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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 01/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver and further in view of Zelenev (US 2019/0153304 A1) and Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Weaver and further in view of Hill et al. (US 2019/0169492 A1)have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made set forth below.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner has combined an excessive number of references, reliance on a large number of references in a rejection does not, without more, weigh against the obviousness of the claimed invention. See In re Gorman, 933 F.2d 982, 18 USPQ2d 1885 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 11-12, and 14-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver (cited previously) Zelenev (US 2019/0153304 A1) ("Zelenev" herein- cited previously), and in further in view of Su et al. (US 2004/0180795 A1) ("Su" herein- cited previously)
Claim 1
Weaver discloses a method of treating a subterranean formation, the method comprising:
introducing a treatment fluid into a subterranean formation or well, wherein the treatment fluid comprises: [0028]
(a) surface-modified silica nanoparticles having a surface modified with an alkoxysilane, [0069-0071, 0093]
(b) a stability component, the stability component comprising a sulfate, a chloride, a carbonate, or an oxide salt of aluminum, titanium, or zirconium, [0061]
(c) a surfactant composition [0059] and
d) a solvent. [0096-0099]
Weaver does not explicitly disclose the surfactant composition comprising a i) sulfobetaine, ii) a nonionic surfactant comprising an ethoxylated alcohol, and iii) an anionic and wherein the stability component is present in a range of from 0.1 wt.% to 10 wt.% based on total weight of the treatment fluid.
Zelenev teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0121, 0139, 0146, 0148 → Zelenev teaches this limitation in that The term surfactant includes but is not limited to nonionic surfactants, anionic surfactants, cationic surfactants, amphoteric surfactants, zwitterionic surfactants, switchable surfactants, cleavable surfactants, dimeric or gemini surfactants, glucamide surfactants, alkylpolyglycoside surfactants, extended surfactants containing anonionic spacer arm central extension and an ionic or nonionic polar group, and combinations thereof. Suitable anionic surfactants include, but are not necessarily limited to, alkali metal alkyl sulfates, alkyl or alkylaryl sulfonates, linear or branched alkyl ether sulfates and sulfonates, alkyl sulphosuccinates, dialkyl sulphosuccinates alkyl ether sulfates, linear and branched ether sulfates, fatty carboxylates, alkyl sarcosinates, alkyl phosphates and combinations thereof. The surfactant is laurylamidopropylamine oxide, cocamidopropylamine oxide). In some embodiments, the surfactant is amphoteric or zwitterionic, including sultaines (e.g., cocamidopropy|hydroxysultaine, lauryl sultaine, lauryl sulfobetaine, COCO sultaine, COCO sulfobetaine), betaines (e.g., cocamidopropyl I betaine, lauramidopropyl betaine, or lauryl betaine, COCO betaine), the nonionic surfactant may be one or more of an ethoxylated castor oil, an ethoxylated alcohol, an ethoxylated tristyrylphenol, or an ethoxylated sorbitan ester, or combinations thereof.) for the purpose of given the surfactants specific affinity for oil/water-type and water/oil-type interfaces, the affinity helps the surfactants to reduce the free energy of these interfaces and to stabilize the dispersed phase of an emulsion or microemulsion and [0120]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver with the above limitation, as taught by Zelenev, in order to reduce the free energy of these interfaces and to stabilize the dispersed phase of an emulsion or microemulsion
Su teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0023 & 0036 → Su teaches this limitation in that In further an embodiment, said production well treating fluid of the present invention may contain further an electrical stabilizing agent with a content of 0.1-15% by weight. In the production well treating fluid of the present invention, said electrical stabilizing agent is preferably at least one selected from the group consisting of an inorganic salt of iron or aluminum, such as iron chloride, aluminum chloride, ferric sulfate, aluminum sulfate, hydroxylammonium and organic cationic etherifying agent.) for the purpose of stabilizing agent. [0036]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver, as taught by Su, in order to have a stabilize agent. [0036]
Since Weaver teaches the same treatment for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery comprising nanoparticle silica having a silane compound such alkoxylate, aluminum or titanium zirconium, an sulfobetaine, an anionic surfactant such as ethoxylated alcohol, and nonionic surfactant, sulfobetaine, it will be a surface- modified nanoparticles, a stability component , and a surfactant composition.
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties". A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.07 (I), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp V Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp V DF Newtield Co, 7F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY 1934).
Claim 2
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: recovering a hydrocarbon from the subterranean formation or well. [0028]
Claim 3
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, wherein' the alkoxysilane comprises 3- glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropyimethyidimethoxysilane, 3- glycidoxypropylmethyidiethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropyltriethoxysilane, 2-(3,4- epoxycyclohexyl)propyltrimethoxysilane, 2-(3,4-epoxycyclohexyl)propyltriethoxysilane, 2- (3,4-epoxycyclohexylethyltrimethoxysilane, 2-(3,4- epoxycyclohexylethyltriethoxysilane, 2- (3,4-epoxycyclohexyl)methyltrimethoxysilane, 2- (3,4- epoxycyclohexyl)methyltriethoxysilane, [(3-ethyl-3- oxethanyl)methoxy]propyltrimethoxysilane, [(3-ethyl-3- oxethanyl)methoxy]propyltriethoxysilane, or combinations thereof. [0069-0071, 0093]
Claim 5- 6 & 21
Weaver discloses the claimed invention except for a ratio of the alkoxysilane to silica nanoparticles in the surface-modified silica nanoparticles is in a range from 0.01:15 to 0.1: 5. A ratio of the alkoxysilane to surface -modified silica nanoparticles to the surfactant composition is 1:1 to 1:20.. It would have been obvious to one having
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to have the ratio of the alkoxysilane to silica nanoparticles in the surface-modified silica nanoparticles the range from 0.01:15 to 0.1: 5 and the ratio of the alkoxysilane to surface -modified silica nanoparticles to the surfactant composition is 1:1 to 1:20, since it has been held that [W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 7
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1. Weaver does not explicitly disclose, wherein the sulfobetaine comprises one or more of 3-(C10-C16)-alkyldimethylammonio)-2- hydroxypropanesulfonate, C10- 16-alkyl(2-hydroxy-3-sulfopropyl)dimethy. betaine, and cocoamidopropyl hydroxysultaine. (Same as claim 1)
Claim 8
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the nonionic surfactant further comprises one or more of ethoxylated castor oil, dimethyl-lauryl-amine, C10-16 alkyl dimethylamines, and alkoxylated ethylenediamine,. (Same as Claim 1)
Claims 9 and 22
Weaver discloses the method of claims 1 and 17. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose wherein the surfactant composition further comprises an anionic surfactant comprises sulfosuccinate (Same as claim 1)
Claim 10
Weaver discloses the treatment fluid of claim 1. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the stability component is aluminum sulfate. (See claim 1)
Claim 11
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the solvent is selected from a water source and a coupling agent. [0049, 0095-0096]
Claim 12
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the solvent comprises a water source, and wherein the water source from 0 wt. % to 35 wt. % total dissolved solids, a temperature in a range of from 60° C to 250° C or both, wherein the coupling agent comprise a glycerol. [0049, 0095-0096]
It is elementary that a mere recitation of a newly discovered function or property, possessed by things in the prior art, does not cause a claim to distinguish over the prior art. Additionally, where the Patent Office has reason to believe that a functional limitation asserted to be critical for establishing novelty in the claimed subject matter, may in fact, be a characteristic of the prior art, it possess the authority to require the applicant to prove that the subject matter shown to be in the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied on. In re Swinehart, 169 USPQ 226 (CCPA 1971).
Claims 14-15
Since Weaver teaches the same treatment for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery comprising nanoparticle silica having a silane compound such alkoxysilane, aluminum or titanium zirconium, a surfactant composition, it will have the treatment fluid contacting
a solid surface of the subterranean formation or well, and a contact angle of water on
the solid surface is altered by at least 10°, and changes the subterranean formation
from oil wettable to water wettable..
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive
properties". A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the
prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and
/or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01 (I), in re Best, 562 F2d at 1255,
195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp V Banner, 778 Fed 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed
Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam
Wareen Corp V DF Newtield Co, 7 F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY 1934).
Claim 16
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the subterranean formation or well
comprises a shale formation, a secondary well, or a tertiary well. [0024, 0038-0039]
Claim 17
Weaver discloses a treatment fluid for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery comprising:
surface-modified silica nanoparticles having a surface modified with an
alkoxysilane; [0069-0071]
a stability component, the stability component comprising a sulfate, a chloride, a
carbonate, or an oxide salt of aluminum, titanium, or zirconium; [0061]
a surfactant composition; [0059] and
a solvent. [0096-0099]
Weaver does not explicitly disclose the surfactant composition comprising a i) sulfobetaine, ii) a nonionic surfactant comprising an ethoxylated alcohol, and iii) an anionic and wherein the stability component is present in a range of from 0.1 wt.% to 10 wt.% based on total weight of the treatment fluid.
Zelenev teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0121, 0139, 0146, 0148 Zelenev teaches this limitation in that The term surfactant includes but is not limited to nonionic surfactants, anionic surfactants, cationic surfactants, amphoteric surfactants, zwitterionic surfactants, switchable surfactants, cleavable surfactants, dimeric or gemini surfactants, glucamide surfactants, alkylpolyglycoside surfactants, extended surfactants containing anonionic spacer arm central extension and an ionic or nonionic polar group, and combinations thereof. Suitable anionic surfactants include, but are not necessarily limited to, alkali metal alkyl sulfates, alkyl or alkylaryl sulfonates, linear or branched alkyl ether sulfates and sulfonates, alkyl sulphosuccinates, dialkyl sulphosuccinates alkyl ether sulfates, linear and branched ether sulfates, fatty carboxylates, alkyl sarcosinates, alkyl phosphates and combinations thereof. The surfactant is laurylamidopropylamine oxide, cocamidopropylamine oxide). In some embodiments, the surfactant is amphoteric or zwitterionic, including sultaines (e.g., cocamidopropy| hydroxysultaine, lauryl sultaine, lauryl sulfobetaine, COCO sultaine, COCO sulfobetaine), betaines (e.g., cocamidopropyl betaine, lauramidopropyl betaine, or lauryl betaine, COCO betaine), the nonionic surfactant may be one or more of an ethoxylated castor oil, an ethoxylated alcohol, an ethoxylated tristyrylphenol, or an ethoxylated sorbitan ester, or combinations thereof.) for the purpose of given the surfactants specific affinity for oil/water-type and water/oil-type interfaces, the affinity helps the surfactants to reduce the free energy of these interfaces and to stabilize the dispersed phase of an emulsion or microemulsion and [0120]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver with the above limitation, as taught by Zelenev, in order to reduce the free energy of these interfaces and to stabilize the dispersed phase of an emulsion or microemulsion
Su teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0023 & 0036 → Su teaches this limitation in that In further an embodiment, said production well treating fluid of the present invention may contain further an electrical stabilizing agent with a content of 0.1-15% by weight. In the production well treating fluid of the present invention, said electrical stabilizing agent is preferably at least one selected from the group consisting of an inorganic salt of iron or aluminum, such as iron chloride, aluminum chloride, ferric sulfate, aluminum sulfate, hydroxylammonium and organic cationic etherifying agent.) for the purpose of stabilizing agent. [0036]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver, as taught by Su, in order to have a stabilize agent. [0036]
Since Weaver teaches the same treatment for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery comprising nanoparticle silica having a silane compound such alkoxylate, aluminum or titanium zirconium, an sulfobetaine, an anionic surfactant such as ethoxylated alcohol, and nonionic surfactant, sulfobetaine, it will be a surface- modified nanoparticles, a stability component , and a surfactant composition.
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties". A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.07 (I), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp V Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp V DF Newtield Co, 7F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY 1934).
Claim 18
Weaver discloses the treatment fluid of claim 17, wherein the alkoxysilane comprises 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropyimethyidimethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropylmethyidiethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropyltriethoxysilane, 2-(3,4-
epoxycyclohexyl)propyltrimethoxysilane, 2-(3,4-epoxycyclohexy !)propyltriethoxysilane,
2- (3,4-epoxycyclohexylethyltrimethoxysilane, 2-(3,4-
epoxycyclohexylethyltriethoxysilane, 2- (3,4-epoxycyclohexy!)methyltrimethoxysilane,
3674 2-(3,4- epoxycyclohexyl)methyltniethoxysilane, [(3-ethyl-3-
oxethanyl)methoxy]propyltrimethoxysilane, [(3-ethyl-3-
oxethanyl)methoxy]propyltriethoxysilane, or combinations thereof. [0069-0071]
Claim 19
Weaver discloses the treatment fluid of claim 17. Weaver does not explicitly disclose,
wherein the sulfobetaine comprises 3-((C 10-C16)-alkyIdimethylammonio)-2-
hydroxypropanesulfonate, C10-16-alkyl(2-hydroxy-3-sulfopropy)dimethy/! betaine,
cocoamidopropyl hydroxysultaine, or combinations thereof; and
wherein the nonionic surfactant further comprises ethoxylated castor oil,
dimethyl-lauryl-amine, C10-16 alkyl dimethylamines, alkoxylated ethylenediamine, or
combinations thereof. (Same as claim 17)
Claim 20
Weaver discloses the treatment fluid of claim 17, wherein the stability component is
aluminum sulfate, and wherein the solvent is selected from a water source, and a coupling agent. [0049, 0095-0096]
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver, Zelenev, Su, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2007/0202318 A1) ("Smith" herein- cited previously)
Claim 4
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the surface-modified silica nanoparticles comprise a core and a shell, wherein the core comprises a material other than silica and the shell comprises silica.
Smith teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0030, 0051, & 0125 → Smith teaches this limitation in that FIG. 1 is a schematic showing an embodiment of a proppant of the present invention showing a substrate (A) with the coating (B). The substrate (A) may be chosen from a group including, but not limited to, ceramic, natural material, shell, nut, or other materials. The coating (B) can be chosen from a group including, but not limited to, ceramic, ceramic precursor, polymer, resin, or a nanoparticle reinforced polymer or a nanoparticle reinforced resin. In the present invention the proppant can be made from a ceramic, a polymer, or mixture thereof. The proppant can be made from nanoparticles. The proppant can be a composite or combination of ceramic, polymer and other materials. Although not required it is understood that a ceramic may include oxides such as aluminum oxides (alumina) or mixed metal aluminum oxides (aluminates). Another alternative coating material may be the use of silica flour (e.g., with a particle size of from 0.2 µm to 4 µm) that has been derived from the powder milling of silica sand. In addition to silica sand, zircon sand may also be used as a coating material for the template.) for the purpose of providing particles with crush strength and/or buoyancy [0022]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver, with the above limitation, as taught by Smith, in order to provide particles with crush strength and buoyancy.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver, Zelenev, Su, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hinkel et al. (US 2012/0152548 A1) ("Hinkel' herein- cite previously).
Claim 13
Weaver The method of claim 1. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the subterranean formation or well comprises a low permeability formation having a permeability of 0.01 mD to 0.1 mD.
Hinkel teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 015 & 0017 →Hinkel teaches this limitation in that the underground formation is a low-permeability formation with a reservoir matrix permeability of less than 0.1 mD. A method for enhancing hydrocarbon recovery from a low-permeability formation is provided. A treating fluid is caused to contact the underground formation such that the treating fluid is imbibed by the formation, thereby increasing hydrocarbon recovery, wherein the treating fluid is selected based at least in part on the determination of the receding contact angle of the treating fluid on the underground formation.) for the purpose of determining a characteristic of an underground formation [010]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver, with the above limitation, as taught by Hinkel, in order to determine a characteristic of an underground formation.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11-12, and 14-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Weaver and further in view of Hill et al. (US 2019/0169492 A1) ("Hill" herein – cited previously).
Claim 1
Weaver discloses a method of treating a subterranean formation, the method comprising:
introducing a treatment fluid into a subterranean formation or well, wherein the treatment fluid comprises: [0028]
(a) surface-modified silica nanoparticles having a surface modified with an alkoxysilane, [0069-0071, 0093]
(b) a stability component, the stability component comprising a sulfate, a chloride, a carbonate, or an oxide salt of aluminum, titanium, or zirconium, [0061]
(c) a surfactant composition [0059] and
d) a solvent. [0096-0099]
Weaver does not explicitly disclose the surfactant composition comprising a i) sulfobetaine, ii) a nonionic surfactant comprising an ethoxylated alcohol, and iii) an anionic and wherein the stability component is present in a range of from 0.1 wt.% to 10 wt.% based on total weight of the treatment fluid.
Hill teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0055, 0075, 0082, and 0083→ Hill teaches this limitation in that The term surfactant includes but is not limited to nonionic surfactants, anionic surfactants, cationic surfactants, amphoteric surfactants, zwitterionic surfactants, switchable surfactants, cleavable surfactants, dimeric or gemini surfactants, glucamide surfactants, alkylpolyglycoside surfactants, extended surfactants and combinations thereof. Nonionic surfactants generally do not contain any charges. Suitable anionic surfactants include, but are not necessarily limited to, alkali metal alkyl sulfates, alkyl or alkylaryl sulfonates, linear or branched alkyl ether sulfates and sulfonates, alkyl sulphosuccinates, dialkyl sulphosuccinates alkyl ether sulfates, linear and branched ether sulfates, fatty carboxylates, alkyl sarcosinates, alkyl phosphates and combinations thereof.. In some embodiments, the surfactant is amphoteric or zwitterionic, including sultaines (e.g., cocamidopropyl hydroxysultaine, lauryl sultaine, lauryl sulfobetaine, COCO sultaine, COCO sulfobetaine), betaines (e.g., cocamidopropyl betaine, lauramidopropyl betaine, , and 0083or lauryl betaine, COCO betaine), or phosphates (e.g., lecithin). the nonionic surfactant may be one or more of an ethoxylated castor oil, an ethoxylated alcohol, an ethoxylated tristyrylphenol, or an ethoxylated sorbitan ester, or combinations thereof..) for the purpose of stimulating the production of hydrocarbons (e.g., formation crude oil and/or formation gas) from subterranean formations. [0002]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver with the above limitation, as taught by Hill, in order to stimulating the production of hydrocarbons (e.g., formation crude oil and/or formation gas) from subterranean formations.
Su teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0023 & 0036 → Su teaches this limitation in that In further an embodiment, said production well treating fluid of the present invention may contain further an electrical stabilizing agent with a content of 0.1-15% by weight. In the production well treating fluid of the present invention, said electrical stabilizing agent is preferably at least one selected from the group consisting of an inorganic salt of iron or aluminum, such as iron chloride, aluminum chloride, ferric sulfate, aluminum sulfate, hydroxylammonium and organic cationic etherifying agent.) for the purpose of stabilizing agent. [0036]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver, as taught by Su, in order to have a stabilize agent. [0036]
Since Weaver teaches the same treatment for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery comprising nanoparticle silica having a silane compound such alkoxylate, aluminum or titanium zirconium, an sulfobetaine, an anionic surfactant such as ethoxylated alcohol, and nonionic surfactant, sulfobetaine, it will be a surface- modified nanoparticles, a stability component , and a surfactant composition.
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties". A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.07 (I), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp V Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp V DF Newtield Co, 7F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY 1934).
Claim 2
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: recovering a hydrocarbon from the subterranean formation or well. [0028]
Claim 3
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, wherein' the alkoxysilane comprises 3- glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropyimethyidimethoxysilane, 3- glycidoxypropylmethyidiethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropyltriethoxysilane, 2-(3,4- epoxycyclohexyl)propyltrimethoxysilane, 2-(3,4-epoxycyclohexyl)propyltriethoxysilane, 2- (3,4-epoxycyclohexylethyltrimethoxysilane, 2-(3,4- epoxycyclohexylethyltriethoxysilane, 2- (3,4-epoxycyclohexyl)methyltrimethoxysilane, 2- (3,4- epoxycyclohexyl)methyltriethoxysilane, [(3-ethyl-3- oxethanyl)methoxy]propyltrimethoxysilane, [(3-ethyl-3- oxethanyl)methoxy]propyltriethoxysilane, or combinations thereof. [0069-0071, 0093]
Claim 5- 6 & 21
Weaver discloses the claimed invention except for a ratio of the alkoxysilane to silica nanoparticles in the surface-modified silica nanoparticles is in a range from 0.01:15 to 0.1: 5. A ratio of the alkoxysilane to surface -modified silica nanoparticles to the surfactant composition is 1:1 to 1:20.. It would have been obvious to one having
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to have the ratio of the alkoxysilane to silica nanoparticles in the surface-modified silica nanoparticles the range from 0.01:15 to 0.1: 5 and the ratio of the alkoxysilane to surface -modified silica nanoparticles to the surfactant composition is 1:1 to 1:20, since it has been held that [W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 7
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1. Weaver does not explicitly disclose, wherein the sulfobetaine comprises one or more of 3-(C10-C16)-alkyldimethylammonio)-2- hydroxypropanesulfonate, C10- 16-alkyl(2-hydroxy-3-sulfopropyl)dimethy. betaine, and cocoamidopropyl hydroxysultaine. (Same as claim 1)
Claim 8
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the nonionic surfactant further comprises one or more of ethoxylated castor oil, dimethyl-lauryl-amine, C10-16 alkyl dimethylamines, and alkoxylated ethylenediamine,. (Same as Claim 1)
Claims 9 and 22
Weaver discloses the method of claims 1 and 17. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose wherein the surfactant composition further comprises an anionic surfactant comprises sulfosuccinate (Same as claim 1)
Claim 10
Weaver discloses the treatment fluid of claim 1. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the stability component is aluminum sulfate. (See claim 1)
Claim 11
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the solvent is selected from a water source and a coupling agent. [0049, 0095-0096]
Claim 12
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the solvent comprises a water source, and wherein the water source from 0 wt. % to 35 wt. % total dissolved solids, a temperature in a range of from 60° C to 250° C or both, wherein the coupling agent comprise a glycerol. [0049, 0095-0096]
It is elementary that a mere recitation of a newly discovered function or property, possessed by things in the prior art, does not cause a claim to distinguish over the prior art. Additionally, where the Patent Office has reason to believe that a functional limitation asserted to be critical for establishing novelty in the claimed subject matter, may in fact, be a characteristic of the prior art, it possess the authority to require the applicant to prove that the subject matter shown to be in the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied on. In re Swinehart, 169 USPQ 226 (CCPA 1971).
Claims 14-15
Since Weaver teaches the same treatment for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery comprising nanoparticle silica having a silane compound such alkoxysilane, aluminum or titanium zirconium, a surfactant composition, it will have the treatment fluid contacting
a solid surface of the subterranean formation or well, and a contact angle of water on
the solid surface is altered by at least 10°, and changes the subterranean formation
from oil wettable to water wettable..
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive
properties". A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the
prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and
/or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01 (I), in re Best, 562 F2d at 1255,
195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp V Banner, 778 Fed 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed
Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam
Wareen Corp V DF Newtield Co, 7 F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY 1934).
Claim 16
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the subterranean formation or well
comprises a shale formation, a secondary well, or a tertiary well. [0024, 0038-0039]
Claim 17
Weaver discloses a treatment fluid for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery comprising:
surface-modified silica nanoparticles having a surface modified with an
alkoxysilane; [0069-0071]
a stability component, the stability component comprising a sulfate, a chloride, a
carbonate, or an oxide salt of aluminum, titanium, or zirconium; [0061]
a surfactant composition; [0059] and
a solvent. [0096-0099]
Weaver does not explicitly disclose the surfactant composition comprising a i) sulfobetaine, ii) a nonionic surfactant comprising an ethoxylated alcohol, and iii) an anionic and wherein the stability component is present in a range of from 0.1 wt.% to 10 wt.% based on total weight of the treatment fluid.
Zelenev teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0121, 0139, 0146, 0148 Zelenev teaches this limitation in that The term surfactant includes but is not limited to nonionic surfactants, anionic surfactants, cationic surfactants, amphoteric surfactants, zwitterionic surfactants, switchable surfactants, cleavable surfactants, dimeric or gemini surfactants, glucamide surfactants, alkylpolyglycoside surfactants, extended surfactants containing anonionic spacer arm central extension and an ionic or nonionic polar group, and combinations thereof. Suitable anionic surfactants include, but are not necessarily limited to, alkali metal alkyl sulfates, alkyl or alkylaryl sulfonates, linear or branched alkyl ether sulfates and sulfonates, alkyl sulphosuccinates, dialkyl sulphosuccinates alkyl ether sulfates, linear and branched ether sulfates, fatty carboxylates, alkyl sarcosinates, alkyl phosphates and combinations thereof. The surfactant is laurylamidopropylamine oxide, cocamidopropylamine oxide). In some embodiments, the surfactant is amphoteric or zwitterionic, including sultaines (e.g., cocamidopropy| hydroxysultaine, lauryl sultaine, lauryl sulfobetaine, COCO sultaine, COCO sulfobetaine), betaines (e.g., cocamidopropyl betaine, lauramidopropyl betaine, or lauryl betaine, COCO betaine), the nonionic surfactant may be one or more of an ethoxylated castor oil, an ethoxylated alcohol, an ethoxylated tristyrylphenol, or an ethoxylated sorbitan ester, or combinations thereof.) for the purpose of given the surfactants specific affinity for oil/water-type and water/oil-type interfaces, the affinity helps the surfactants to reduce the free energy of these interfaces and to stabilize the dispersed phase of an emulsion or microemulsion and [0120]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver with the above limitation, as taught by Zelenev, in order to reduce the free energy of these interfaces and to stabilize the dispersed phase of an emulsion or microemulsion
Hill teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0055, 0075, 0082, and 0083→ Hill teaches this limitation in that The term surfactant includes but is not limited to nonionic surfactants, anionic surfactants, cationic surfactants, amphoteric surfactants, zwitterionic surfactants, switchable surfactants, cleavable surfactants, dimeric or gemini surfactants, glucamide surfactants, alkylpolyglycoside surfactants, extended surfactants and combinations thereof. Nonionic surfactants generally do not contain any charges. Suitable anionic surfactants include, but are not necessarily limited to, alkali metal alkyl sulfates, alkyl or alkylaryl sulfonates, linear or branched alkyl ether sulfates and sulfonates, alkyl sulphosuccinates, dialkyl sulphosuccinates alkyl ether sulfates, linear and branched ether sulfates, fatty carboxylates, alkyl sarcosinates, alkyl phosphates and combinations thereof.. In some embodiments, the surfactant is amphoteric or zwitterionic, including sultaines (e.g., cocamidopropyl hydroxysultaine, lauryl sultaine, lauryl sulfobetaine, COCO sultaine, COCO sulfobetaine), betaines (e.g., cocamidopropyl betaine, lauramidopropyl betaine, , and 0083or lauryl betaine, COCO betaine), or phosphates (e.g., lecithin). the nonionic surfactant may be one or more of an ethoxylated castor oil, an ethoxylated alcohol, an ethoxylated tristyrylphenol, or an ethoxylated sorbitan ester, or combinations thereof..) for the purpose of stimulating the production of hydrocarbons (e.g., formation crude oil and/or formation gas) from subterranean formations. [0002]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver with the above limitation, as taught by Hill, in order to stimulating the production of hydrocarbons (e.g., formation crude oil and/or formation gas) from subterranean formations.
Su teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0023 & 0036 → Su teaches this limitation in that In further an embodiment, said production well treating fluid of the present invention may contain further an electrical stabilizing agent with a content of 0.1-15% by weight. In the production well treating fluid of the present invention, said electrical stabilizing agent is preferably at least one selected from the group consisting of an inorganic salt of iron or aluminum, such as iron chloride, aluminum chloride, ferric sulfate, aluminum sulfate, hydroxylammonium and organic cationic etherifying agent.) for the purpose of stabilizing agent. [0036]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver, as taught by Su, in order to have a stabilize agent. [0036]
Since Weaver teaches the same treatment for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery comprising nanoparticle silica having a silane compound such alkoxylate, aluminum or titanium zirconium, an sulfobetaine, an anionic surfactant such as ethoxylated alcohol, and nonionic surfactant, sulfobetaine, it will be a surface- modified nanoparticles, a stability component , and a surfactant composition.
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties". A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.07 (I), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp V Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp V DF Newtield Co, 7F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY 1934).
Claim 18
Weaver discloses the treatment fluid of claim 17, wherein the alkoxysilane comprises 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropyimethyidimethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropylmethyidiethoxysilane, 3-glycidoxypropyltriethoxysilane, 2-(3,4-
epoxycyclohexyl)propyltrimethoxysilane, 2-(3,4-epoxycyclohexy !)propyltriethoxysilane,
2- (3,4-epoxycyclohexylethyltrimethoxysilane, 2-(3,4-
epoxycyclohexylethyltriethoxysilane, 2- (3,4-epoxycyclohexy!)methyltrimethoxysilane,
3674 2-(3,4- epoxycyclohexyl)methyltniethoxysilane, [(3-ethyl-3-
oxethanyl)methoxy]propyltrimethoxysilane, [(3-ethyl-3-
oxethanyl)methoxy]propyltriethoxysilane, or combinations thereof. [0069-0071]
Claim 19
Weaver discloses the treatment fluid of claim 17. Weaver does not explicitly disclose,
wherein the sulfobetaine comprises 3-((C 10-C16)-alkyIdimethylammonio)-2-
hydroxypropanesulfonate, C10-16-alkyl(2-hydroxy-3-sulfopropy)dimethy/! betaine,
cocoamidopropyl hydroxysultaine, or combinations thereof; and
wherein the nonionic surfactant further comprises ethoxylated castor oil,
dimethyl-lauryl-amine, C10-16 alkyl dimethylamines, alkoxylated ethylenediamine, or
combinations thereof. (Same as claim 17)
Claim 20
Weaver discloses the treatment fluid of claim 17, wherein the stability component is
aluminum sulfate, and wherein the solvent is selected from a water source, and a coupling agent. [0049, 0095-0096]
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver, Hill, Su, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2007/0202318 A1) ("Smith" herein- cited previously)
Claim 4
Weaver discloses the method of claim 1. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the surface-modified silica nanoparticles comprise a core and a shell, wherein the core comprises a material other than silica and the shell comprises silica.
Smith teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0030, 0051, & 0125 → Smith teaches this limitation in that FIG. 1 is a schematic showing an embodiment of a proppant of the present invention showing a substrate (A) with the coating (B). The substrate (A) may be chosen from a group including, but not limited to, ceramic, natural material, shell, nut, or other materials. The coating (B) can be chosen from a group including, but not limited to, ceramic, ceramic precursor, polymer, resin, or a nanoparticle reinforced polymer or a nanoparticle reinforced resin. In the present invention the proppant can be made from a ceramic, a polymer, or mixture thereof. The proppant can be made from nanoparticles. The proppant can be a composite or combination of ceramic, polymer and other materials. Although not required it is understood that a ceramic may include oxides such as aluminum oxides (alumina) or mixed metal aluminum oxides (aluminates). Another alternative coating material may be the use of silica flour (e.g., with a particle size of from 0.2 µm to 4 µm) that has been derived from the powder milling of silica sand. In addition to silica sand, zircon sand may also be used as a coating material for the template.) for the purpose of providing particles with crush strength and/or buoyancy [0022]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver, with the above limitation, as taught by Smith, in order to provide particles with crush strength and buoyancy.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver, Hill, Su, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hinkel et al. (US 2012/0152548 A1) ("Hinkel' herein- cite previously).
Claim 13
Weaver The method of claim 1. Weaver however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the subterranean formation or well comprises a low permeability formation having a permeability of 0.01 mD to 0.1 mD.
Hinkel teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 015 & 0017 →Hinkel teaches this limitation in that the underground formation is a low-permeability formation with a reservoir matrix permeability of less than 0.1 mD. A method for enhancing hydrocarbon recovery from a low-permeability formation is provided. A treating fluid is caused to contact the underground formation such that the treating fluid is imbibed by the formation, thereby increasing hydrocarbon recovery, wherein the treating fluid is selected based at least in part on the determination of the receding contact angle of the treating fluid on the underground formation.) for the purpose of determining a characteristic of an underground formation [010]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Weaver, with the above limitation, as taught by Hinkel, in order to determine a characteristic of an underground formation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 24 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SILVANA C RUNYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5415. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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, Doug Hutton can be reached at 571-272-4137. 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.
/SILVANA C RUNYAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 02/13/2026