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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claims 1–16 in the reply filed on January 26, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 17–20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on January 26, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 10–13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hall et al. (US Pub. # 20220056797), hereinafter referred to as Hall.
The applied reference has a common applicant with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claim 1, Hall teaches, “An instrumented sub (Fig. 1–3) for supporting subterranean operations, the instrumented sub comprising: a body (44, 99; see para. [0036]) comprising an upper portion (above 110/120 of 100) and a lower portion (below 110/120 of 100); a flow passage (Fig. 2, 3; ref. # 43) extending through the upper portion and the lower portion; and an instrumented clamp (100, including 110/120) that is removably attached to the body (see para. [0029]) between the upper portion and the lower portion, wherein the instrumented clamp (100) is electrically coupled to the body via a first electrical coupling mated to a second electrical coupling, with the first electrical coupling being mounted to the instrumented clamp and the second electrical coupling being mounted to the body (see para. [0034–0038]; which discuss electronics 130 and sensors 140, 144 mated with each other wirelessly, or via contact, mounted in 110, 120 of 100, pressing against 44; 130/140, 144 are mated with each other in 100, and 140/144 with 44).”
Regarding claim 2, Hall teaches, “wherein a first valve is disposed in the upper portion, and wherein the first valve selectively permits or restricts fluid flow through the flow passage (Fig. 1, ref. # 46; [0020–0024]).”
Regarding claim 10, Hall teaches, “wherein the instrumented clamp (100) further comprises a first arcuate portion (110) and a second arcuate portion (120) that are disposed on opposite sides of the body (44) when the instrumented clamp is removably attached to the body [0029].”
Regarding claim 11, Hall teaches, “wherein the first arcuate portion (110) and the second arcuate portion (120) engage the body (44) when the first arcuate portion (110) and the second arcuate portion (120) are removably attached to each other (see Fig. 3).”
Regarding claim 12, Hall teaches, “wherein the first arcuate portion (110) comprises control electronics (130) that control communications to a rig controller (60) via wireless telemetry (see para. [0027, 0036]) through one or more antennas (132) disposed in the first arcuate portion (110).”
Regarding claim 13, Hall teaches, “wherein the second arcuate portion (120) comprises a plurality of energy storage devices (134) and supplies power to the first arcuate portion when the instrumented clamp is removably attached to the body (see para. [0034–0035]).”
Regarding claim 16, Hall teaches, “wherein a box end adjacent the upper portion is configured to couple the instrumented sub to a top drive, and wherein a pin end adjacent the lower portion is configured to couple the instrumented sub to a second sub or a tubular string (see para. [0029, 0039, 0049]).”
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 10–12, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Therrien et al. (US Pub. # 20180328120), hereinafter referred to as Therrien.
Regarding claim 1, Therrien teaches, “An instrumented sub for supporting subterranean operations, the instrumented sub comprising: a body (Fig. 3A–5C, ref. # 60, 61) comprising an upper portion and a lower portion (60 above 220 and 61 below 220, as shown in Fig. 1); a flow passage (30 in 60/61, see also [0023]) extending through the upper portion and the lower portion; and an instrumented clamp (210 in 220; see para. [0037–0041, 0043]) that is removably attached to the body between the upper portion and the lower portion, wherein the instrumented clamp (220 includes 210, 250, 270; see para. [0030]) is electrically coupled to the body via a first electrical coupling mated to a second electrical coupling, with the first electrical coupling being mounted to the instrumented clamp (210 in 220) and the second electrical coupling being mounted to the body (250 secured to 60).”
Regarding claim 6, Therrien teaches, “wherein a radially reduced diameter portion of the body forms an annular groove in the body between the upper portion and the lower portion (Fig. 2, ref. # 62; collars of flow pipes in downhole assemblies inherently are connected/screwed together via threads, which form grooves in the body which are between the upper and lower portion).”
Regarding claim 10, Therrien teaches, “wherein the instrumented clamp further comprises a first arcuate portion and a second arcuate portion that are disposed on opposite sides of the body when the instrumented clamp is removably attached to the body (Fig. 5A, 5B).”
Regarding claim 11, Therrien teaches, “wherein the first arcuate portion and the second arcuate portion engage the body when the first arcuate portion and the second arcuate portion are removably attached to each other (Fig. 1–3B, 5A, 5B; ref. # 220).”
Regarding claim 12, Therrien teaches, “wherein the first arcuate portion comprises control electronics that control communications to a rig controller via wireless telemetry through one or more antennas disposed in the first arcuate portion (see para. [0030, 0031, 0033, 0045–0055]).”
Regarding claim 16, Therrien teaches, “wherein a box end adjacent the upper portion is configured to couple the instrumented sub to a top drive, and wherein a pin end adjacent the lower portion is configured to couple the instrumented sub to a second sub or a tubular string (see para. [0043]; see also Fig. 1–3).”
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 (or as subject to pre-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.
Claim(s) 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall (US Pub. # 20220056797) in view of Alkier et al. (US Pub. # 20190353028), hereinafter referred to as Alkier.
Regarding claims 14 and 15, Hall does not appear to teach, “wherein the second arcuate portion comprises an energy storage portion that is removably attached to an electrical coupling portion; wherein the energy storage portion is removable from the electrical coupling portion while the electrical coupling portion remains attached to the first arcuate portion.” However, Alkier teaches the deficiencies of Hall (see para. [0041]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hall’s invention to include wherein the second arcuate portion comprises an energy storage portion that is removably attached to an electrical coupling portion; wherein the energy storage portion is removable from the electrical coupling portion while the electrical coupling portion remains attached to the first arcuate portion.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Hall’s invention for at least the purpose of efficiently replacing degraded energy devices to ensure limited downtime during necessary maintenance periods.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3–5 and 7–9 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 claims 3–5, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “wherein a proximity sensor detects a first position of the first valve and communicates the first position to the instrumented clamp, and wherein the instrumented clamp communicates the first position to a rig controller”, in combination with the previously claimed language.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “wherein one or more strain gauges are positioned in the annular groove, and wherein the one or more strain gauges measure a torsional force, a tensile force, a compression force, a bending force, or combinations thereof acting on one of the upper portion or the lower portion relative to the other one of the upper portion or the lower portion.”
Regarding claim 8, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “wherein one or more sensors are positioned along the annular groove, and wherein the one or more sensors measures torque applied by a top drive, rotational parameters of a tubular string, sensor data used to determine toolface, vibration signals received from the tubular string and top drive, weight of the tubular string, or a combination thereof.”
Regarding claim 9, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “wherein a protective sleeve is mounted to one of the upper portion and the lower portion, and wherein the protective sleeve surrounds the annular groove and is at least partially aligned axially on the body with the annular groove.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO–892 form. The references cited herewith teach instrumented subs and clamps with configurations similar to the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-2726. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:30pm.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at 571-272-1674. 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.
/RYAN D WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights