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 .
Request for Continued Examination
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/23/2026 has been entered.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gerngross WO2024061722A1.
Gerngross discloses:
16. (Original) A frac fluid pumping assembly, comprising: a first hydraulic cylinder comprising a first cylinder housing 624, a first cylinder rod 616 at least partially disposed within the first cylinder housing, and a first piston 614 coupled to the first cylinder rod and forming a pump side fluid chamber and a plunger side fluid chamber within the first cylinder housing on opposite sides of the first piston [604(1) and 604(2)];a second hydraulic cylinder comprising a second cylinder housing 626, a second cylinder rod 618 at least partially disposed within the second cylinder housing, and a second piston 615 coupled to the second cylinder rod and forming a pump side fluid chamber and a plunger side fluid chamber within the second cylinder housing on opposite sides of the second piston [605(1) and 605(2)]; and a pump 603 configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber within the first cylinder housing, and configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber within the second cylinder housing (see e.g. Fig 6), wherein the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing is in fluid communication with the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing (609 and 610 are connected via line 3 in Fig 6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gerngross WO2024061722A1, or in the alternative, as being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerngross WO2024061722A1 in view of Stephenson US 11761317.
Regarding claims 17-20, Gerngross discloses:
17. (Original) The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 16, wherein the first cylinder rod is coupled to a first plunger that extends into a first fluid end, and wherein the second cylinder rod is coupled to a second plunger that extends into a second fluid end (plungers are read as end portions of 616/618 that extend into 207/407).
18. (Original) The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 16, wherein operating fluid is supplied from the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing into the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing to move the second piston, the second cylinder rod, and the second plunger in a suction stroke to draw fluid into the second fluid end (see e.g. Fig 6 and associated description and MPEP 2114 II).
19. (Original) The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 18, wherein operating fluid is supplied from the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing back into the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing to move the first piston, the first cylinder rod, and the first plunger in a suction stroke to draw fracing fluid into the first fluid end (see e.g. Fig 6 and associated description and MPEP 2114 II).
20. (Original) The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 19, wherein when the first piston, the first cylinder rod, and the first plunger move in the suction stroke, the second piston, the second cylinder rod, and the second plunger move in a discharge stroke to pump fracing fluid out of the second fluid end (see e.g. Fig 6 and associated description and MPEP 2114 II).
In the event the schematic drawing of Gerngross does not sufficiently disclose a plunger and an inherent fluid end, the examiner turns to Stephenson. Stephenson discloses the use of a spacer frame and separate plunger and piston rods wherein the first cylinder rod 238 is coupled to a first plunger (226, 236) that extends into a first fluid end 204, and wherein the second cylinder rod 238 is coupled to a second plunger (226, 236) that extends into a second fluid end 204.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a spacer frame configuration with separable plunger and piston rods as taught by Stephenson in the system of Gerngross to gain the benefit of facilitating maintenance operations as taught by Stephenson in col 6 lines 40-44.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gable US 20190330923 in view of Stephenson US 11761317 in further view of Vasquez US 11248599.
Gable discloses:
1. A frac fluid pumping assembly, comprising: a first pair of hydraulic cylinders (any pair of hydraulic cylinders 42 in e.g. Fig 5) each having a cylinder rod 66 extending at least partially from the first pair of hydraulic cylinders (see e.g. Fig 7); a first pair of spacer spools (any pair of spacer spools 46 in e.g. Fig 5); and a fluid end assembly having a pair of fluid ends (any pair of fluid ends 126) coupled to the first pair of spacer spools (see e.g. Fig 7), wherein a plunger 50 of each fluid end is coupled to one of the cylinder rods 66 of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders (see e.g. Fig 7).
It appears Gable discloses a first spacer frame coupled at one end to the first pair of hydraulic cylinders and at an opposite end to the first pair of spacer spools (see e.g. annotated Figs 5 and 7 herein).
In any event, Stephenson discloses a first spacer frame 234 coupled at one end to the first pair of hydraulic cylinders 220 and at an opposite end to the first pair of spacer spools 204.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a spacer frame as taught by Stephenson in the system of Gable to gain the benefit of facilitating maintenance operations as taught by Stephenson in col 6 lines 40-44.
Gable discloses wherein the first pair of hydraulic cylinders are mechanically decoupled from each other (see e.g. Figs 7-8), but does not disclose: but are hydraulically coupled to each other.
However, in e.g. Figs 1-2 Vasquez discloses a pump system driven by hydraulic cylinders including a pump 25 configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber (chamber on side of 24 towards 30) within the first cylinder housing (housing of 22A) and configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber (chamber on side of 14 towards 30) within the second cylinder housing (housing of 12A), wherein the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing is in fluid communication with the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing (via 20).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize the hydraulic cylinder drive system configuration of Vasquez in the system of Gable as modified above to gain the benefit of reducing the number of pumps 22 of Gable needed to drive the hydraulic cylinders and/or to alternately drive adjacent hydraulic cylinders as taught by Vasquez in col 2 lines 35-38 e.g. to lessen pulsations by having one pump is in a discharge phase while another is suction phase as taught by Gable in 0046 which incorporates U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 which states in 0067 “maintain precise relative timing of the pump assemblies, such as, for example, to minimize and/or eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well, as described in more detail below.”, and which states in 0068, “the first pump assembly would perform its forward stroke as the second pump assembly performs its return stroke of the same duration.”
Gable as modified above discloses (references to Gable unless noted otherwise):
PNG
media_image1.png
602
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
572
802
media_image2.png
Greyscale
2. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 1, wherein each hydraulic cylinder comprises a cylinder housing 42, the cylinder rod 66 at least partially disposed within the cylinder housing (see e.g. Fig 7), and a piston 86 coupled to the cylinder rod and forming fluid chambers within the cylinder housing (chamber inside 42 on either side of 86).
3. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 2, wherein the first pair of hydraulic cylinders are hydraulically coupled to each other such that an operating fluid is repeatedly pumped from the fluid chamber of one of the hydraulic cylinders into the fluid chamber of the other hydraulic cylinder and then back (see e.g. 20 in Figs 1-2 and col 2 lines 35-38 of Vasquez).
4. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 3, wherein as the operating fluid is pumped out of one of the hydraulic cylinders, the cylinder rod of that hydraulic cylinder is at least partially further extended out of that cylinder housing in a discharge stroke (see e.g. 25 and 20 in Figs 1-2 and col 2 lines 35-38 of Vasquez).
5. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 4, wherein as the operating fluid is pumped into one of the hydraulic cylinders, the cylinder rod of that hydraulic cylinder is at least partially retracted back into the cylinder housing in a suction stroke (see e.g. 25 and 20 in Figs 1-2 and col 2 lines 35-38 of Vasquez).
6. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 5, wherein when the cylinder rod of one of the hydraulic cylinders is moved in a first direction in the discharge stroke, the cylinder rod of the other hydraulic cylinder is moved in an opposite, second direction in the suction stroke (see e.g. 25 and 20 in Figs 1-2 and col 2 lines 35-38 of Vasquez).
7. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 6, wherein each plunger (50 of Gable) is at least partially disposed within one of the spacer spools (46 of Gable) that is coupled to one of the fluid ends (see e.g. Fig 7).
9. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 7, wherein each fluid end comprises a suction valve assembly 58 configured to direct fluid into the fluid end, and a discharge valve assembly 62 configured to direct fluid out of the fluid end.
10. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 9, wherein each fluid end is in fluid communication with a suction manifold 138 and a discharge manifold 142.
11. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 1, wherein the frac fluid pumping assembly further comprises a second pair of hydraulic cylinders that are mechanically decoupled from each other but are hydraulically coupled to each other (See e.g. Fig 5 wherein there are multiple pairs of cylinders which would all be modified as per the rejection of claim 1. Additionally, the addition of a second pair of hydraulic cylinders that are mechanically decoupled from each other but are hydraulically coupled to each other is merely a duplication of parts. It has held that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04. VI. B).
12. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 11, wherein the frac fluid pumping assembly further comprises a third pair of hydraulic cylinders that are mechanically decoupled from each other but are hydraulically coupled to each other (See e.g. Fig 5 wherein there are multiple pairs of cylinders which would all be modified as per the rejection of claim 1. Additionally, the addition of a third pair of hydraulic cylinders that are mechanically decoupled from each other but are hydraulically coupled to each other is merely a duplication of parts. It has held that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04. VI. B).
13. A pump system, comprising: a power system 18; a drive system 26; and the frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1).
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerngross WO2024061722A1 in view of Stephenson US 11761317.
Gable discloses:
1. A frac fluid pumping assembly, comprising: a first pair of hydraulic cylinders (624, 626) each having a cylinder rod (616, 618) extending at least partially from the first pair of hydraulic cylinders (see e.g. Fig 6), wherein the first pair of hydraulic cylinders are mechanically decoupled from each other (see e.g. Fig 6) but are hydraulically coupled to each other (see the connection of 609 and 610 via line 3 as in Fig 6); a first pair of spacer spools (207, 407).
In e.g. Fig 6, Gerngross does show the cylinder housings 624, 626 axially spaced apart from the spacer spools 207, 407 and it would be understood that the pumps would have fluid ends incorporating inherent vales, etc. but Gerngross uses a schematic illustration and thus does not provide details including a first spacer frame coupled at one end to the first pair of hydraulic cylinders and at an opposite end to the first pair of spacer spools; and a fluid end assembly having a pair of fluid ends coupled to the first pair of spacer spools, wherein a plunger of each fluid end is coupled to one of the cylinder rods of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders.
Stephenson discloses a first spacer frame 234 coupled at one end to the first pair of hydraulic cylinders 220 and at an opposite end to the first pair of spacer spools 204; and a fluid end assembly having a pair of fluid ends (comprising elements 208-216) coupled to the first pair of spacer spools, wherein a plunger (226, 236) of each fluid end is coupled to one of the cylinder rods 238 of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a spacer frame configuration with separable plunger and piston rods and a fluid end as taught by Stephenson in the system of Gerngross to gain the benefit of facilitating maintenance operations as taught by Stephenson in col 6 lines 40-44, and providing the inherent valving and distribution components for the piston pump.
Gerngross as modified above discloses (references to Gerngross unless noted otherwise):
2. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 1, wherein each hydraulic cylinder comprises a cylinder housing (224, 226), the cylinder rod (616, 618) at least partially disposed within the cylinder housing (see e.g. Fig 6), and a piston (614, 616) coupled to the cylinder rod and forming fluid chambers within the cylinder housing [604(1) 604(2); 605(1) 605(2) ].
3. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 2, wherein the first pair of hydraulic cylinders are hydraulically coupled to each other such that an operating fluid is repeatedly pumped from the fluid chamber of one of the hydraulic cylinders into the fluid chamber of the other hydraulic cylinder and then back (see e.g. 3 in Fig 6 and associated description and MPEP 2114 II).
4. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 3, wherein as the operating fluid is pumped out of one of the hydraulic cylinders, the cylinder rod of that hydraulic cylinder is at least partially further extended out of that cylinder housing in a discharge stroke (see e.g. 3 in Fig 6 and associated description and MPEP 2114 II).
5. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 4, wherein as the operating fluid is pumped into one of the hydraulic cylinders, the cylinder rod of that hydraulic cylinder is at least partially retracted back into the cylinder housing in a suction stroke (see e.g. 3 in Fig 6 and associated description and MPEP 2114 II).
6. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 5, wherein when the cylinder rod of one of the hydraulic cylinders is moved in a first direction in the discharge stroke, the cylinder rod of the other hydraulic cylinder is moved in an opposite, second direction in the suction stroke (see e.g. 3 in Fig 6 and associated description and MPEP 2114 II).
7. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 6, wherein each plunger (226, 236 of Stephenson) is at least partially disposed within one of the spacer spools (204 of Stephenson) that is coupled to one of the fluid ends 208-216 of Stephenson).
9. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 7, wherein each fluid end comprises a suction valve assembly (210 of Stephenson) configured to direct fluid into the fluid end, and a discharge valve assembly (212 od Stephenson) configured to direct fluid out of the fluid end.
10. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 9, wherein each fluid end is in fluid communication with a suction manifold (216 Stephenson) and a discharge manifold (214 of Stephenson).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gable US 20190330923 in view of Stephenson US 11761317 in further view of Vasquez US 11248599 in further view of Kumar WO2021178455.
Regarding claim 8, Gable as modified above discloses:
8. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 7, wherein a length of each cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow each plunger to be fully retracted from each spacer spool (see Stephenson wherein a length of each cylinder housing 220 is dimensioned to allow each plunger 236 to be fully retracted from each spacer spool 234 as in Fig 2A).
In the event that Stephenson was found to be lacking in some manner, the examiner could turn to Kumar which discloses a spacer frame coupled to a cylinder housing and coupled to a spacer spool, wherein a cylinder rod is coupled to a plunger that extends through the spacer spool into a fluid end, and wherein the length of the cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow plunger to be fully retracted from the spacer spool (see annotated Fig 2 herein).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to dimension the cylinder housings and plungers of Gerngross as modified above to allow each plunger to extend into the fluid end and to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool to gain the benefit of reducing dead space in the fluid end and facilitating inspection and/or maintenance of the spacer spool.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerngross WO2024061722A1 in view of Stephenson US 11761317 in further view of Kumar WO2021178455.
Regarding claim 8, Gerngross as modified above discloses wherein a length of each cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow each plunger to be fully retracted from each spacer spool (see Stephenson wherein a length of each cylinder housing 220 is dimensioned to allow each plunger 236 to be fully retracted from each spacer spool 234 as in Fig 2A, and see annotated Fig 2 of Kumar herein).
In the event that Stephenson was found to be lacking in some manner, the examiner could turn to Kumar which discloses a spacer frame coupled to a cylinder housing and coupled to a spacer spool, wherein a cylinder rod is coupled to a plunger that extends through the spacer spool into a fluid end, and wherein the length of the cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow plunger to be fully retracted from the spacer spool (see annotated Fig 2 herein).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to dimension the cylinder housings and plungers of Gerngross as modified above to allow each plunger to extend into the fluid end and to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool to gain the benefit of reducing dead space in the fluid end and facilitating inspection and/or maintenance of the spacer spool.
Claim(s) 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerngross WO2024061722A1 in view of Stephenson US 11761317 in further view of Gable US 20190330923.
Regarding claims 11-12, Gerngross does not disclose the use of additional pairs (second and third pairs) of hydraulic pumping assemblies and thus does not specifically disclose the limitations of claims 11-12. However, Gable discloses the use of two additional pairs of hydraulic pumping assemblies for a total of 6 (see e.g. Fig 5 and 0048 which incorporates U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 including 0069). Additionally, the addition of a second pair and a third pair of hydraulic cylinders that are mechanically decoupled from each other but are hydraulically coupled to each other is merely a duplication of parts. It has held that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04. VI. B.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use second and third pairs of hydraulic pump assemblies as taught by Gable in the system of Gerngross as modified above to gain the benefit of increasing pumping capacity.
Regarding claim 13, Gerngross as modified above in claim 1 discloses:
13. A pump system, comprising: the frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1). Gerngross discloses a pump 613 as the energy source (see e.g. 0020) wherein the pump would read on a drive system and whatever inherently powers the pump would be the power system. In any event, Gable discloses: a power system 18; a drive system 26.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use a power system and a drive system as taught by Gable in the system of Gerngross as modified above to gain the benefit of powering and driving the pump assemblies.
14. (Original) The pump system of claim 13, wherein the drive system comprises one or more pumps (603 of Gerngross, 22 of Gable) and one or more pump manifolds configured to direct the operating fluid between the pairs of hydraulic cylinders that are hydraulically coupled to each other (see 214 and 216 of Stephenson).
15. (Original) The pump system of claim 14, wherein the power system is configured to power the one or more pumps (see e.g. 603 of Gerngross which inherently requires a power source to operate, and see 18 of Gable).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gable US 20190330923 in view of Stephenson US 11761317 in further view of Vasquez US 11248599 in further view of Van Zandt US 4462764.
Regarding claim 14, Gable as modified above discloses:
14. The pump system of claim 13, wherein the drive system comprises one or more pumps 22 configured to direct the operating fluid between the pairs of hydraulic cylinders that are hydraulically coupled to each other (see Figs 1-2 of Vasquez). Gable as modified above does not disclose and one or more pump manifolds. Van Zandt discloses the use of one of more manifolds (see e.g. 92 in Fig 3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a manifold as taught by Van Zandt in the system of Gable as modified above to gain the benefit of cooling the hydraulic fluid as taught by Van Zandt in col 5 lines 58-64.
Gable as modified above discloses (references to Gable unless noted otherwise):
15. The pump system of claim 14, wherein the power system 18 is configured to power the one or more pumps.
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gable US 20190330923 in view of Vasquez US 11248599.
Gable discloses:
16. A frac fluid pumping assembly, comprising: a first hydraulic cylinder comprising a first cylinder housing 42, a first cylinder rod 66 at least partially disposed within the first cylinder housing, and a first piston 86 coupled to the first cylinder rod and forming a pump side fluid chamber (chamber inside 42 adjacent to 70 in Fig 7) and a plunger side fluid chamber (chamber inside 42 adjacent to 90 in Fig 7) within the first cylinder housing on opposite sides of the first piston (see e.g. Fig 7); a second hydraulic cylinder comprising a second cylinder housing, a second cylinder rod at least partially disposed within the second cylinder housing, and a second piston coupled to the second cylinder rod and forming a pump side fluid chamber and a plunger side fluid chamber within the second cylinder housing on opposite sides of the second piston (see e.g. Fig 5 wherein there are a plurality of hydraulic cylinders 42); and a pump 22 configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber within the first cylinder housing (see e.g. Fig 8).
Gable does not disclose and configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber within the second cylinder housing, wherein the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing is in fluid communication with the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing.
However, in e.g. Figs 1-2 Vasquez discloses a pump system driven by hydraulic cylinders including a pump 25 configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber (chamber on side of 24 towards 30) within the first cylinder housing (housing of 22A) and configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber (chamber on side of 14 towards 30) within the second cylinder housing (housing of 12A), wherein the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing is in fluid communication with the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing (via 20).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize the hydraulic cylinder drive system configuration of Vasquez in the system of Gable to gain the benefit of to gain the benefit of reducing the number of pumps 22 of Gable needed to drive the hydraulic cylinders and/or to alternately drive adjacent hydraulic cylinders as taught by Vasquez in col 2 lines 35-38 e.g. to lessen pulsations by having one pump is in a discharge phase while another is suction phase as taught by Gable in 0046 which incorporates U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 which states in 0067 “maintain precise relative timing of the pump assemblies, such as, for example, to minimize and/or eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well, as described in more detail below.”, and which states in 0068, “the first pump assembly would perform its forward stroke as the second pump assembly performs its return stroke of the same duration.”
Gable as modified above discloses (references to Gable unless noted otherwise):
17. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 16, wherein the first cylinder rod 66 is coupled to a first plunger 50 that extends into a first fluid end 46, and wherein the second cylinder rod is coupled to a second plunger that extends into a second fluid end (see e.g. Fig 5 wherein there are a plurality of hydraulic cylinders 66 and fluid ends 46).
18. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 17, wherein operating fluid is supplied from the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing into the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing to move the second piston, the second cylinder rod, and the second plunger in a suction stroke to draw fluid into the second fluid end (see e.g. 25 and 20 in Figs 1-2 and col 2 lines 35-38 of Vasquez).
19. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 18, wherein operating fluid is supplied from the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing back into the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing to move the first piston, the first cylinder rod, and the first plunger in a suction stroke to draw fracing fluid into the first fluid end (see e.g. 25 and 20 in Figs 1-2 and col 2 lines 35-38 of Vasquez).
20. The frac fluid pumping assembly of claim 19, wherein when the first piston, the first cylinder rod, and the first plunger move in the suction stroke, the second piston, the second cylinder rod, and the second plunger move in a discharge stroke to pump fracing fluid out of the second fluid end (see e.g. 25 and 20 in Figs 1-2 and col 2 lines 35-38 of Vasquez).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gable US 20190330923 in view of Vasquez US 11248599 in further view of Stephenson US 11761317 in further view of Kumar WO2021178455.
Gable discloses:
21. (New) A frac fluid pumping assembly, comprising: a first pair of hydraulic cylinders (any pair of hydraulic cylinders 42 in e.g. Fig 5), each hydraulic cylinder comprising: a cylinder housing 42; and a cylinder rod 66 extending at least partially from the cylinder housing, a first pair of spacer spools each spacer spool aligned with a corresponding hydraulic cylinder of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders (any pair of spacer spools 46 in e.g. Fig 5 corresponding to the pair of hydraulic cylinders 42 above); and a fluid end assembly having a pair of fluid ends (any pair of fluid ends 126 corresponding to the spacer spools above) coupled to the first pair of spacer spools (see e.g. Fig 7), wherein a plunger 50 of each fluid end is coupled to a corresponding one of the cylinder rods (see e.g. Fig 7).
Gable discloses wherein the first pair of hydraulic cylinders are mechanically decoupled from each other (see e.g. Figs 7-8), but does not disclose: but are hydraulically coupled to each other.
However, in e.g. Figs 1-2 Vasquez discloses a pump system driven by hydraulic cylinders including a pump 25 configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber (chamber on side of 24 towards 30) within the first cylinder housing (housing of 22A) and configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber (chamber on side of 14 towards 30) within the second cylinder housing (housing of 12A), wherein the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing is in fluid communication with the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing (via 20).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize the hydraulic cylinder drive system configuration of Vasquez in the system of Gable as modified above to gain the benefit of reducing the number of pumps 22 of Gable needed to drive the hydraulic cylinders and/or to alternately drive adjacent hydraulic cylinders as taught by Vasquez in col 2 lines 35-38 e.g. to lessen pulsations by having one pump is in a discharge phase while another is suction phase as taught by Gable in 0046 which incorporates U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 which states in 0067 “maintain precise relative timing of the pump assemblies, such as, for example, to minimize and/or eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well, as described in more detail below.”, and which states in 0068, “the first pump assembly would perform its forward stroke as the second pump assembly performs its return stroke of the same duration.”
Gable discloses a first spacer frame coupled to each cylinder housing and coupled to the first pair of spacer spools (see e.g. annotated Figs 5 and 7 herein), but does not appear to disclose wherein a length of each cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow each plunger to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders.
In any event, Stephenson discloses a first spacer frame 234 coupled at one end to the first pair of hydraulic cylinders 220 and at an opposite end to the first pair of spacer spools 204.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a spacer frame as taught by Stephenson in the system of Gable to gain the benefit of facilitating maintenance operations as taught by Stephenson in col 6 lines 40-44.
Kumar discloses a first spacer frame connecting a cylinder housing and a spacer spool and wherein a length of each cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow each plunger to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders (see annotated Fig 2 herein). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to dimension the cylinder housings of Gable as modified above to allow each plunger to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool to gain the benefit of facilitating inspection and/or maintenance of the spacer spool.
PNG
media_image3.png
570
708
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerngross WO2024061722A1 in view Stephenson US 11761317 in further view of Kumar WO2021178455.
Gerngross discloses:
21. (New) A frac fluid pumping assembly, comprising: a first pair of hydraulic cylinders, each hydraulic cylinder comprising: a cylinder housing (624, 626); and a cylinder rod (616, 618) extending at least partially from the cylinder housing, wherein the first pair of hydraulic cylinders are mechanically decoupled from each other (see e.g. Fig 6) but are hydraulically coupled to each other (609 and 610 are hydraulically coupled via line 3); a first pair of spacer spools (207, 407) each spacer spool aligned with a corresponding hydraulic cylinder of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders (see e.g. Fig 6).
In e.g. Fig 6, Gerngross does show the cylinder housings 624, 626 axially spaced apart from the spacer spools 207, 407 and it would be understood that the pumps would include a fluid ends to incorporate the inherent valves, etc. but Gerngross uses a schematic illustration and thus does not provide details including a first spacer frame coupled to each cylinder housing and coupled to the first pair of spacer spools; and a fluid end assembly having a pair of fluid ends coupled to the first pair of spacer spools, wherein a plunger of each fluid end is coupled to a corresponding one of the cylinder rods, and wherein a length of each cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow each plunger to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders.
Stephenson discloses a first spacer frame 234 coupled to each cylinder housing 220 and coupled to the first pair of spacer spools 204; and a fluid end assembly (comprising elements 208-216) having a pair of fluid ends coupled to the first pair of spacer spools, wherein a plunger (226, 236) of each fluid end is coupled to a corresponding one of the cylinder rods 238, and wherein a length of each cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow each plunger to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool of the first pair of hydraulic cylinders (see e.g. Fig 2A wherein the length of 220 would allow 226 to be fully retracted from 204).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a spacer frame configuration with separable plunger and piston rods and a fluid end as taught by Stephenson in the system of Gerngross to gain the benefit of facilitating maintenance operations as taught by Stephenson in col 6 lines 40-44, and providing the inherent valving and distribution components for the piston pump.
In the event that Stephenson was found to be lacking in some manner, the examiner could turn to Kumar which discloses a spacer frame coupled to a cylinder housing and coupled to a spacer spool, wherein a cylinder rod is coupled to a plunger that extends through the spacer spool into a fluid end, and wherein the length of the cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow plunger to be fully retracted from the spacer spool (see annotated Fig 2 herein).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to dimension the cylinder housings and plungers of Gerngross as modified above to allow each plunger to extend into the fluid end and to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool to gain the benefit of reducing dead space in the fluid end and facilitating inspection and/or maintenance of the spacer spool.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerngross WO2024061722A1 in view Stephenson US 11761317 in further view of Kumar WO2021178455.
Gerngross discloses:
22. (New) A frac fluid pumping assembly, comprising: a first hydraulic cylinder comprising: a first cylinder housing 626; a first cylinder rod 618 at least partially disposed within the first cylinder housing; a first piston 615 coupled to the first cylinder rod and forming a pump side fluid chamber 605(1) and a plunger side fluid chamber 605(2) within the first cylinder housing on opposite sides of the first piston; a first spacer spool 407 aligned with the first hydraulic cylinder; and a second hydraulic cylinder comprising: a second cylinder housing 624; a second cylinder rod 616 at least partially disposed within the second cylinder housing; a second piston 614 coupled to the second cylinder rod and forming a pump side fluid chamber 604(1) and a plunger side fluid chamber 604(2) within the second cylinder housing on opposite sides of the second piston; a second spacer spool 207 aligned with the second hydraulic cylinder; and a pump 603 configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber within the first cylinder housing, and configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber within the second cylinder housing, wherein the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing is in fluid communication with the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder housing (the connection of 609 and 610 via line 3 as in Fig 6).
In e.g. Fig 6, Gerngross does show the cylinder housings 624, 626 axially spaced apart from the spacer spools 207, 407 but Gerngross uses a schematic illustration and thus does not provide details including a first spacer frame coupled to the first cylinder housing and coupled to the first spacer spool, wherein the first cylinder rod is coupled to a first plunger that extends through the first spacer spool into a first fluid end; and a second spacer frame coupled to the second cylinder housing and coupled to the second spacer spool, wherein the second cylinder rod is coupled to a second plunger that extends through the second spacer spool into a second fluid end, and wherein lengths of the first and second cylinder housings are dimensioned to allow the first and second plungers to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spools of the first and second hydraulic cylinders.
Stephenson discloses a first spacer frame 234 coupled to the first cylinder housing 220 and coupled to the first spacer spool 204, wherein the first cylinder rod is coupled to a first plunger 226, 236 that extends through the first spacer spool into a first fluid end; and a second spacer frame 234 coupled to the second cylinder housing 220 and coupled to the second spacer spool 204, wherein the second cylinder rod is coupled to a second plunger 226, 236 that extends through the second spacer spool into a second fluid end, and wherein lengths of the first and second cylinder housings are dimensioned to allow the first and second plungers to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spools of the first and second hydraulic cylinders (see e.g. Fig 2A wherein the length of 220 would allow 226 to be fully retracted from 204).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a spacer frame configuration with separable plunger and piston rods as taught by Stephenson in the system of Gerngross to gain the benefit of facilitating maintenance operations as taught by Stephenson in col 6 lines 40-44.
In the event that Stephenson was found to be lacking in some manner, the examiner could turn to Kumar which discloses a spacer frame coupled to a cylinder housing and coupled to a spacer spool, wherein a cylinder rod is coupled to a plunger that extends through the spacer spool into a fluid end, and wherein the length of the cylinder housing is dimensioned to allow plunger to be fully retracted from the spacer spool (see annotated Fig 2 herein).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to dimension the cylinder housings and plungers of Gerngross as modified above to allow each plunger to extend into the fluid end and to be fully retracted from the corresponding spacer spool to gain the benefit of reducing dead space in the fluid end and facilitating inspection and/or maintenance of the spacer spool.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues:
The Examiner acknowledges that Gable does not explicitly disclose the hydraulically coupling as recited in claim 1, but states that "one of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to utilize the hydraulic cylinder drive system configuration of Vasquez in the system of Gable... to gain the benefit of reducing the number of pumps... and/or alternatively drive adjacent hydraulic cylinders" (see Office Action, pg. 4). Applicant respectfully disagrees.
Gable discloses a system where individual hydraulic ram cylinders are driven by dedicated pumps. Specifically, Gable teaches that "each pump 22 can be fluidly coupled to a respective working fluid pump assembly 34 using a closed-loop hydraulic circuit 118. Further, each pump 22 can operate bi-directionally to actuate ram piston 86..." (see Gable [0042] and FIG. 8). Further, the individual pumps (22) for individual cylinders are imperative to Gable's teaching of independent actuation. The system of Gable allows a control system (146) to precisely adjust the frequency and sequence of each pump to achieve advanced operational characteristics, such as "a continuous and pulseless output flow" (see Gable, [0048]). Thus, each hydraulic cylinder of Gable is operated through its own pump rather than through direct hydraulic communication with another cylinder.
In contrast, Vasquez discloses a rigid system where two cylinders are driven by a single pump. Vasquez discloses "chambers 12A and 22A are further connected to one another by hydraulic line 20" and "hydraulic fluid can thus move between chambers 12 A and 22A to alternatively drive pistons 14 and 24" (Vasquez, Col. 2, Lines [35-38]). Thus, the cylinders of Vasquez are hydraulically connected, allowing the cylinders to operate in a dependent, opposing relationship.
The system of Gable and Vasquez are fundamentally different in both structure and operation. Gable is directed to independently controlled cylinders using dedicated closed-loop circuits, whereas Vasquez requires direct hydraulic communication between cylinders to drive alternating motion. Modifying Gable to incorporate the hydraulic connection of Vasquez would eliminate the independent actuation that is central of Gable's teaching. Such modification would undermine the intended purpose of Gable, thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be motivated to make such modification as suggested. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to modify the system of Gable with the teachings of Vasquez as suggested by the Examiner. See MPEP § 2143.01(VI) (citing In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 221 USPQ 1125 (Fed. Cir. 1984)).
Further, the Examiner's suggestion that the combination of Gable and Vasquez would reduce the number of pumps and lessen pulsations is a generalized benefit in the art and does not provide a specific rationale to combine Gable and Vaquez in a manner that preserves the functionality of Gable. The Examiner does not explain how the proposed modification would maintain Gable's independent control structure and thus appears to rely on impermissible hindsight.
Examiner’s reply:
How are piston pumps operated to produce "a continuous and pulseless output flow"? Applicant is asked to provide a full, logical explanation. Of course they must be operated alternately to produce such a flow as would be elementary to a person of ordinary skill in the art. This is confirmed in 0048 of Gable: “Processor(s) 150 can be configured to control the frequency and sequence at which each pump 22 alternates the direction hydraulic fluid between the first and second directions such that system 10, via collective operation of the pumps, delivers a continuous and pulseless output flow of working fluid from fluid end cylinders 46 to the well, as described in paragraphs [0067]-[0069] and FIG. 16 of U.S. Publication 2015/0192117, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.”
In 0067, U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 states: “In operation, sensing the position of the piston (156) and/or plunger rod (86a) of each pump assembly 82a can assist control system 314 with maintain precise relative timing of the pump assemblies, such as, for example, to minimize and/or eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well, as described in more detail below.”
In 0068, U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 states: “In most embodiments, the present systems are configured to actuate the pump assemblies such that at least one of the pump assemblies is performing a forward stroke at any given point in time (e.g., such that the hydraulic ram cylinder of a first one of the working fluid pump assemblies is beginning its forward stroke as the hydraulic ram cylinder of a second one of the working fluid pump assemblies is ending its forward stroke). For example, in an embodiment with only two pump assemblies 82a, the first pump assembly would perform its forward stroke as the second pump assembly performs its return stroke of the same duration.”
Thus, to “eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well”, Gable uses alternating strokes of the same duration which is exactly what Vasquez discloses. Thus, applicant’s arguments are directly contrary to the disclosure of Gable and thus are not persuasive.
Applicant argues:
The Office Action additionally suggests that it would have been obvious to "utilize a spacer frame as taught by Stephenson in the system of Gable to gain the benefit of facilitating maintenance operations" (see Office Action, pg. 3). Applicant respectfully disagrees. The deficiencies of Gable and Vasquez are described above. Stephenson fails to cure the deficiencies of Gable and Vasquez.
Examiner’s reply:
Stephenson was not used to teach anything already taught by Gable and Vasquez. Therefore, it is unclear what applicant is arguing. Applicant is asked to explain.
Applicant argues:
Claim 11 depends from claim 1 and incorporates each and every element thereof. Claim 11 additionally recites "a second pair of hydraulic cylinders that are mechanically decoupled from each other but are hydraulically coupled to each other." The Examiner states that the addition of a second pair of hydraulic cylinders is "merely a duplication of parts" (see Office Action, pg. 8). Applicant respectfully disagrees.
The claimed addition of a second pair of hydraulic cylinders is not a mere duplication of parts but instead introduces a specific system level configuration that provides functional advantages beyond a single pair of cylinders. As disclosed in the Applicant's originally filed specification, scaling the system with multiple pairs improves overall system reliability through redundancy, enhances flow consistency, and allows for greater scalability of the pumping system (see Specification [0046]-[0047]). The benefits result from the interaction between multiple pairs of cylinders and are not inherent in, nor suggested by, a single pair of cylinders. Further, the Office Action does not address the functional and structural differences, nor does it provide a rationale explaining why one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the cited references to include an additional hydraulically coupled pair in the manner as claimed.
Based on the above, Applicant submits that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have modified the system of Gable in view of Vasquez, nor in view of Stephenson to arrive at the claimed system. Therefore, Gable, in view of Stephenson and Vasquez, fail to teach or suggest each and every element of independent claim 1 and claims 2-13 dependent therefrom. Withdrawal of the rejection is respectfully requested.
Examiner’s reply:
Firstly, applicant admits on the record that this configuration is redundancy which proves the obviousness of the rejection as per MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.
Secondly, how are piston pumps operated to produce "a continuous and pulseless output flow"? Applicant is asked to provide a full, logical explanation. Of course they must be operated alternately to produce such a flow as would be elementary to a person of ordinary skill in the art. This is confirmed in 0048 of Gable: “Processor(s) 150 can be configured to control the frequency and sequence at which each pump 22 alternates the direction hydraulic fluid between the first and second directions such that system 10, via collective operation of the pumps, delivers a continuous and pulseless output flow of working fluid from fluid end cylinders 46 to the well, as described in paragraphs [0067]-[0069] and FIG. 16 of U.S. Publication 2015/0192117, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.”
In 0067, U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 states: “In operation, sensing the position of the piston (156) and/or plunger rod (86a) of each pump assembly 82a can assist control system 314 with maintain precise relative timing of the pump assemblies, such as, for example, to minimize and/or eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well, as described in more detail below.”
In 0068, U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 states: “In most embodiments, the present systems are configured to actuate the pump assemblies such that at least one of the pump assemblies is performing a forward stroke at any given point in time (e.g., such that the hydraulic ram cylinder of a first one of the working fluid pump assemblies is beginning its forward stroke as the hydraulic ram cylinder of a second one of the working fluid pump assemblies is ending its forward stroke). For example, in an embodiment with only two pump assemblies 82a, the first pump assembly would perform its forward stroke as the second pump assembly performs its return stroke of the same duration.”
In 0069, U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 states: “More particularly, and as illustrated in FIG. 7, the pistons (156) of the first and fourth hydraulic ram cylinders (66a-1 and 66a-4) are just beginning their forward stroke (which may be referred to as top dead center or TDC), the pistons (156) of the third and sixth hydraulic ram cylinders (66a-3 and 66a-6) are just ending their forward stroke (which may be referred to as bottom dead center or BDC), and the pistons (156) of the second and fifth hydraulic ram cylinders (66a-2 and 66a-5) are in the middle of their forward stroke (are halfway between TDC and BDC). For example, FIG. 16 illustrates the actuation of cylinders 66a-1, 66a-2, and 66a-3, from TDC to BDC (L.sub.S), in which: at time "A," cylinder 66a-1 is halfway through its forward stroke and cylinder 66a-2 is begins its forward stroke; at time "B," cylinder 66a-2 is halfway through its forward stroke and cylinder 66a-3 beings its forward stroke; and, at time "C," cylinder 66a-1 has returned to TDC and is beginning a subsequent forward stroke. In use, these relative positions between the pistons is maintained during their forward strokes such that, at any given point in time at which any two of the pistons are at TDC, two of the other four pistons are at BDC, and the remaining two pistons are half way in between TDC and BDC. In use, these relative positions result in a relatively smooth and pulseless delivery of fluid to discharge manifold 238 and to a well.”
Thus, to “eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well”, Gable uses alternating strokes of the same duration (which is exactly what Vasquez discloses) in three pairs of pump cylinders with their strokes staggered as in 0069 of U.S. Publication 2015/0192117. Thus, applicant’s arguments are directly contrary to the disclosure of Gable and thus are not persuasive.
PNG
media_image4.png
367
544
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Applicant argues:
Claims 14-15 stand rejected under 35 USC § 103 over Gable in view of Stephenson in further view of Vasquez and in further view of Van Zandt (US 4462764; hereinafter Van Zandt). Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.
Van Zandt discloses a system where "the piston rods extend toward one another along a common central longitudinal axis, and a pump drive bar is connected to the outermost ends of the piston rods" (see Van Zandt, Abstract). The Examiner suggests that it would have been obvious to "utilize a manifold as taught by Van Zandt in the system10 of Gable as modified above to gain the benefit of cooling the hydraulic fluid" (Office Action, pg. 9). Applicant respectfully disagrees.
Van Zandt discloses cooling manifolds (92, 98) integrated into the pump's structural support beams for heat dissipation (see Van Zandt, Col. 5, II. 58-64). However, the Office Action is silent on establishing that the combination of Gable, Stephenson, and Vasquez would result in a system requiring such cooling, nor does it provide a sufficient rationale explaining why one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate Van Zandt's structural cooling manifolds into the modified system. The suggested benefit of cooling is not tied to any identified deficiency in the base combination and therefore does not provide a proper motivation to combine.
Examiner’s reply:
Firstly, Van Zant discloses the common practice of removing heat from the hydraulic oil: “These elongated metal beams conduct the heat from the hydraulic fluid to the outside atmosphere”.
Secondly, eliminating heat from hydraulic oils is common knowledge to a person of ordinary skill in the art as evidenced by e.g. www.rg-group.com: “Most of us who work with hydraulic systems on a regular basis are well aware of the critical need for effective, efficient cooling of the hydraulic oil. Maintaining a proper oil temperature is imperative-the consequences of ignoring this factor are dramatic and often catastrophic! Elastomeric seals and hoses become hard and brittle when exposed to excessive temperatures and will begin to leak. Piston pumps and servo/proportional valves (which typically rely on tight tolerance metal-to-metal interfaces for internal moving parts) will fail due to loss of viscosity of the oil as it thins or breaks down. The hydraulic system performance will then degrade or fail completely when any of these occur.”
PNG
media_image5.png
2250
1859
media_image5.png
Greyscale
URL: https://www.rg-group.com/what-are-effective-methods-for-cooling-hydraulic-oil/
Applicant argues:
Claims 16-20 stand rejected under 35 USC § 103 over Gable in view of Vasquez Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.
The Office Action acknowledges that Gable does not disclose and is not configured to pump operating fluid into the pump side fluid chamber within the second cylinder housing, wherein the plunger side fluid chamber of the first cylinder housing is in fluid communication with the plunger side fluid chamber of the second cylinder and relies on Vasquez to teach this feature. The Office Action further states that it would have been obvious to utilize the configuration of Vasquez in the system of Gable to gain the benefits of reducing the number of pumps (see Office Action, pg. 10-11). Applicant respectfully disagrees.
As discussed above with respect to claim 1, Gable discloses a system in which "a plurality of bi-directional pumps [are] each coupled to a respective one of the working fluid pump assemblies" and "pump 22 can be fluidly coupled to a respective working fluid pump assembly 34 using a closed-loop hydraulic circuit" (Gable [0010], [0042]). Vasquez discloses that "chambers 12A and 22A are further connected to one another by hydraulic line 20" such that "hydraulic fluid can thus move between chambers 12A and 22A to alternatively drive pistons 14 and 24" (Vasquez, col. 2, lines 35-38). Incorporating the configuration of Vasquez into Gable would require converting Gable's independently controlled system into a hydraulically coupled system, thereby eliminating the independent control that is fundamental to Gable's operation.
Therefore, Gable in view of Vasquez, alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest each and every element of independent claim 16 and claims dependent therefrom. Withdrawal of the rejection is respectfully requested.
Examiner’s reply:
How are piston pumps operated to produce "a continuous and pulseless output flow" as taught by Gable in 0048? Applicant is asked to provide a full, logical explanation. Of course they must be operated alternately to produce such a flow as would be elementary to a person of ordinary skill in the art. This is confirmed in 0048 of Gable: “Processor(s) 150 can be configured to control the frequency and sequence at which each pump 22 alternates the direction hydraulic fluid between the first and second directions such that system 10, via collective operation of the pumps, delivers a continuous and pulseless output flow of working fluid from fluid end cylinders 46 to the well, as described in paragraphs [0067]-[0069] and FIG. 16 of U.S. Publication 2015/0192117, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.”
In 0067, U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 states: “In operation, sensing the position of the piston (156) and/or plunger rod (86a) of each pump assembly 82a can assist control system 314 with maintain precise relative timing of the pump assemblies, such as, for example, to minimize and/or eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well, as described in more detail below.”
In 0068, U.S. Publication 2015/0192117 states: “In most embodiments, the present systems are configured to actuate the pump assemblies such that at least one of the pump assemblies is performing a forward stroke at any given point in time (e.g., such that the hydraulic ram cylinder of a first one of the working fluid pump assemblies is beginning its forward stroke as the hydraulic ram cylinder of a second one of the working fluid pump assemblies is ending its forward stroke). For example, in an embodiment with only two pump assemblies 82a, the first pump assembly would perform its forward stroke as the second pump assembly performs its return stroke of the same duration.”
Thus, to “eliminate pulses in the flow of working fluid into the well”, Gable uses alternating strokes of the same duration which is exactly what Vasquez discloses. Thus, applicant’s arguments are directly contrary to the disclosure of Gable and thus are not persuasive.
Conclusion
Reference made of record but not relied upon in the current rejections: Hall US 3967542 discloses a hydraulic cylinder 40 dimensioned to allow a piston 50 to be fully retracted from a spool 60.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS ANDREW FINK whose telephone number is (571)270-3373. The examiner can normally be reached on M-W 9-7.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Laurenzi can be reached on (571) 270-7878. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-4373.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Thomas Fink/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights