in the subsurface volume of interest from fracturing the given well, the stress shadow effect comprising (Rahimi, Figure 9, steps 960-993, [0189] At 960, which is an optional for the 3 segment
pressure decay determination, the acoustic NFCI measurements made at 920 can be used to calculate near wellbore pressure drop to provide a more accurate determination of fracture properties. [0190] At 970, the 3-segment model as described above (Eqs. 22-103) may be used to analyze the pressure decay
data and calculate the pressure properties of each stage (all previously collected data may be used in this element of the method.
an effect that fracturing a given wellbore of the given well has on stresses in the subsurface volume of interest, further wherein slope coefficients of the curves form alternative stress shadow effect values; (Rahimi, [0194] At 992, evaluate possible interaction between different fracture treatment stages and adjacent wells using the calculated values of NFCI, stress shadowing, and any measured
offset-well interactions. Offset well interactions require simultaneous pressure measurements made in at least 2 nearby wells”. NOTE: the pressure measurement over distance data is used in stress shadow model (Fig. 9step 970) to generate fracture dimensions. The slope of the curve pressure vs distance is the coefficient with unit PSI/ distance measurement unit. Instant application defines the stress shadow slope coefficient with the same units (see instant application specification [0044] “the stress shadow effect slope coefficient may be in units of psi per foot or a pressure unit per a distance unit”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Weng’s method in view of Rahimi’s method incorporating a relationship of pressure with the distance as a coefficient slope into a model to predict stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress shadow effect accurately. (Rahimi, [0194],[0116]- [0126]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to include well known fracture pressure measurement and incorporating a model to estimate stress shadowing effect. There are many path to measure showing effect, considering the fracture pressure over distance is one of the known alternative path to estimate shadowing stress effect. subsequent equations to derive a slope coefficient and use in into model to estimate stress shadowing effect in order to yield the predicted results of generating accurate measurement, yet with higher accuracy (KSR).
Regarding Claim 23, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the non-transitory machine-readable storage media of claim 19,
wherein the stress shadow effect map is a temperature map. (Weng, Figure 17, 20;21, [0071] Sensors (S), such as gauges, may be positioned about oilfield 1700 to collect data relating to various oilfield operations as described previously. As shown, sensor (S) is positioned in one or more locations in the drilling tools and/or at rig 1728 to measure drilling parameters, such as weight on bit, torque on bit, pressures, temperatures, flow rates, compositions, rotary speed, and/or other parameters of the field operation. Sensors (S) may also be positioned in one or more locations in the circulating system”).
Regarding Claim 27, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1,
Weng further teaches, wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used for production from the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques”).
Regarding Claim 28, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1,
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used to predict well productivity in the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, Figure 45, [0058] FIGS. 45.1-45.2 are graphs depicting well production performance curves and a distribution of the computed cumulative production, respectively”).
Regarding Claim 29, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used to identify anomalous stages of well development. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques. [0262]. The method may additionally include, using the statistic parameters from the statistical distribution for additional economic analysis or decisions, or for modifying the fracture treatment design. Part or all of the method may be repeated any multiple of times to achieve an optimal design, which may entail maximizing production and/or minimizing uncertainty.
Various combinations of part or all of the methods provided herein may be performed in various orders”).
Regarding Claim 30, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used for asset development in the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, [0181] “At least a portion of the cumulative production predicted for a number of simulations may provide a statistical distribution that gives an assessment of how heterogeneity in natural fracture distribution and fracture dimensions can impact well production. This type of assessment can be
used by operators to make decisions when evaluating an asset or determining the values of additional measurements that can help reduce a variety of uncertainties”)
Regarding Claim 31, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of claim 10,
Weng further teaches, wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used for production from the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques”).
Regarding Claim 32, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of claim 10,
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used to predict well productivity in the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, Figure 45, [0058] FIGS. 45.1-45.2 are graphs depicting well production performance curves and a distribution of the computed cumulative production, respectively”).
Regarding Claim 33, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of claim 10,
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used to identify anomalous stages of well development. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques. [0262]. The method may additionally include, using the statistic parameters from the statistical distribution for additional economic analysis or decisions, or for modifying the fracture treatment design. Part or all of the method may be repeated any multiple of times to achieve an optimal design, which may entail maximizing production and/or minimizing uncertainty.
Various combinations of part or all of the methods provided herein may be performed in various orders”).
Regarding Claim 34, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of claim 10,
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used for asset development in the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, [0181] “At least a portion of the cumulative production predicted for a number of simulations may provide a statistical distribution that gives an assessment of how heterogeneity in natural fracture distribution and fracture dimensions can impact well production. This type of assessment can be
used by operators to make decisions when evaluating an asset or determining the values of additional measurements that can help reduce a variety of uncertainties”)
Regarding Claim 35, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the non-transitory machine-readable storage media of claim 19,
Weng further teaches, wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used for production from the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques”).
Regarding Claim 36, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the non-transitory machine-readable storage media of claim 18,
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used to predict well productivity in the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, Figure 45, [0058] FIGS. 45.1-45.2 are graphs depicting well production performance curves and a distribution of the computed cumulative production, respectively”).
Regarding Claim 37, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the non-transitory machine-readable storage media of claim 19,
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used to identify anomalous stages of well development. (Weng, [0184], Published models may map the complex geometry of discrete hydraulic fractures based on monitoring microseismic event distribution”. Figure 19, [0093] The production data from graph 1908.4 may be used by the reservoir engineer to determine fluid flow reservoir characteristics. The data analyzed by the geologist, geophysicist and the reservoir engineer may be analyzed using modeling techniques. [0262]. The method may additionally include, using the statistic parameters from the statistical distribution for additional economic analysis or decisions, or for modifying the fracture treatment design. Part or all of the method may be repeated any multiple of times to achieve an optimal design, which may entail maximizing production and/or minimizing uncertainty.
Various combinations of part or all of the methods provided herein may be performed in various orders”).
Regarding Claim 38, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the non-transitory machine-readable storage media of claim 19,
Weng further teaches wherein the stress shadow effect map displayed in the graphical user interface is used for asset development in the subsurface volume of interest. (Weng, [0181] “At least a portion of the cumulative production predicted for a number of simulations may provide a statistical distribution that gives an assessment of how heterogeneity in natural fracture distribution and fracture dimensions can impact well production. This type of assessment can be
used by operators to make decisions when evaluating an asset or determining the values of additional measurements that can help reduce a variety of uncertainties”).
Claims 9, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WENG and in view of Rahimi as applied to claim 1, and in further view of Nicolas P. ROUSSEL (US 2018/0148999 A1, hereinafter Roussel, previously cited).
Regarding Claim 9, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 8,
Weng is silent on wherein the stress shadow effect model comprises a regression analysis.
However, Roussel teaches wherein the stress shadow effect model comprises a regression analysis. (Roussel, Figure 3, [0083] "Match curves" as used herein, refer to the best fit of the stress-escalation equation with collected shut-in pressures obtained by means of a regression method, preferably linear least squares regression. The
∆
σ
p
l
a
t
u
e
and escalation number are varied until a solution to Equation 1 that minimizes the sum of the squared deviations between the data and the model is found”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modified Weng’s method in view of Roussel’s method incorporating into a model to predicting stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress plateau accurately. (Roussel, [0020], [0083]).
Regarding Claim 18, combination of Weng and Rahimi teaches the system of
claim 17,
Weng is silent on wherein the stress shadow effect model comprises a regression analysis.
However, Roussel teaches wherein the stress shadow effect model comprises a regression analysis. (Roussel, Figure 3, [0083] "Match curves" as used herein, refer to the best fit of the stress-escalation equation with collected shut-in pressures obtained by means of a regression method, preferably linear least squares regression. The
∆
σ
p
l
a
t
u
e
and escalation number are varied until a solution to Equation 1 that minimizes the sum of the squared deviations between the data and the model is found”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modified Weng’s method in view of Roussel’s method incorporating into a model to predicting stress shadowing effect on the subsurface due to fracture with the benefit of estimating shadowing/ stress plateau accurately. (Roussel, [0020], [0083]).
Conclusion
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Maxwell et al. (US 2016/0108705 A1) recites “A method of performing a fracture operation is provided at a wellsite. The wellsite is positioned about a subterranean formation having a wellbore therethrough and a complex fracture network therein. The complex fracture network includes natural fractures, and the wellsite stimulated by injection of an injection fluid with proppant into the complex fracture network. The method involves generating wellsite data comprising measurements of micro seismic events of the subterranean formation, modeling a hydraulic fracture network and a discrete fracture network of the complex fracture network based on the wellsite data, and performing a seismic moment operation. The method involves determining an actual seismic moment density based on the wellsite data and a predicted seismic moment density based on shear and tensile components of the simulated hydraulic fracture network, and calibrating the discrete fracture network based on a comparison of the predicted moment density and the actual moment density” (Abstract).
ZHU et al. (CN 110005392 A) recites “The present invention relates to the design of new processes method of unconventional oil and gas reservoir multiple fracturing technique, the method for closure segment length and new crack steering distance when specially a kind of determining shale crack tip temporarily blocks up pressure break. This method injects diverting agent to pressure-break tip, and after fracturing fluid enters major fracture inside, the pressure break hydraulic coupling in major fracture forms stress shadow effect around it；Original major fracture ambient stress state is influenced by stress shadow effect, the induced stress of generation with primitively Stress superposition, original crustal stress states changeCrack tip is blocked completely, and the new crack different from original fracture direction is generated in block section end. Further, at diverting agent Free Surface, temporarily the new crack of stifled pressure break is perpendicular to original fracture Directional Extension, until the steering distance in new crack is demarcated by giving real standard stress in the position by induced stress difference place equal with horizontal stress. To rational exploitation major fracture face two sides shale gas potential resource” (abstract)
.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 DILARA SULTANA whose telephone number is (571)272-3861. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9 AM-5:30 PM.
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, EMAN ALKAFAWI can be reached on (571) 272-4448. 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.
/DILARA SULTANA/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
06/11/2026
/EMAN A ALKAFAWI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 6/15/2026
Prosecution Insights