Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/812,640

DOWNHOLE FLUID SEPARATOR IN RE-ENTRY MULTILATERAL WELL

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Aug 22, 2024
Examiner
QUAIM, LAMIA
Art Unit
3676
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
235 granted / 320 resolved
+21.4% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
353
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.8%
-35.2% vs TC avg
§103
40.2%
+0.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 320 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
EXAMINER'S COMMENT Notice of AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Response to Arguments Claim 1 has been rejected below under Double Patenting over Patent no. 12523123 and was not addressed in the Non-Final Rejection dated 07/21/2025. As such, this office action is a Non-Final Rejection. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claim 1 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12523123. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Regarding claim 1, claim 16 of Patent No. 12523123 teaches all of the limitations of the instant claim 1, such as “an orienting liner…”, “a lower completion…”, and “ a fluid separator...” Claim 16 of the patent recites additional features such as “a dual string packer…” and “an upper completion packer…” which are not recited in claim 1 of the instant application. As such, patented claim 16 is narrower in scope and fully encompasses the instant claim 1. Reasons for Allowance Claims 2-20 are allowed. Claim 1 is not allowable due to the Double Patenting rejection above; however, regarding prior art, see the reasons for allowance discussed in the Non-Final Rejection (7/21/2025). Regarding claims 16 and 17, the claims are allowable over prior art for similar reasons as claim 1 discussed in the Non-Final Rejection (7/21/2025). Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lamia Quaim whose telephone number is (469)295-9199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM - 6PM CST. 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. /LAMIA QUAIM/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Oct 02, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 02, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 09, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601228
ALIGNABLE GUIDANCE DEVICE FOR CASING ENTRY MILLING OPERATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590499
DOWNHOLE TUBING INTERVENTION TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590500
EXTENDED REACH AND JARRING TOOL FOR A BOTTOM HOLE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584401
MONITORING A DRILL STRING CONTROLLED BY A DRILLING PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577836
COILED TUBING FLEXIBLE DRILL ROD ULTRA-SHORT RADIUS RADIAL DRILLING STRING, SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+17.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 320 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month