Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/465,738

DETERMINING ELECTRICAL SUBMERSIBLE PUMP LIFETIME EXPECTANCY

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Sep 12, 2023
Examiner
ZOLLINGER, NATHAN C
Art Unit
3746
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Saudi Arabian Oil Company
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
590 granted / 851 resolved
-0.7% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+41.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
888
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
48.0%
+8.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 851 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 8 and 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group and Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/11/2025. Claim Objections Claim 4-5 and their dependents are objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 4, line 2, the phrase “the differential temperature across the outer surface” should be changed to “a differential temperature across an outer surface”; in claim 4, lines 5-6, the phrase “at the motor uphole end” should be changed to “at a motor uphole end”; in claim 4, line 6, the phrase “the motor downhole end” should be changed to “a motor downhole end”; in claim 5, lines 2-3, the phrase “the energy loss of the motor comprises comparing the actual energy loss and the calculated mass flow rate” should be changed to “an energy loss of the motor comprises comparing an actual energy loss and the calculated mass flow rate”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “sensor module” in claim 1 and 17; “electrical storage device” in claim 9. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 18 is 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. Claim 18 depends from itself and is unclear which claim it should depend from. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 18 depends from itself. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. 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) 1-3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrighton (US 11,697,982) in view of Tosi (US 9,670,739) and Rendusara (CA2949533A1) and in further view of Chung (US 8,624,530). Claim 1: Wrighton discloses an electrical submersible pump assembly (note Figs. 2 and 6A/6B) comprising a motor (note Fig. 2, 64/86 or in Figs. 6A-6B, 64/84); a motor head (note 50 in Fig. 2 or in Fig. 6A-6B the head components could include some or all of 260/44/220) coupled to the motor (Fig. 4). Wrighton also discloses a sensor module Fig. 6B, note gauge 226 or flow meter 232) configured to perform operations comprising receiving power from one or more toroidal transformers (col. 11, lines 39-45, Examiner noting connection “data communication link may or may include one or more toroidal current transformers on one or more phases of the…cable system…current may be sourced from the three-phase cable system directly…[m]easurement data may then be sent back through the same connection in reverse” includes power (current) provision and allows data submission about the condition of the motor, which data includes any sensor information discussed in col. 9, lines 48-54, note monitoring ancillary devices which can include “monitoring gauge…may house one or more sensors…to measure…vibration, pressure, temperature…flow rate”); detecting a condition of the motor and transmitting a signal representing the condition of the motor (see previous note regarding col. 11, lines 39-45 and col. 9, lines 48-54, Examiner noting the monitored condition can include vibration, pressure, temperature, flow rate, etc.). Wrighton is not explicit about a local controller contained within the motor head, the local controller coupled to the motor and the sensor module, the local controller configured to perform operations comprising: receiving electrical power from the one or more toroidal transformers; receiving the signal representing the condition of the motor. However, Tosi teaches (Fig. 7B) utilizing a local controller (641A) in a downhole pump context coupled to a sensor module (642A, note how 641A is coupled up against 642A), the local controller configured to perform operations comprising receiving electrical power from one or more toroidal transformers receiving the signal representing the condition of the downhole pump (see col. 20, lines 14-17 and 35-36, Examiner noting that the successful operation of the associated sensor device will necessarily impart sensor data). As incorporated into Wrighton, Tosi’s local controller would necessarily be situated within Wrighton’s motor head (as can be appreciated by the adjacency of the sensor/controller layout in Fig. 7B) as well as be coupled to the motor via the sensor associated with monitoring motor conditions. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a local controller in Wrighton as taught by Tosi in order to reduce the distance between the controller/sensor to zero and avoid any transmission issues (e.g., short-circuit in wiring, etc.). Wrighton further discloses based on the condition of the motor determining a mass flow rate of the motor (see previous note regarding col. 11, lines 39-45 and col. 9, lines 48-54, Examiner noting the monitored condition can include flow rate and that this a positive determination can be made by directly measuring the flow rate through the motor as discussed by Wrighton) but is not explicit about based on the mass flow rate of the motor, determining a life expectancy of the motor. However, Rendusara teaches a downhole motor/pump which based on the mass flow rate of the motor, determining a life expectancy of the motor (see paragraph 115). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to assess life expectancy in a manner as taught by Rendusara into the apparatus of Wrighton in order to alert an operator as to when needed repairs/replacement measures should be taken. Wrighton is not explicit about the motor head case comprising one or more toroidal transformers; a power cable extending into the motor head through the one or more toroidal transformers to the motor. However, Chung teaches an electrical submersible pump assembly (Figs. 3-4) comprising a motor (420); a motor head (410) coupled to the motor (Fig. 4), the motor head comprising one or more toroidal transformers (414, 415, 416); a power cable (note cables extending inside 410 from one of 414, 415, 416) extending into the motor head through the one or more toroidal transformers to the motor (Fig. 4). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize toroidal transformer in Wrighton as taught by Chung in order to reduce the voltage to a level that is suitable for use by downhole equipment (see Abstract). Claim 2: Wrighton, Tosi, Rendusara and Chung teach the previous limitations. Wrighton further discloses a temperature sensor configured to detect a differential temperature of a fluid passing across an outer surface of the motor (note distributed temperature sensing system and sensor mentioned in col. 2, lines 16-17 and 20 as well as details relating to detection of the motor-pump unit in col. 10, lines 38-42 and inlet/intake fluid temperature discussed in col. 12, lines 3-5) and transmit a signal representing the differential temperature to a control unit (see col. 12, lines 28-29) and, as can be appreciated from the teaching of the modifying reference of Tosi, to the associated local controller. Claim 3: Wrighton, Tosi, Rendusara and Chung teach the previous limitations. Modified Wright further teaches that the temperature sensor comprises a downhole temperature sensor positioned at a downhole end of the motor, the downhole temperature sensor configured to sense a downhole end temperature of the fluid and transmit a signal representing the downhole end temperature to the local controller (see col. 14, lines 7-9 of Wrighton, note the temperature measurement at a downhole end; Examiner add’l noting that, as can be appreciated from the teaching of the modifying reference of Tosi, that the sensor data can be provided the associated local controller). W an uphole end temperature sensor positioned at an uphole end of the motor, the uphole end temperature sensor configured to sense an uphole end temperature of the fluid and transmit a signal representing the uphole end temperature to the local controller (see col. 12, lines 13-15 and the sensor examples which include thermal anemometry which can be situated at the uphole end; Examiner add’l noting that, as can be appreciated from the teaching of the modifying reference of Tosi, that the sensor data can be provided the associated local controller). Claim 7: Wrighton, Tosi, Rendusara and Chung teach the previous limitations. Modified Wrighton (via Chung) further teaches the power cable comprises three conductors, each of the three conductors configured conduct a different phase of a three-phase electrical signal to the motor (see Fig. 4, note three conductors); and the one or more toroidal transformers comprises three toroidal transformers (414, 415, 416), each of the three conductors positioned through a different toroidal transformer (Fig. 4). Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrighton (US 11,697,982) in view of Tosi (US 9,670,739) and Rendusara (CA2949533A1) and Chung (US 8,624,530) and in further view of Atherton (US 8,571,798). Claim 9-10: Wrighton, Tosi, Rendusara and Chung teach the previous limitations. Wrighton is not explicit about the motor head further comprises an electrical storage device such as a battery or a capacitor is electrically coupled to the one or more toroidal transformers, the sensor module, and the local controller. However, Atherton teaches a submersible pump arrangement in which it is a common associated for an electrical storage device such as a battery or a capacitor to be included among various components including sensors, controllers, etc.. (see col. 7, lines 33-40), which, as incorporated into modified Wrighton, would necessarily have couplings with the one or more toroidal transformers, the sensor module, and the local controller which could provide a source of backup power in the event of a power outage. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a battery in modified Wrighton as taught by Atherton in order to provide a source of backup power in the event of a power outage. Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrighton (US 11,697,982) in view of Tosi (US 9,670,739) and Rendusara (CA2949533A1) and Chung (US 8,624,530) and in further view of Struthers (US 6,481,873). Claim 11: Wrighton, Tosi, Rendusara and Chung teach the previous limitations While discussing sensors in the motor head, Wright is not further explicit about a dielectric oil sensor configured to sense a dielectric condition of the dielectric oil and transmit a signal representing a value of the dielectric condition of the dielectric oil in the motor head to the local controller. However, Struthers teaches a submersible pump with a motor housing (Fig. 1) which utilizes dielectric oil sensor (72) configured to sense a dielectric condition of the dielectric oil and transmit a signal representing a value of the dielectric condition of the dielectric oil in the motor head to a local controller (see col. 4, lines 30-38). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a dielectric sensor in Wrighton as taught by Struthers in order to alert an operator of failure or leakage of the dielectric oil. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrighton (US 11,697,982) in view of Tosi (US 9,670,739) and Rendusara (CA2949533A1) and Zehren (US 4,128,735) and in further view of Chung (US 8,624,530). Claim 17: Wrighton discloses an electrical submersible pump motor head (note Figs. 2 and 6A/6B) comprising a motor head case (note 50 in Fig. 2 or in Fig. 6A-6B the head components could include some or all of 260/44/220). Wrighton also discloses a sensor module Fig. 6B, note gauge 226 or flow meter 232) configured to perform operations comprising receiving power from one or more toroidal transformers (col. 11, lines 39-45, Examiner noting connection “data communication link may or may include one or more toroidal current transformers on one or more phases of the…cable system…current may be sourced from the three-phase cable system directly…[m]easurement data may then be sent back through the same connection in reverse” includes power (current) provision and allows data submission about the condition of the motor, which data includes any sensor information discussed in col. 9, lines 48-54, note monitoring ancillary devices which can include “monitoring gauge…may house one or more sensors…to measure…vibration, pressure, temperature…flow rate”); detecting a condition of the motor and transmitting a signal representing the condition of the motor (see previous note regarding col. 11, lines 39-45 and col. 9, lines 48-54, Examiner noting the monitored condition can include vibration, pressure, temperature, flow rate, etc.). Wrighton is not explicit about a local controller contained within the motor head, the local controller coupled to the motor and the sensor module, the local controller configured to perform operations comprising: receiving electrical power from the one or more toroidal transformers; receiving the signal representing the condition of the motor. However, Tosi teaches (Fig. 7B) utilizing a local controller (641A) in a downhole pump context coupled to a sensor module (642A, note how 641A is coupled up against 642A), the local controller configured to perform operations comprising receiving electrical power from one or more toroidal transformers receiving the signal representing the condition of the downhole pump (see col. 20, lines 14-17 and 35-36, Examiner noting that the successful operation of the associated sensor device will necessarily impart sensor data). As incorporated into Wrighton, Tosi’s local controller would necessarily be situated within Wrighton’s motor head (as can be appreciated by the adjacency of the sensor/controller layout in Fig. 7B) as well as be coupled to the motor via the sensor associated with monitoring motor conditions. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a local controller in Wrighton as taught by Tosi in order to reduce the distance between the controller/sensor to zero and avoid any transmission issues (e.g., short-circuit in wiring, etc.). Wrighton further discloses based on the condition of the motor determining a mass flow rate of the motor (see previous note regarding col. 11, lines 39-45 and col. 9, lines 48-54, Examiner noting the monitored condition can include flow rate and that this a positive determination can be made by directly measuring the flow rate through the motor as discussed by Wrighton) but is not explicit about based on the mass flow rate of the motor, determining a life expectancy of the motor. However, Rendusara teaches a downhole motor/pump which based on the mass flow rate of the motor, determining a life expectancy of the motor (see paragraph 115). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to assess life expectancy in a manner as taught by Rendusara into the apparatus of Wrighton in order to alert an operator as to when needed repairs/replacement measures should be taken. Wrighton does not disclose a pothead coupled to the motor head case. However, Zehren teaches using a pothead coupling with a motor head case (see Figs. 2-3). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a pothead in Wrighton as taught by Zehren in order to improve sealing against intrusion of well fluid (see Abstract). Wrighton is also not explicit about the motor head case comprising one or more toroidal transformers; a power cable extending into the motor head through the one or more toroidal transformers to the motor. However, Chung teaches an electrical submersible pump assembly (Figs. 3-4) comprising a motor (420); a motor head (410) coupled to the motor (Fig. 4), the motor head comprising one or more toroidal transformers (414, 415, 416); a power cable (note cables extending inside 410 from one of 414, 415, 416) extending into the motor head through the one or more toroidal transformers to the motor (Fig. 4). As incorporated into Wrighton, the power cable would necessarily be coupled to the pothead. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize toroidal transformer in Wrighton as taught by Chung in order to reduce the voltage to a level that is suitable for use by downhole equipment (see Abstract). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-6 and 12-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claims 4 and 18, the prior art of record does not further disclose or reasonably teach in combination that the condition of the motor is the differential temperature across the outer surface of the motor, determining the mass flow rate of the motor comprises calculating the mass flow rate by m= PNG media_image1.png 39 94 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein m is the mass flow rate of fluids in the motor in kg/sec, Q is the energy supplied in the motor in Watts, C, is a specific heat capacity of the fluid in J/kgK in the motor, Tout is a fluid temperature at the motor uphole end in °C, and Tin is a fluid temperature at the motor downhole end in °C. Regarding claim 12, the prior art of record also does not further disclose or reasonably teach in combination that the local controller is further configured to perform operations comprising receiving the value of the dielectric condition of the dielectric oil in the motor head; comparing the value of the dielectric condition of the dielectric oil in the motor head to a threshold value of the dielectric condition of the dielectric oil in the motor head; and based on a result of the comparison, adjusting the life expectancy of the motor. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN C ZOLLINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-7815. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F 9-4 EST. 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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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. /NATHAN C ZOLLINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601341
DIAPHRAGM PUMP ADJUSTMENT PORTION FOR ADJUSTING RESONANT FREQUENCY OF DIAPHRAGM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601342
FLUID-ACTUATED MICROFLUIDIC MEMBRANE PUMP WITH DIFFERENTLY-SIZED INLET AND OUTLET PORTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601334
VARIABLE DISPLACEMENT HYDRAULIC PUMP SYSTEM WITH OVER-TEMPERATURE PREVENTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584495
Keyless Nesting Diffuser for Centrifugal Pumps
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571385
HIGH-PRESSURE PLUNGER PUMP, AND USE OF A HIGH-PRESSURE PLUNGER PUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+41.1%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 851 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month