Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/505,991

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING OIL QUALITY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 09, 2023
Examiner
GRAVES, TIMOTHY P
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Saudi Arabian Oil Company
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
363 granted / 449 resolved
+12.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
469
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
§103
40.0%
+0.0% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 449 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Systems and Methods for Determining Oil Quality 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/09/2023 and 03/21/2025 are being considered by the examiner. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: Systems and Methods for Determining Oil Quality Based on Pump Curve Data Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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 1-2, 8-10 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 3453868; “Williams”), in view of Noor (Centrifugal Pump Characteristics for Crude Oil Transfer, 2010; "Noor"). Regarding claim 1, Williams discloses, in the figure, a system (not enumerated, see Williams’ figure), the system comprising: a first pressure sensor (24, 25) deployed upstream (examiner notes the inlet side of the pump is measured through pipe 25) from a pump (15) and configured to sense a first pressure (col. 2, Williams’ sensor is a pressure differential measuring instrument which is connected to and senses pressure with respect to the inlet and outlet sides of the centrifugal pump) of an uncompressible liquid (the examiner asserts Williams’ differential measuring instrument is capable of measuring uncompressible liquid pressure) moving in a first pipe (12) toward the pump (15); a second pressure sensor (24, 26) deployed downstream (examiner notes the outlet side of the pump is measured through pipe 26) from the pump (15) and configured to sense a second pressure (see previous comment) of the uncompressible liquid (see previous comment) moving in a second pipe (20) away from the pump (15); a quality determination device (30) configured to: receive the first pressure (see previous comment) from the first pressure sensor (24, 25); receive the second pressure (see previous comment) from the second pressure sensor (24, 26); determine in real-time an uncompressible liquid quality value (col. 3, lines 21-26, Williams determines changes to specific gravity on the fluid being pumped) based at least in part on the first pressure, the second pressure (col. 3, lines 21-26, changes to Williams pressure differential is directly proportional to specific gravity changes). Williams fails to determine a quality value based in part on pump data from a pump curve of the pump. Noor teaches, in figures 3.2-3.3 and 4.3, various quality value fluids (see fig. 4.3, “water”, “sea water”, “diesel”, “light crude oil”, “medium crude oil”, “heavy crude oil”, the examiner notes these types of fluids represent differing economic values) may be differentiated (Noor pump curve delineates different materials by their particular head vs flow rate characteristics) on a pump curve (fig. 4.3) by measuring pump pressure (see fig. 3.2), orifice pressure (see fig. 3.2) and flow rate (see fig. 3.2), and head (see p. 30, section 3.4.2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Noor’s varying pump characteristic curves based on material quality types to teach Williams to infer unmeasured data such as fluid type using the pump curve. Doing so allows the operator to specifically identify the pipeline batch. Regarding claim 2, Williams and Noor fail to explicitly disclose the calculation of the liquid quality value. However, the examiner takes official notice that converting differential pressure to specific gravity by multiplying differential pressure by a conversion factor then dividing the product by the head is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a well-known conversion calculation to determine specific gravity from differential pressure measurements of a pumped fluid. Doing so is an efficient process for determining specific gravity of the fluid. Regarding claim 8, Williams and Noor disclose, in Williams’ figure, the pump (Williams (15)) having a pump inlet (not enumerated, see Williams’ figure) and a pump outlet (not enumerated, see Williams’ figure); an inlet connector (not enumerated, the examiner construes the interface between Williams’ pipeline and inlet pipe to be the inlet connector); an outlet connector (not enumerated, the examiner construes the interface between the pipeline and outlet pipe to be the outlet connector); the first pipe (Williams (12)); the second pipe (Williams (20)); and a mobile container housing at least: the pump (Williams (15)), the first pipe (Williams (12)) coupled between (not enumerated, see Williams’ figure) the pump inlet (see previous comment) and the inlet connector (see previous comment), the second pipe (Williams (20)) coupled between the pump outlet (see previous comment) and the outlet connector (see previous comment), the first pressure sensor (Williams (24, 25)), and the second pressure sensor (Williams (24, 26)); wherein the inlet connector (see previous comment) is configured for connection to an uncompressible liquid source (Williams (11)); and wherein the outlet connector (see previous comment) is configured for connection to an uncompressible liquid destination ((11) examiner notes Williams’ outlet pipe is downstream of the inlet pipe with respect to the pipeline). Williams and Noor fail to disclose a mobile container housing the pump, first pipe with inlet connector and second pipe with inlet connector. However, the examiner takes official notice that pump skids are well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a well-known pump skid to house Williams and Noor’s centrifugal pump package. Doing so reliable way of providing for pump package mobility. Regarding claim 9, Williams and Noor, as combined in claim 8, fail to disclose a tank. However, Noor further teaches, in figure 3.2, the uncompressible liquid destination comprises a tank (fig. 3.2, “Tank”), and wherein the uncompressible liquid source comprises the tank (fig. 3.2, “Tank”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Noor’s tank as a source and destination of uncompressible liquid into Williams and Noor’s system of determining a liquid quality value. Doing so reliable way of determining liquid quality values of stored liquids. Regarding claim 10, William and Noor disclose, in Williams figure, the pump (Williams (15)) having a pump inlet (not enumerated, see Williams’ figure) and a pump outlet (not enumerated, see Williams’ figure); an inlet connector (not enumerated, the examiner construes the interface between Williams’ pipeline and inlet pipe to be the inlet connector); the first pipe (Williams (12)); the second pipe (Williams (20)). Williams and Noor, as combined in claim 1, fail to explicitly disclose a circulation valve or an assembly housed by a container. However, Noor further teaches in figure 3.2, a circulation valve (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below); a tank (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below); a container housing (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) at least: the tank (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below), the inlet connector (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) coupled to the tank (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below), the pump (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below), the first pipe (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) coupled between the pump inlet (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) and the tank (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below), the second pipe (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) coupled between the pump outlet (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) and the circulation valve (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below), the circulation valve (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) coupled between the second pipe (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) and the tank (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below), the first pressure sensor (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below), and the second pressure sensor (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below); wherein the inlet connector (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) is configured to allow an uncompressible liquid from an uncompressible liquid source to enter (the examiner asserts Noor’s inlet is capable of allowing liquid to enter the tank) the tank (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below); and wherein the circulation valve control (the examiner asserts Noor’s circulation valve assemble is capable of controlling circulation to and from the pump) circulation of the uncompressible liquid from the tank (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) to the pump (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) via the first pipe (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below), and from the pump (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) to the tank (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below) via the second pipe (see Noor’s annotated fig. 3.2 below). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Noor’s tank, control valve, inlet configuration and container to provide a control of the source and destination of uncompressible liquid into Williams and Noor’s system of determining a liquid quality value. Doing so reliable way of controlling the distribution of liquid in the system when determining liquid quality values. PNG media_image1.png 418 802 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 14, Williams and Noor disclose, in Williams’ figure, the pump (Williams (15)) is a centrifugal pump (Williams, col. 2, line 10, “centrifugal pump”). Regarding claim 15, Williams and Noor disclose the uncompressible liquid is crude oil (Noor, TITLE, “Centrifugal Pump Characteristics for Crude Oil Transfer”). Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 3453868; “Williams”) and Noor (Centrifugal Pump Characteristics for Crude Oil Transfer, 2010; "Noor"), in view of Khan (US 20200018739; “Khan”). Regarding claim 11, Williams and Noor fail to disclose a display. Khan teaches, in figure 4, a display (444), wherein the quality determination device (440) is further configured to display the uncompressible liquid quality value (ABSTRACT, Khan’s system determines downhole fluid properties) via the display (444). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Khan’s scheme of displaying determined fluid properties on a monitor to teach Williams and Noor to display determined quality values via display. Doing so provides a reliable way for communicating information. Regarding claim 12, Williams and Noor fail to disclose a transmitter. Khan teaches, in figure 4, the quality determination device (440) comprises a transmitter ( the examiner construes the presence of Khan’s monitor separate from a processing unit to be evidence of an inherent transmitter used to send signals to the monitor from the processing unit), and wherein the quality determination device (440) is further configured to transmit data (see previous comment) to a recipient device (444) via the transmitter (see previous comment). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Khan’s scheme of transmitting information via transmitter to teach Williams and Noor to transmit data to the display. Doing so provides a reliable way moving information. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 16-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claim 16, although combined Williams and Noor disclose a method of oil quality determination including receiving differential pressure measurements from sensors upstream and downstream of a pump, receiving temperature measurements of pumped fluid via a temperature sensor, receiving pump speed measurements via a speed sensor and a change in specific gravity of a flow correlated with a change in differential pressure measurement and calculating specific gravity via pump curve data; they do not disclose receiving real-time pressure, temperature and flow measurements via multiple communication links to a processor and using the received data and pump data from a pump curve of the pump to determine an oil quality value. Furthermore, no other prior art can be found to motivate or teach applicant’s method including determining in real-time, by the processing resource, an oil quality value based at least in part on the first real-time pressure, the second real-time pressure, the real-time temperature, the real-time flow, and a pump data from a pump curve of the pump, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. Dependent claims 17-20 are allowable for at least the same reasons as above. Claims 3-7 and 13 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. Regarding claim 3, examiner notes a search has not revealed art teaching or suggesting the system of Williams and Noor in combination with a flow sensor configured to sense a flow of the uncompressible liquid; and wherein the quality determination device is further configured to select the pump data from the pump curve based upon the flow. The examiner concludes prior existence of the combination is improbable. Dependent claims 4-7 would be allowable for at least the same reasons as above. Regarding claim 13, examiner notes a search has not revealed art teaching or suggesting the system of Williams and Noor in combination with the quality determination device is a handheld, mobile quality determination device comprising an integrated display, and wherein the handheld, mobile quality determination device is configured to display the uncompressible liquid quality value via the integrated display. The examiner concludes prior existence of the combination is improbable. 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 TIMOTHY P GRAVES whose telephone number is (469)295-9072. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.. 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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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. /TIMOTHY P GRAVES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 09, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596057
ADAS Calibration System Including Motor Vehicle Centerline Alignment Element
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594923
VEHICLE HAVING A SENSOR ARRANGEMENT FOR MEASURING AN ACTUATING ANGLE OF THE ACTUATING ELEMENT, MEASURING ARRANGEMENT AND MEASUREMENT METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590938
NEW POLLUTANT DETECTION EQUIPMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584899
METHOD OF AND ANALYSER FOR THE OPTICAL ANALYSIS OF A LIQUID CONTAINING A DISSOLVED GAS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571720
APPARATUS FOR AND METHOD OF DETERMINING DRYNESS LEVEL OF STEAM
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
81%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+10.4%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 449 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month