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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 02/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 16, applicant argues that Hammer does not teach flow restriction in direct response to an increase in differential pressure. Applicant explains that Hammer’s piston translate only after a separate actuator is enabled and differential pressure acts on the piston only acter the actuator enablement has occurred. Therefore, differential pressure alone is not sufficient to directly cause the flow restriction.
Examiner respectfully disagree. The claim requires that the flow restriction occurs in direct response to an increase in differential pressure. While Hammer teach an actuator, the piston only moves or translate in direct response to an increase in differential pressure across the flow control tool (para 0028: “the piston 132 may be considered as being actuated by the increased pressure differential induced”) when the actuator is actuated. In other words, the differential pressure across the flow control tool generated by the actuator causes the piston to translate. Applicant’s claim does not restrict or exclude an actuator for generating the differential pressure. The claim only states “an increase in differential pressure across the flow control tool”. This “differential pressure” can be caused by an actuator or other means creating the pressure differential. In the case of Hammer, the piston moves in direct response to the generated differential pressure.
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 1-6 and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greci et al. (U.S. 2020/0040676A1), in view of Hammer (U.S. 2009/0283275A1).
Regarding claim 1, Greci et al. disclose an apparatus (116, fig. 1; 200. fig. 2; refer to para 0022 and 0026) to be positioned in a wellbore (102; fig. 1 and para 0020) formed in a subsurface formation (110), the apparatus (116) comprising:
one or more generators (226; figs. 2-3, refer to para 0034 and 0041. Examiner is using the embodiment of fig. 3 but making reference to fig. 2 for elements not shown in fig. 3) disposed in a flow path (218, fig. 2) within a flow control tool (212a) and configured to output electrical power to components of the flow control tool (para 0035: “The generated electrical power can be transferred to the electronics module 220”) in response to flow of a fluid (210) in the flow path (218; see fig. 2 and refer to para 0035), wherein the fluid enters the flow path (218) from the wellbore (see figs. 1-2) and wherein the one or more generators (226) are configured to operate at a rotational speed that produces at least a minimum electrical power requirement of the components of the flow control tool (the rotational speed that correspond to an electrical power output that is approximately equal to or greater than the minimum electrical power required to power the components of the flow control tool. Para 0042: “the flow control device 216 can controllably adjust amounts of flow to the power generator 226”. “the flow control device 216…receive a first flow 292 of fluid 210… and adjustably control an amount that is directed to the power generator 226”. “in this manner, the flow control device 216…providing a desired amount of flow to generate power”); and
a flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) comprising a pressure-responsive (para 0037: sensor module 230 can be a pressure sensor and communicates with control module 232 to control the flow rate limiting device; refer to para 0038-0039) variable choke (the structure of rate limiting device is piston 312 shown in fig. 8 and as well as the embodiment of figs. 9-11. In figure 8, the rate limiting device comprises choke pints 408a, 408b, as discussed in para 0049. In figs. 9-11, the choke point is at the “tip” of 520 entering nozzle 530. Also referent to para 0050 and 0054) disposed in the flow path (218; para 0031) and configured to increase flow restriction (see figs. 6, 8, and 9-11) of the fluid to the one or more generators (226; refer to para 0042: “flow control device 216 can controllably adjust amounts of flow to the power generator 226”; increase restriction is shown in figs. 6, 9, and 12) to regulate the rotational speed of the one or more generators (para 0042: ““in this manner, the flow control device 216…providing a desired amount of flow to generate power”).
Greci et al. further teach an actuator 314 for actuating the piston 312. Para 0047 gives an open ended list of possible linear actuators that can be used.
However, Greci et al. is silent to increase flow restriction in direct response to an increase in differential pressure across the flow control tool.
Hammer teaches a flow control device (refer to title and abstract) comprising a piston (132, figs. 6A, 6B) and an actuator (134), wherein, the piston is actuated to translate linearly to open opening (122; see fig. 6B). The piston is actuated by an increase in differential pressure (refer to para 0028: “the piston 132 may be considered as being actuated by the increased pressure differential induced”. Also refer to para 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the piston actuation system Greci et al. with the differential pressure actuation system of Hammer, to achieve the predictable result of regulating the rotational speed of the one or more generators.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 1 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) is proximate an inlet or an outlet of the one or more generators (226; fig. 2: proximate the inlet).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 1 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the one or more generators (226) includes a turbine generator (para 0034-0035: turbine generator) or a vibration generator (para 0033: “vibration power harvester”; para 0080: “vibration based power generator”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 1 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the components of the flow control tool include electronics (para 0035: “electronics module 220”), powered by the one or more generators, to control the flow of the fluid into a tubular string (para 0035: “The generated electrical power can be transferred to the electronics module 220” and data is sent to the flow control device to adjust flow operations; also refer to para 0039).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 4 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the electronics (para 0035: “electronics module 220”) of the flow control tool require a minimum electrical power to control the flow of the fluid into the tubular string (the amount of electrical power that is sent to the electronics module from the generator to power the electronics module is the minimum electrical power. Examiner note that the claimed “minimum” is recited broadly to include any power that actuates the electronic module), and wherein the one or more generators are configured to generate the minimum electrical power based on a flow rate limit of the fluid in the flow path (para 0039: sensor module 230 measures flow rate and the electronics module 220 instruct the flow control device 216 to adjust based on the sensor measurements; para 0019: “compensate for adjustments of flow…,thereby providing substantially consistent production of power”).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 5 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) is configured to restrict the flow rate of the fluid in the flow path to the one or more generators (para 0041-0042: “without passing through the power generator 226”) when the flow rate is greater than the flow rate limit (refer to para 0039: based on flow rate data provided by sensor 230, well operator instruct the electronics module to adjust flow control device 216”. The adjustment involves restricting the flow of fluid, as discussed in [0041]. Examiner notes that the instruction by well operator is based on a “rate limit”).
Regarding claim 9, Greci et al. disclose a system (fig. 1) comprising:
a tubular string (202, fig. 2; refer to para 0026) to be positioned in a wellbore (102; fig. 1 and para 0020) formed in a subsurface formation (110); and
a flow control tool (212a) disposed on the tubular string (202, see fig. 2), the flow control tool (212a) comprising, one or more generators (226; fig. 2 and para 0034) positioned in a flow path (218; see fig. 2 and refer to para 0035) within the flow control tool (212a) and configured to output electrical power to components the flow control tool (para 0035: “The generated electrical power can be transferred to the electronics module 220”) in response to flow of a fluid (210) in the flow path (218; see fig. 2 and refer to para 0035), wherein the fluid enters the flow path from the wellbore (see figs. 1-2) wherein the one or more generators (226) are configured to operate at a rotational speed that produces at least a minimum electrical power requirement of the components of the flow control tool (the rotational speed that correspond to an electrical power output that is approximately equal to or greater than the minimum electrical power required to power the components of the flow control tool. Para 0042: “the flow control device 216 can controllably adjust amounts of flow to the power generator 226”. “the flow control device 216…receive a first flow 292 of fluid 210… and adjustably control an amount that is directed to the power generator 226”. “in this manner, the flow control device 216…providing a desired amount of flow to generate power”), and
a flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) comprising a pressure-responsive (para 0037: sensor module 230 can be a pressure sensor and communicates with control module 232 to control the flow rate limiting device; refer to para 0038-0039) variable choke (the structure of rate limiting device is piston 312 shown in fig. 8 and as well as the embodiment of figs. 9-11. In figure 8, the rate limiting device comprises choke pints 408a, 408b, as discussed in para 0049. In figs. 9-11, the choke point is at the “tip” of 520 entering nozzle 530. Also referent to para 0050 and 0054) positioned in the flow path (218; para 0031) and configured to increase flow restriction (see figs. 6, 8, and 9-11) of the fluid to the one or more generators (226; refer to para 0042: “flow control device 216 can controllably adjust amounts of flow to the power generator 226”) to regulate the rotational speed of the one or more generators (para 0042: ““in this manner, the flow control device 216…providing a desired amount of flow to generate power”).
Greci et al. further teach an actuator 314 for actuating the piston 312. Para 0047 gives an open ended list of possible linear actuators that can be used.
However, Greci et al. is silent to increase flow restriction in direct response to an increase in differential pressure across the flow control tool.
Hammer teaches a flow control device (refer to title and abstract) comprising a piston (132, figs. 6A, 6B) and an actuator (134), wherein, the piston is actuated to translate linearly to open opening (122; see fig. 6B). The piston is actuated by an increase in differential pressure (refer to para 0028: “the piston 132 may be considered as being actuated by the increased pressure differential induced”. Also refer to para 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the piston actuation system Greci et al. with the differential pressure actuation system of Hammer, to achieve the predictable result of regulating the rotational speed of the one or more generators.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 9 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) is proximate an inlet or outlet of the one or more generators (226; fig. 2: proximate the inlet).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 9 above; Greci et al. further disclose the one or more generators (226) includes a turbine generator (para 0034-0035: turbine generator) and a vibration generator (para 0033: “vibration power harvester”; para 0080: “vibration based power generator”).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 9 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the components of the flow control tool include electronics (para 0035: “electronics module 220”) powered by the one or more generators to control the flow of the fluid into the tubular string (para 0035: “The generated electrical power can be transferred to the electronics module 220” and data is sent to the flow control device to adjust flow operations; also refer to para 0039).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 9 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the electronics (para 0035: “electronics module 220”) of the flow control tool require the minimum electrical power to control the flow of the fluid into the tubular string (the amount of electrical power that is sent to the electronics module from the generator to power the electronics module is the minimum electrical power. Examiner note that the claimed “minimum” is recited broadly to include any power that actuates the electronic module), and wherein the one or more generators are configured to generate the minimum electrical power based on the flow rate limit (para 0039: sensor module 230 measures flow rate and the electronics module 220 instruct the flow control device 216 to adjust based on the sensor measurements; para 0019: “compensate for adjustments of flow…,thereby providing substantially consistent production of power”).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 13 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) is configured to restrict the flow rate of the fluid to the one or more generators (para 0041-0042: “without passing through the power generator 226”) when the flow rate is greater than the flow rate limit (refer to para 0039: based on flow rate data provided by sensor 230, well operator instruct the electronics module to adjust flow control device 216”. The adjustment involves restricting the flow of fluid, as discussed in [0041]. Examiner notes that the instruction by well operator is based on a “rate limit”).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 9 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) is configured to self-regulate the flow rate of the fluid in the flow path (refer to para 0022-0023 and 0038-0039).
Regarding claim 16, Greci et al. disclose a method comprising:
maintaining, via a flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”; fig. 2) comprising a pressure-responsive (para 0037: sensor module 230 can be a pressure sensor and communicates with control module 232 to control the flow rate limiting device; refer to para 0038-0039) variable choke (the structure of rate limiting device is piston 312 shown in fig. 8 and as well as the embodiment of figs. 9-11. In figure 8, the rate limiting device comprises choke pints 408a, 408b, as discussed in para 0049. In figs. 9-11, the choke point is at the “tip” of 520 entering nozzle 530. Also referent to para 0050 and 0054) disposed in a flow path (218; para 0031) within a flow control tool (212a) positioned in a wellbore (102; fig. 1 and para 0020) formed in a subsurface formation (110) and configured to increase flow restriction (see figs. 6, 8, and 9-11) of a fluid to one or more generators (226; refer to para 0042: “flow control device 216 can controllably adjust amounts of flow to the power generator 226”; increase restriction is shown in figs. 6, 9, and 12) in response to pressure (pressure sensor 230; refer to para 0037 and 0039), a rotational speed of a fluid to one or more generators (226; fig. 2 and para 0034) as the fluid flows through the flow path (218; refer to para 0042: “flow control device 216 can controllably adjust amounts of flow to the power generator 226”; para 0042: ““in this manner, the flow control device 216…providing a desired amount of flow to generate power”; i.e., the “desired amount of flow” is the flow rate limit; the desired amount of flow maintains a rotational speed) based on a minimum electrical power requirement of components of a flow control tool (para 0042: ““in this manner, the flow control device 216…providing a desired amount of flow to generate power”; i.e., the “desired amount of flow” is the flow rate limit);
outputting, via the one or more generators (226; fig. 2 and para 0034) disposed in the flow path (218), electrical power to the components of the flow control tool (para 0035: “The generated electrical power can be transferred to the electronics module 220”) in response to the flow rate of the fluid as the fluid flows through the flow path (218; see fig. 2 and refer to para 0035) wherein the one or more generators (226) are configured to operate at the rotational speed that produces at least the minimum electrical power requirement of the components of the flow control tool (the rotational speed that correspond to an electrical power output that is approximately equal to or greater than the minimum electrical power required to power the components of the flow control tool. Para 0042: “the flow control device 216 can controllably adjust amounts of flow to the power generator 226”. “the flow control device 216…receive a first flow 292 of fluid 210… and adjustably control an amount that is directed to the power generator 226”. “in this manner, the flow control device 216…providing a desired amount of flow to generate power”).
Greci et al. further teach an actuator 314 for actuating the piston 312. Para 0047 gives an open ended list of possible linear actuators that can be used.
However, Greci et al. is silent to increase flow restriction in direct response to an increase in differential pressure across the flow control tool.
Hammer teaches a flow control device (refer to title and abstract) comprising a piston (132, figs. 6A, 6B) and an actuator (134), wherein, the piston is actuated to translate linearly to open opening (122; see fig. 6B). The piston is actuated by an increase in differential pressure (refer to para 0028: “the piston 132 may be considered as being actuated by the increased pressure differential induced”. Also refer to para 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the piston actuation system Greci et al. with the differential pressure actuation system of Hammer, to achieve the predictable result of regulating the rotational speed of the one or more generators.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 16 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) is proximate an inlet or outlet of the one or more generators (226; fig. 2: proximate the inlet).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 16 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the components of the flow control tool include electronics (para 0035: “electronics module 220”) powered by the one or more generators to control flow of the fluid into a tubular string (para 0035: “The generated electrical power can be transferred to the electronics module 220” and data is sent to the flow control device to adjust flow operations; also refer to para 0039).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 18 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the electronics (para 0035: “electronics module 220”) of the flow control tool require a minimum electrical power to control the flow of the fluid into the tubular string (the amount of electrical power that is sent to the electronics module from the generator to power the electronics module is the minimum electrical power. Examiner note that the claimed “minimum” is recited broadly to include any power that actuates the electronic module), and wherein the one or more generators are configured to generate the minimum electrical power based on a flow rate limit (para 0039: sensor module 230 measures flow rate and the electronics module 220 instruct the flow control device 216 to adjust based on the sensor measurements; para 0019: “compensate for adjustments of flow…,thereby providing substantially consistent production of power”).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer teach all the features of this claim as applied to claim 19 above; Greci et al. further disclose wherein the flow rate limiting device (“flow control device 216”) is configured to restrict the flow rate of the fluid to the one or more generators (para 0041-0042: “without passing through the power generator 226”) when the flow rate is greater than the flow rate limit (refer to para 0039: based on flow rate data provided by sensor 230, well operator instruct the electronics module to adjust flow control device 216”. The adjustment involves restricting the flow of fluid, as discussed in [0041]. Examiner notes that the instruction by well operator is based on a “rate limit”).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greci et al. (U.S. 2020/0040676A1), in view of Hammer (U.S. 2009/0283275A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hunter (U.S. 2017/0306725A1).
Regarding claims 7-8, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer as applied to claim 1 above; however, the combination of Greci et al. and Hammer fail to teach that the flow rate limiting device is a spring-based device; wherein the spring-based device includes a mechanical spring or a fluid spring.
Hunter, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a downhole turbine generator (121a, fig. 5 and para 0174) for generating electrical power to actuate a operate a valve (12, see fig. 1). A flow rate limiting device (170, fig. 5; para 0176) is configured to regulate the flow rate of fluid to the generator (para 0176). The flow rate limiting device is a spring-based device (para 0176: “spring 172”); wherein the spring-based device includes a mechanical spring (see fig. 5 and refer to para 0176).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted one type of flow rate limiting device for another (the spring-based device of Hunter) to achieve the predictable result of regulating the fluid flow rate sent to the generator.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shaw (U.S. 2024/0026762A1) teach a spring base flow limiting device that has differential pressure piston action.
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 YANICK A AKARAGWE whose telephone number is (469)295-9298. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 7:30-5:30.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached on (571) 272-5405. 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.
/YANICK A AKARAGWE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights