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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1 and 2, in the reply filed on 9 May 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 3-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected Inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office action.
Claim 2 is 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. However, Applicant would likely prefer simply Amending claim 1 as suggested, which would also place claim 2 in condition for allowance.
Claims 3-7 would not qualify for rejoinder as directed to unrelated inventions and thus should be canceled and pursued in a Divisional or the like.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Table 1 in [0069] is almost completely illegible. Applicant may refile Table 1 in a larger form for readability of the small text within the table.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Independent claim 1 recites “A clay swelling inhibitor composition, wherein the composition comprises:
calcium chloride, wherein the calcium chloride is present in the clay swelling inhibitor composition from about 40 wt% to about 60 wt%;
potassium bicarbonate, wherein the potassium bicarbonate is present in the clay swelling inhibitor composition from about 15 wt% to about 25 wt%;
potassium formate, wherein the potassium formate is present in the clay swelling inhibitor composition from about 25 wt% to about 35 wt%; and
additives.”
Just on its face, 60 + 15 + 25 + additives = 100 wt% + additives, i.e. >100 wt% of elements, which is impossible. Accordingly, it is unclear if this actually requires: i) the additives are optional; ii) the maximum amount of CaCl2 is less than 60 wt%; iii) the minimum amount of KHCO3 is less than 15 wt%; or iv) the minimum amount of KHCO2 is less than 25 wt%.
Accordingly, the claim scope is rendered Indefinite. In contrast, claim 2’s ranges only require up to 98 wt% + additives.
For examination purposes, claim 1 will be read as though the additives are optional, e.g.:
“1. (Currently Amended) A clay swelling inhibitor composition, wherein the composition comprises:
calcium chloride, wherein the calcium chloride is present in the clay swelling inhibitor composition from about 40 wt% to about 60 wt%;
potassium bicarbonate, wherein the potassium bicarbonate is present in the clay swelling inhibitor composition from about 15 wt% to about 25 wt%;
potassium formate, wherein the potassium formate is present in the clay swelling inhibitor composition from about 25 wt% to about 35 wt%; and
optionally, additives.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
The reference to Elward-Berry (5,620,947) provides evidence that it is well-known in the art to use salts such as CaCl2, KHCO3, and KHCO2 to inhibit clay swelling, stating “The brine composition for a particular application generally depends on four basic considerations: (1) brine concentration--to prevent clay swelling and dispersion” (1:51-53) and “The composition comprises a saturated brine solution such as potassium chloride, sodium chloride, calcium chloride, sodium sulfate, sodium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate, calcium bromide, sodium bromide, potassium bromide, magnesium bromide, magnesium chloride, potassium carbonate, potassium bicarbonate, potassium formate, cesium formate, cesium chloride, or mixtures thereof; a sized-salt that is insoluble in the saturated brine solution, examples of which include potassium chloride, sodium chloride, calcium chloride, sodium sulfate, sodium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate, calcium bromide, sodium bromide, potassium bromide, magnesium bromide, magnesium chloride, potassium carbonate, potassium bicarbonate, cesium chloride, cesium formate, potassium formate, or mixtures thereof; and a water-soluble filtration additive” (2:58-3:5). However, this reference only provides the salts dissolved up to saturation and the total sized-salt in a range of 20-200 pounds per barrel of brine (3:17-20), which appears would be less than the minimal 80 wt% of salts as claimed.
The reference to Dobson (2014/0034323) discloses “The aqueous (water)-based fluid may be from any source provided that it does not contain compounds that may adversely affect other components in the treatment fluid. The base fluid may comprise a fluid from a natural or synthetic source. In certain exemplary embodiments of the present inventions, an aqueous-based fluid may comprise fresh water or salt water depending upon the particular density of the composition required. The term "salt water" as used herein may include unsaturated salt water or saturated salt water "brine systems", such as a NaCl, or KCl brine, as well as heavy brines including CaCl2, CaBr2, NaBr, KBr, ZnBr2, ZnCl2, ZnBr2/CaBr2, ZnBr2/KBr, sodium formate (NaCO2H), cesium formate (CsCO2H), and potassium formate (KCO2H). The brine systems suitable for use herein may comprise from about 1% to about 75% by weight of an appropriate salt, including about 3 wt. %, about 5 wt. %, about 10 wt. %, about 15 wt. %, about 20 wt. %, about 25 wt. %, about 30 wt. %, about 35 wt. %, about 40 wt. %, about 45 wt. %, about 50 wt. %, about 55 wt. %, about 60 wt. %, about 65 wt. %, about 70 wt. %, and about 75 wt. % salt, without limitation, as well as concentrations falling between any two of these values, such as from about 21 wt. % to about 66 wt. % salt, inclusive” ([0051]). However, this reference fails to teach providing a mixture of CaCl2, KHCO3, and KHCO2 and further this appears to be a maximum amount of 75 wt%, which is less than the minimal 80 wt% of salts as claimed.
The reference to Reyes Bautista (2014/0148366) discloses a solids-free drilling fluid system (abstract) for “inhibiting hydration of any clays present in the productive formation pores” i.e. clay swelling inhibitors ([0002]) wherein “The brines used may be simple or binary brines formed by a salt or mixture of divalent halide salts. Examples of these salts are calcium chloride, calcium bromide, zinc bromide or mixtures thereof and more preferably a binary mixture of calcium chloride and calcium bromide salts. According to the present invention, the titer of these salts may widely vary depending on the density of the wellbore fluid required for controlling the formation pressures. More specifically, the % weight of the salt or salt mixture may be up to 75% weight, and can range from 27 to 41 wt % CaCl2, 1.6 to 30 weight % CaBr2 and from 11 to 52.8 wt % ZnBr2 and more preferably from 1.0 to 37% CaCl2 and 1 to 57% CaBr2” ([0030]). This reference also teaches that, in the Prior Art, “In order to solve the concerns related to damages to the productive formation, fluids formulated based on solids-free heavy brines have been used, which have the advantage of not requiring insoluble solids (such as barite, calcium carbonate, iron oxide, galena, etc.) to increase the density required by high-pressure/high-temperature wells in order to control formation pressures, this type of fluid increases its density by dissolving salts or mixtures thereof (NaCl, KCl, CaCl2, CaBr2, ZnBr2, NaHCO3, NaBr, KHCO3, NaHCO3, NH4Cl, etc.) in water, such that there are no insoluble solids (in suspension) which may, during the drilling of the productive area, invade the formation with the consequent plugging and reduction of the well's permeability and production” ([0006]). However, this reference fails to teach providing a mixture of CaCl2, KHCO3, and KHCO2 especially in the claimed amounts of each.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SUE-AKO whose telephone number is (571)272-9455. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM EST.
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 571-272-24137. 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.
/ANDREW SUE-AKO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674