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 .
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) 1-3,7-8,11,13,14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leone, Jr. et al. (US 20100232880) in view of Babcock et al. (US 8783345) and Zebrowski (US 20110013986).
Leone, Jr. et al. discloses a method comprising: introducing one or more gases (biogas, para 0011) into a subterranean storage formation (208) via a well injector system comprising one or more well (202a) extending from a wellhead (204a) to a location within the subterranean storage formation (208, Figs. 2A, 2B), wherein the wellhead is external to the subterranean storage formation; and storing at least a portion of the one or more gases within the subterranean storage formation (para 0013, 0028, 0039-0044); wherein the one or more gases are compressed (para 0010,0012,0041,0046) before or while being introduced to the subterranean storage formation.
Leone, Jr. et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Leone, Jr. et al. is silent about the well injector system including one or more capillary lines. Further, Leone, Jr. et al. lacks storing the one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers.
Babcock et al. teaches a well injector system including one or more capillary lines (115).
Zebrowski teaches storing one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers (108,110, para 0017, Figs. 1,2A-2B)).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Leone, Jr. et al. to include one or more capillary lines as taught by Babcock since such a modification enhances operational control and allows for efficient and precise targeting of desired formation zones.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Leone, Jr. et al. to store the one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers as taught by Zebrowski
since such a modification prevent migration of the gases from the storage to the surface.
Re claim 2, a gas capture apparatus (220,224, Leone, Jr. et. al.)
Re claim 3, wherein the system further comprises a compressor (para 0010,0012,0041,0046 of Leone, Jr. et al. ) and the one or more gases are compressed.
Re claim 7, wherein the subterranean storage formation is selected from the group consisting of a depleted formation, a salt formation, a depleted aquifer, and any combination thereof (para 0028 Leone, Jr et al).
Re claim 8, wherein the one or more gases comprise carbon dioxide, hydrogen, or any combination thereof (para 0011, Leone, Jr. et al.).
Re claim 11, wherein at least a portion of the one or more gases is captured at an oil and gas well (see para 0045, Leone, Jr. et al.).
Re claim 13, wherein the one or more gases comprise carbon dioxide (para 0011, 0022, Leone, Jr. et al.).
Re claim 14, wherein the one or more gases comprises hydrogen (para 0011, Leone, Jr. et al.).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leone, Jr. et al. (US 20100232880) in view of Babcock et al. (US 8783345) and Zebrowski (US 20110013986) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Japanese document (JP 2548815).
Leone, Jr. et al. (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Leone, Jr. et al. (as modified above) is silent about wherein the capillary line injector system further comprises a gas capture apparatus, wherein at least a portion of the one or more gases is captured from a combustion process. Japanese document ‘815 teaches a carbon dioxide storage method comprising wherein the line injector system further comprises a gas capture apparatus, wherein at least a portion of the one or more gases is captured from a combustion process (11, see machine translation, Figs. 1,2). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) to have the line injector system further comprises a gas capture apparatus, wherein at least a portion of the one or more gases is captured from a combustion process as taught by Japanese document ‘815 since such a modification prevents global warming.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leone, Jr. et al. (US 20100232880) in view of Babcock et al. (US 8783345) and Zebrowski (US 20110013986) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Known design Incentives (KSR rationale (f)).
Leone, Jr. et al. (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Leone, Jr. et al. (as modified above) is silent wherein the one or more capillary lines have a wall thickness of about 0.035" to about 0.065". It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) to have
the one or more capillary lines have a wall thickness of about 0.035" to about 0.065" since such a modification would be based on the anticipated pressure and load the lines would have to withstand.
Re claim 5, Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Leone Jr. et al (as modified above) is silent wherein the one or more capillary lines have an interior surface roughness of about 0.4 mm or less. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) to have wherein the one or more capillary lines have an interior surface roughness of about 0.4 mm or less since such a modification would be based on the flowrate etc (reduce frictional resistance).
Re claim 6, Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Leone Jr. et al (as modified above) is silent wherein the one or more gases are compressed to a pressure of at least about 3500 psi up to a maximum working pressure of the one or more capillary lines, with a differential pressure of at least about 1500 psi relative to the subterranean storage formation.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) to have wherein the one or more gases are compressed to a pressure of at least about 3500 psi up to a maximum working pressure of the one or more capillary lines, with a differential pressure of at least about 1500 psi relative to the subterranean storage formation since such a modification would allow for volume reduction and increase storage capacity by being denser.
Claim(s) 9,10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leone, Jr. et al. (US 20100232880) in view of Babcock et al. (US 8783345) and Zebrowski (US 20110013986) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schottenfeld (US 20250122779).
Leone, Jr. et al. (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Leone, Jr. et al. (as modified above) is silent wherein the one or more gases are introduced to the subterranean storage formation in a supercritical state. Schottenfeld teaches wherein the one or more gases are introduced to the subterranean storage formation in a supercritical state during sequestration of carbon dioxide (para 0035).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) to have wherein the one or more gases are introduced to the subterranean storage formation in a supercritical state as taught by Schottenfeld since such state allows for the carbon dioxide to be dense thus allowing for storage of higher concentrations of carbon dioxide.
Re claim 10, Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Leone Jr. et al (as modified above) is silent wherein the one or more gases comprise two or more gases, and a first of the two or more gases is stored in a first location of the subterranean storage formation and a second of the two or more gases is stored in a second location of the subterranean storage formation. Schottenfeld teaches wherein the one or more gases comprise two or more gases, and a first of the two or more gases is stored in a first location of the subterranean storage formation and a second of the two or more gases is stored in a second location of the subterranean storage formation (218,220, Figs. 1-3).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Leone JR. et al. (as modified above) to wherein the one or more gases comprise two or more gases, and a first of the two or more gases is stored in a first location of the subterranean storage formation and a second of the two or more gases is stored in a second location of the subterranean storage formation as taught by Schottenfeld since such a modification enables the treatment of various gases that contribute to global warming with one apparatus/mechanism.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leone, Jr. et al. (US 20100232880) in view of Babcock et al. (US 8783345) and Zebrowski (US 20110013986) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Russian document (RU 2094925).
Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed (see para 0013 of Leone, Jr. et al.). However, Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) is silent about using the hydrogen to generate electrical power and wherein the hydrogen is a product of electrolysis.
Russian document ‘925 teaches wherein the one or more gases comprise hydrogen, recovering the hydrogen from the subterranean storage formation; and using the hydrogen to generate electrical power and wherein the hydrogen is a product of electrolysis (see machine translation). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) to using the hydrogen to generate electrical power and wherein the hydrogen is a product of electrolysis as taught by Russian document since such a modification allows one to store and recover numerous gases such as hydrogen, methane, carbon dioxide etc.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leone, Jr. et al. (US 20100232880) in view of Babcock et al. (US 8783345) and Zebrowski (US 20110013986) and Russian document (RU 2094925) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Anderson (US 20050109394)
Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) is silent wherein the electrolysis is powered by solar energy. Anderson teaches wherein electrolysis is powered by solar energy (20, Fig. 1).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Leone Jr. et al. (as modified above) to wherein the electrolysis is powered by solar energy as taught by Anderson since such a modification takes advantage of renewable energy and mitigates climate change.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 on 3/4/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on at least one reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
It should be noted that Zebrowski ‘986 teaches storing one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers (para 0017)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hill et al. (US 2002/0174895) teaches storing one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers (para 0012)
Egermann et al. (US 2007/0062258) teaches storing one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers (para 0009).
Koide et al. (US 2009/0202304) teaches storing one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers (para 0127)
Dickinson, III et al. (US 20100098492) teaches storing one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers (para 0058)
Bosch et al. (US 20250206538) teaches storing one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers (para 0095)
Upchurch et al. (US 20260110235) teaches storing one or more gases beneath one or more impermeable sealing layers (para 0003)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNIL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-7051. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-3, F 9-8 and 2nd Sat 11-7.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571 270 5281. 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.
/SUNIL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
SS
5/16/2026
Prosecution Insights