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 Group I, claims 1-7, in the reply filed on 2/16/206 is acknowledged. Claim 18 is amended to depend from claim 1. Claims 8-17, 19 and 20 are withdrawn by Applicant.
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)(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) 1-4, 6, 7, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Knight et al. (20170115102 – Knight).
Knight disclose a perforating gun, comprising:
Re claim 1:
an outer sleeve 10 (i.e., fig. 1) comprising a generally tubular wall structure having an outer peripheral surface, opposite ends thereof and a central passage therethrough extending from one end to the other end and further including a connection at each end to connect to other tools 12 (i.e., pgh 20, “a plurality of tubular segments 12 coupled together via a casing collar 14”) in the tool string (i.e., casing string); and
a plurality of separate perforating module 100 (i.e., pgh. 21, “perforating gun assemblies”) installed within the central passage of the outer sleeve, wherein each perforating module comprises a shaped charge 316 (i.e., pgh. 26, “shape charge”) and a uniquely addressable switch (i.e., pgh. 22, “each perforating gun assembly 100 comprises a perforating tool 110 and one or more switch subs 200”) configured to detonate the shaped charge in response to receiving a firing signal addressed to the switch (i.e., pgh. 27, “switch subs 200 are configured to pass signals between the multiple perforating tools 110 of tool string 20 and to control the detonation of the shaped charges 316 housed in each perforating tool 110”).
Re claim 2, each of the plurality of perforating modules comprises a detonator in signal communication with the switch of the perforating module (i.e., pgh. 28, detonator chamber 202 with detonator connected to the module by ballistic pattern, fig. 4) and ballistically connected to the shaped charge of the perforating module.
Re claim 3, the switch of the perforating module is configured to transmit a detonation signal to the detonator in response to receiving the firing signal addressed to the switch (i.e., pgh. 28).
Re claim 4, each of the plurality of perforating modules comprises a plurality of the shaped charges, and wherein switch of the perforating module is configured to detonate each of the plurality of shaped charges in response to receiving the firing signal addressed to the switch (i.e., pgh. 28).
Re claim 6, the switch of each of the plurality of perforating modules comprises an opening at least partially surrounded by an outer periphery of the switch (i.e., pgh. 37, inner surface of the switch chamber).
Re claim 7, each of the plurality of perforating modules are pressure isolated (i.e., by the througbore 202 in the switch sub 200, fig. 4) from one another.
Re claim 18, each of the plurality of perforating modules comprises a digitally addressable switch (i.e., pgh. 39, wireline communication is considered digital - https://www.bing.com/search?q=Is+wireline+comunication+considerd+digital%3F&cvid=101546ad1e904e9baf017048ed9f437a&gs_lcrp=EgRlZGdlKgYIABBFGDkyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQABhAMgYIAhAAGEAyBggDEAAYQDIGCAQQABhAMgYIBRAAGEAyBggGEAAYQDIICAcQ6QcY_FXSAQkxNDE5MWowajGoAgCwAgA&FORM=ANAB01&PC=U531).
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knight.
Re claim 5, Knight discloses a switch disposed in the switch chamber (i.e., pgh. 37), but is silent on the switch of each of the plurality of perforating modules has a length extending in a direction parallel with a longitudinal axis of the perforating gun that is less than a width of the switch extending in a direction orthogonal with the longitudinal axis of the perforating gun. However, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the switch of Knight with a length extending in a direction parallel with a longitudinal axis of the perforating gun that is less than a width of the switch extending in a direction orthogonal with the longitudinal axis of the perforating gun to easily dispose the switch in the chamber, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art all show similar features to those of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONG-SUK (PHILIP) RO whose telephone number is (571)270-5466. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, 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.
/YONG-SUK (PHILIP) RO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676