DETAILED ACTION
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/20/2026 has been entered. 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 Amendment
Applicant's amendments are sufficient to overcome some of the 112(b) rejections but do not appear to be fully responsive to them all, particularly those with independent claim 156, which is unamended. The examiner respectfully reiterates some of them below.
Regarding the prior art, the amendments to claim 135 require a change in mapping with respect to US 5,295,537 (Trainer) but are respectfully held as not being sufficient to overcome Trainer under 35 USC 102 as a whole, as described in detail below.
Claim Objections
Claims 135 & 152 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 135, lines 14 & 15, the phrase "wherein the pump-supplying fluid conductor fluidically coupled to" appears as though it should read "wherein the pump-supplying fluid is conductor fluidically coupled to".
Claim 135, third to last line, the phrase "the structural support member" should read "a structural support member" as this feature does not have antecedent basis earlier in the claim with the amendments of 1/20/2026.
Claim 135, second to last line, the phrase "an upper most edge of the shroud" should read "the upper edge of the shroud", as this feature is now recited previously in the claim per the amendments filed 1/20/2026.
Claim 152, the phrase "a top edge of the shroud" should read "the upper edge of the shroud", as this feature is now recited in parent claim 125 with the amendments of 1/20/2026.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 135, 145, 146, & 149-159 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 135 recites "a downwardly-flow conducting flow conductor, defined within the collector space". As previously discussed, this appears to be an abstract sub-space within the "collection space", confirmed by Applicant in the present remarks. However, this doesn't change the present claim language which apparently requires a distinct "conductor" structure. However this should simply be recited in plain language in the claim rather than improperly imported through remarks. In light of the specification, the "flow receiving communicator" appears to be the same identical structure as the "downwardly-conductor flow conductor": element 408. There is no additional "conductor" structure; just downward fluid flow through element 408. Put another way, what is structurally different from claim 135 as currently worded as opposed to simply reciting "a flow receiving communicator defined within the collector space by an upper edge of the shroud" and "a pump-supplying fluid connector… in fluid communication with the flow receiving communicator", or "a flow receiving communicator for a downwardly flowing gas-depleted reservoir fluid", for example? Applicant's attempt to divide a volume into abstract sub-volumes (so-to-speak) muddies the metes and bounds of the structural requirements of the claim, and recite a "conductor" structure that is not present. The "shroud", the "flow receiving communicator", and the "downwardly-conducting flow conductor" are all the same structure as-disclosed.
Claim 135, in line 14, recites the phrase "the downwardly-conducting flow passage". It is unclear how or if this differs from the "shroud", the "flow receiving communicator" and/or the "downwardly-conducting flow conductor" previously recited.
Claims 145, 146, 151-155 depend from claim 135.
Claims 149 and 150 depend from claim 147, which is canceled. For the purposes of examination, claims 149 & 150 are interpreted as though they depend from claim 135. The examiner notes that if both claims 149 & 150 depend from claim 135, they will be redundant.
Claim 151 recites "The flow diverter as claimed in claim 135; wherein: the emplacement of the flow-receiving communicator, in an uphole-facing direction, is an emplacement of the flow-receiving communicator, in an upwardly-facing direction".
This redundant phrasing does not appear to apply any additional limitation on parent claim 135. It is unclear how or if claim 151 further limits parent claim 135. What does claim 135 allow that claim 151 excludes? Claims 152-154 depend from claim 151.
Claim 152 recites "a top edge of the shroud". It is unclear how or if this differs from the "upper most edge of the shroud" now recited in parent claim 135.
Claim 154 recites "[t]he flow diverter as claimed in claim 153; wherein: the structural support member is also connected to the pump-supplying fluid conductor". Parent claim 153 already recites "[t]he flow diverter as claimed in claim 152; wherein: the structural support member is also connected to the pump-supplying fluid conductor."
It is unclear how or if claim 154 further limits parent claim 153 when they are identical other than claim dependency.
Claim 156 is held as indefinite for several reasons. First, the claim recites "A flow diverter, configured for emplacement within a wellbore string passage", which is clearly a recitation of intended use and an attempt to not positively require the "wellbore string passage" and the wellbore as a whole. This is not improper per se. However, the claim subsequently recites numerous features which only have meaning when the "flow diverter" is in combination with / "emplaced within the wellbore string passage". See the limitations of claim 156 following the "a plurality of braces; wherein…" on page 6 of the as-filed amendments. In other words, Applicant is attempting to simultaneously not require the wellbore in the preamble and require all the "zones", orientation, and flow directions that only have meaning when viewed in combination with the wellbore in the body. This then begs the question: Is the wellbore required or not? In Applicant's attempt to broaden the claim preamble with "configure for emplacement within a wellbore string passage", while simultaneously attempting define the invention with respect to that same "wellbore string passage", they confuse the metes and bounds of the claim. For the purposes of examination, the examiner view the "wellbore string passage" as being a positive structural requirement of the claim, otherwise a large portion of the claim has no clear meaning.
Claim 156, similar to claim 135 above, recites "a flow receiving communicator", "a shroud that defines a collector space", and "a downwardly-conducting flow conductor". However, all of these features appear to just be the "shroud 424" and the volume it defines, the "flow receiving communicator" being the upper open end of shroud 424, and the "downwardly-conducting flow conductor" being the "collector space" as the volume defined by the shroud. The claim recites these as distinct, separate elements that, in light of the specification, appear to be just a single element and the volume defined therein.
Claim 156 recites "the pump-supplying fluid conductor is configured for to a pump for motivating". There appears to be a typo in here, presumably in the "configured for to a pump" portion, but the examiner is unsure of Applicant's intended phrasing.
Claim 156 recites "hydrocarbon material", "reservoir fluid", "flow of reservoir fluid", and "the reservoir fluid flow". All of these appear to be the same fluid, but are recited with shifting, inconsistent nomenclature. Consistent naming conventions should be used through any given claim set. Claims 157-159 depend from claim 156.
Claim 157 recites "the structural support member is fastened to the structural support member also is also fastened to the pump-supplying fluid conductor". There is a clearly a typo in this phrase but the examiner is unsure of Applicant's intended phrasing.
Claim 157 also recites "the brace is fastened to a respective portion of the structural support member and is also fastened to a counterpart portion of the pump-supplying fluid conductor". But parent claim 156 already recites "the brace connects a respective portion of the structural support member to a counterpart portion of the pump-supplying fluid conductor". It is unclear how or if the recitation in claim 157 further limits parent claim 156, when it simply changed "connects… to" to "fastened to" and redundantly recites "a respective portion" and "a counterpart portion". Consistent antecedent terminology should be used through any given claim set.
Claim 158 depends from claim 157.
Claims 158 & 159 recite "each one of the braces, independently, is a gusset brace". These is merely a change in nomenclature and the examiner is unclear how or if it further limits parent claim 157. In other words, what does "a gusset brace" clearly and definitely require that is different than "a brace"?
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 154 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 154 depends from claim 153, but recites identical limitations to those already in claim 153. Therefore claim 154 does not further limit parent claim 153 and is improper under 112(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 135, 145, 146, & 149-154 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 5,295,537 (Trainer). In light of the 112(b) rejections described above, the respective limitations have been interpreted as best able.
Independent claim 135. Trainer discloses a flow diverter (fig 1) emplaced within a wellbore string passage of a wellbores string that is lining a wellbore (col 1:5-46 & "casing 10), for producing hydrocarbon material from a subterranean formation (ibid), comprising:
a collector (fig 1, generally defined by elements 15-18, which collects "sand 19" therein) including:
a shroud ("casing 17" - fig 1) that defines a collector space (volume therein);
a flow receiving communicator that is defined by an upper edge of the shroud (upper end of 17, which is clearly shown in fig 1 as having fluid flowing downwardly past the upper edge of 17);
a downwardly-conducting flow conductor, defined within the collector space (can be drawn in several ways: First, this feature can be the volume in the shroud defined by "casing 17" in any of figs 1-3 in the same manner as the present case and described in the 112(b) rejections above. Second, this feature can be the "conic-shaped sand director 20". Third, it could be "jet tube 25" in fig 3. All are "defined within the collector space" as defined above), and disposed in flow communication with the flow receiving communicator (clearly shown by the flowlines in figs 1-3);
a pump-supplying fluid conductor ("tubing 11" - figs 1-3), extending from the collector space (ibid), and disposed in flow communication with the downwardly-conducting flow passage (clearly shown by the flowlines in figs 1-3), wherein the pump-supplying fluid conductor [is] fluidically coupled to a pump suction of a pump ("tubing 11 carries a pump 12 which is intended to draw up liquids from the well" - col 3:31-33) for motivating production of the hydrocarbon material from the subterranean formation (ibid); wherein:
the flow diverter and the wellbore string are co-operatively configured such that, while the flow diverter is emplaced within the wellbore string passage in a separation-effective orientation (figs 1-3):
there is established, within the wellbore string passage ("oil well casing 10"), a reservoir fluid-receiving zone (area of the "casing 10" below the diverter, as clearly shown by the flow arrows in figs 1 & 3; ¶ bridging cols 3 & 4), a reservoir fluid-conducting passage disposed between the shroud and the wellbore string (reservoir fluid is clearly shown flowing upward from below the diverter and then to an annular space between 17 & 10: figs 1 & 3), and a separation zone disposed above the collector ("In pumping fluids from oil well casing 10, gasses, indicated by the double arrows, and liquids, indicated by the single arrows, pass upwards in oil well casing 10 until they reach the top of gas separator casing 16. At this point the liquids, and any particulate matter which they may be carrying, tend to overflow into gas separator casing 16. The gasses tend to continue up oil well casing 10" - ¶ bridging cols 3 & 4. This is above 17);
the flow-receiving communicator is emplaced in an uphole-facing direction (figs 1 & 3);
while flow of reservoir fluid into the reservoir fluid-receiving zone, from the subterranean formation, is being motivated by the pump ("tubing 11 carries a pump 12 which is intended to draw up liquids from the well" - col 3:31-33), the flow of reservoir fluid is conducted upwardly from the reservoir fluid-receiving zone (clearly shown by the flowlines in figs 1 & 3), via the reservoir fluid-conducting passage (ibid), such that the reservoir fluid becomes emplaced within the separation zone ("In pumping fluids from oil well casing 10, gasses, indicated by the double arrows, and liquids, indicated by the single arrows, pass upwards in oil well casing 10 until they reach the top of gas separator casing 16. At this point the liquids, and any particulate matter which they may be carrying, tend to overflow into gas separator casing 16. The gasses tend to continue up oil well casing 10" - ¶ bridging cols 3 & 4) and, while the reservoir fluid is emplaced within the separation zone, the reservoir fluid is separated, in response to buoyance forces (A matter of physics. Gas rises, denser liquid and solids fall, as well understood in the art and cited above), into at least a flow of gas-depleted reservoir fluid ("the liquids, and any particulate matter which they may be carrying" - ibid) and a flow of gas-enriched reservoir fluid ("The gasses tend to continue up oil well casing 10" - ibid), and a downwardly flowing gas-depleted reservoir fluid (¶ bridging cols 3 & 4 and clearly shown by the flowlines in figs 1-3) is received by the flow-receiving communicator (figs 1-3 clearly shown the downwardly flowing gas-depleted fluid entering the volume defined by 17), and is conducted downwardly (ibid), by the collector (ibid), within the downwardly-conducting flow conductor (ibid); and
while the gas-depleted reservoir fluid is flowing downwardly within the downwardly-conducting flow conductor (liquid flows downward into the separator simultaneously with the separated gas flowing upward: figs 1-3), the flow of gas-depleted reservoir fluid is diverted by the flow diverter (via 20, 21, & 22 in fig 1; via just 13 in fig 2; via 23 & 25 in fig 3) such that the gas-depleted reservoir fluid is conducted upwardly by the pump-supplying fluid conductor ("The liquids however, having less mass than the particulate materials, will display less inertia and will be drawn upwards through up-orifice 21 into pipe extender 22 to pass through pump 12 and continue on up through tubing 11" - col 4:20-25), for supplying to the pump for pressurizing by the pump for flow to the surface (ibid); and
[a] structural support member ("flange 13" - figs 1-3) is fastened to a connection portion of the shroud (top portion of 17, via 15: fig 1), and the connection portion disposed about an upper most edge of the shroud (flange 13 is about the upper edge of 17: fig 1).
145. The flow diverter as claimed in claim 135; wherein: the structural support member ("flange 13") is also fastened to the pump-supplying fluid conductor (13 is directly fastened to 11: fig 1).
146. The flow diverter as claimed in claim 135; wherein: the structural support member ("flange 13") includes a rigid bar (13 is metal as shown by the cross-hatching - MPEP 608.02, subsection IX - and may reasonably be called a "bar" at the high level of generality currently recited, given 13's radial elongation and support purpose. Further, the "rigid bar" could be drawn to element 22 which is unitary with 13 as shown in fig 1).
149. The flow diverter as claimed in claim [135], wherein: the structural support member ("flange 13") is also fastened to the pump-supplying fluid conductor (13 is directly fastened to 11: fig 1).
150. The flow diverter as claimed in claim [135]; wherein: the structural support member ("flange 13") is also fastened to the pump-supplying fluid conductor (13 is directly fastened to 11: fig 1).
151. The flow diverter as claimed in claim 135; wherein: the emplacement of the flow-receiving communicator, in an uphole-facing direction, is an emplacement of the flow-receiving communicator, in an upwardly-facing direction (figs 1 & 3; see the 112(b) rejections above).
152. The flow diverter as claimed in claim 151; wherein: the connection portion (top of 17: fig 1) is defined about a top edge of the shroud (top of 17 is "a top edge of the shroud").
153. The flow diverter as claimed in claim 152; wherein: the structural support member ("flange 13") is also fastened to the pump-supplying fluid conductor (13 is directly fastened to 11: fig 1).
154. The flow diverter as claimed in claim 153; wherein: the structural support member ("flange 13") is also fastened to the pump-supplying fluid conductor (13 is directly fastened to 11: fig 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
The examiner notes that no prior art rejections are presented for claims 155-159. While this does indicate a level of novelty to the claims (as embodied by dependent claim 155 in combination with parent claim 135), given the relatively substantial 112 rejections above, the examiner is not able to indicate them as allowable at this time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Blake Michener whose telephone number is (571)270-5736. The examiner can normally be reached Approximately 9:00am to 6:00pm CT.
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.
/BLAKE MICHENER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676