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 .
The amended claims filed 7/16/25 are acknowledged; claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1 and 5-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prinzhofer (EP 2350599B1) in view of Tucker et al. (US 20230279775).
CLAIM 1: Prinzhofer discloses a method of assessing a caprock in a geologic sequence for caprock defects. The method comprising: drilling a first well (see claim 4, “…during drilling of a CO2 injection well) into the geologic sequence (see Fig. 1), the geologic sequence comprising a first subsurface formation (1), the caprock (2) positioned above the first subsurface formation, and a second subsurface formation (3) positioned above the caprock (see Fig. 1); sampling subsurface fluids of the geologic sequence for helium concentration within the second subsurface formation, within the caprock, and within the first subsurface formation (see discussion of Geological example, He being the noble gases disclosed); sampling the subsurface fluids for the helium concentration within a second subsurface formation, within the caprock, and within the first subsurface formation; determining whether a deviation exists between the helium concentration at the first well and the helium concentration at the second location (see Fig. 2, claim 1), the deviation indicating the caprock defect is present. Halting further drilling into the geologic sequence upon determining the caprock defect is present (see Geological example indicating use only if no leakage).
Prinzhofer fails to disclose drilling a second well into the geologic sequence a pre-determined distance away from the first well and sampling there.
Tucker discloses a method for well planning and management.
Tucker discloses drilling a first and second well (pilot well and well of interest) a pre-determined distance from each other (see Fig. 8). Samples are taken from both well and compared.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data collection of Prinzhofer to take place in a plurality of wells with a reasonable expectation of success as the application of a known technique to a known method that would yield the predictable result of generating data over a larger volume of the geological area to increase the reliability of the data for the caprock.
CLAIM 5: Sampling the subsurface fluids for the helium concentration within the second subsurface formation, within the caprock, and within the first subsurface formation comprises: providing a subsurface fluid sampler into the first well, the second well or both; collecting subsurface fluid into a fluid chamber of the subsurface fluid sampler; and analyzing the subsurface fluid in the fluid chamber for helium concentration (the “capture process”).
CLAIMS 6-8: Prinzhofer discloses the elements of claim 1 as discussed above.
Prinzhofer fails to disclose the sampling means as described in the claims.
Applicant describes the sampling means as known in the art. The sampler of claim 6 is described to be met by a variety of known tools in paragraph 0047. The sampler of claim 7 is described as known products in paragraph 0049. The sampler of claim 8 is described as known method in paragraph 0050. Thus, these elements are all admitted prior art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventions to utilize the known methods of sampling to obtain the samples to be used as described in Prinzhofer with a reasonable expectation of success because sampling would be performed in the established manners to obtain the expected results associated with the known methods.
CLAIM 9: Sampling the subsurface fluids for the helium concentration within the second subsurface formation, within the caprock, and within the first subsurface formation occurs in an unlined portion of the first well, the second well, or both (description of Geological example occurs in unlined portion of the well due to access to aquifer).
CLAIM 10: Prinzhofer discloses the elements of claim 1 as discussed above.
Prinzhofer fails to disclose wherein a vertical depth to the first subsurface formation, the caprock, and the second subsurface formation in the first well, the second well, or both is determined utilizing well logging, surface seismography, drill cuttings analysis, or combinations thereof.
Applicant describes these methods as being “understood by one of ordinary skill in the art” in paragraph 0045.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventions to utilize the known methods of depth determination to obtain the samples to be used as described in Prinzhofer with a reasonable expectation of success because depth determination would be performed in the established manners to obtain the expected results associated with those methods.
CLAIM 11: Sampling the subsurface fluid within the second subsurface formation occurs at a pre-defined vertical depth above the caprock (see Fig. 1, discussion of known physical dimensions).
CLAIM 12: Sampling the subsurface fluid within the first subsurface formation occurs at a pre-defined vertical depth below the caprock (see Fig. 1, discussion of known physical dimensions).
CLAIM 13: Sampling the subsurface fluid within the caprock occurs at a pre-defined vertical depth within the caprock (see Fig. 1, discussion of known physical dimensions).
CLAIM 14: The helium concentration comprises the mass percent of helium-4 isotope in the subsurface fluid (see claim 3 discussing isotropic ratios).
CLAIM 15: The helium concentration further comprises the mass ratio of helium-3 isotope to the helium-4 isotope in the subsurface fluid (see claim 3 discussing isotropic ratios).
CLAIM 16: Prinzhofer discloses the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
Prinzhofer fails to disclose wherein the subsurface fluids comprise: a salinity of greater than or equal to 300 parts per thousand (ppt); a temperature of greater than or equal to 120 ℃; or both.
Applicant admits that relevant subterranean areas often have these conditions (Specification, paragraph 0043).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the method of Prinzhofer to the known subterranean conditions with a reasonable expectation of success as they would apply the method in conditions that allow for success.
CLAIM 17: Sampling of the subsurface fluids of the geologic sequence for helium concentration within the first well, the second well, or both, occurs at multiple points within the second subsurface formation, at multiple points within the caprock, at multiple points within the first subsurface formation, or combinations thereof (see discussion of Geological example, taking readings throughout).
CLAIM 18: Prinzhofer discloses the elements of claim 1 as discussed above.
Prinzhofer fails to disclose wherein the first well is radially centered on a highest point of the caprock, instead showing a flat caprock in Fig. 1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the well over the highest point as Prinzhofer teaches placing the well over one of the highest points and such placement would require drilling to the shortest depth to get data.
CLAIM 19: Prinzhofer discloses a process of storing gas in a geologic sequence, the process comprising: assessing a caprock in the geologic sequence for caprock defects according to claim 1; and injecting the gas into the first subsurface formation of the first well, the first subsurface formation of the second well, or both upon determining the caprock defect is not present.
Prinzhofer fails to disclose the gas being hydrogen, instead storing CO2.
Examiner takes official notice that hydrogen is known element that can be stored underground.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute hydrogen for the CO2 of Prinzhofer with a reasonable expectation of success as the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way as the results would be predictable as the two gases are stored in similar conditions.
Claim(s) 2-4 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prinzhofer in view of Tucker in further view of Zupanick (US 20160024904).
CLAIM 2: Prinzhofer-Tucker discloses the method of claim 1 as discussed above. Tucker further discloses a plurality of wells and sampling each well (Fig. 8).
Prinzhofer fails to disclose drilling a third well into the geologic sequence the pre-determined distance away from the first well upon determining the caprock defect is not present, wherein the third well is positioned at an approximate 120 degree angle from a line defined from the first well to the second well.
Zupanick discloses a method for subterranean access.
Zupanick discloses drilling three wells, with the third well drilled at an angle of 120 degrees from a line of the first two (se Fig. 24F).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the placement of the wells of Prinzhofer to be 120 degrees as in Zupanick with a reasonable expectation of success as Zupanick teaches that the placement offers coverage of a wide area (see paragraph 0187).
CLAIM 3: Zupanick discloses a fourth well at the 120 angle (Fig. 24F).
CLAIM 4: Zupanick discloses drilling additional wells (Fig. 24F).
CLAIM 20: Prinzhofer discloses a process of storing gas in a geologic sequence, the process comprising: assessing a caprock in the geologic sequence for caprock defects according to claim 4; and injecting the gas into the first subsurface formation of the first well, the first subsurface formation of the second well, or both upon determining the caprock defect is not present.
Prinzhofer fails to disclose the gas being hydrogen, instead storing CO2.
Examiner takes official notice that hydrogen is known element that can be stored underground.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute hydrogen for the CO2 of Prinzhofer with a reasonable expectation of success as the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way as the results would be predictable as the two gases are stored in similar conditions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) filed 7/16/25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The claimed subject matter was not shown by the previously cited art. The newly cited art, specifically Tucker, better teaches the claimed method including the distinct wells.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK F LAMBE whose telephone number is (571)270-1932. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-4.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571)270-7741. 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.
/PATRICK F LAMBE/Examiner, Art Unit 3679
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676