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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is objected to because the current title implies that “artificial gravity” has been created whereas as best understood by the examiner, the invention uses a centrifugal force to provide a force which provides density separation, which is not considered as creating “artificial gravity”. A suggested title is “DENSITY BASED DOWNHOLE FLUID SEPARATOR THAT CREATES CENTRIFUGAL FORCE”.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because the phrase in line 1 “is configured fluidly connect” is awkward and should apparently recite – is configured to fluidly connect --.
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.
Claims 2 and 15-20 are 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.
Claims 2, 15 and 20 all recite that “artificial gravity” is generated, but it is not clear in what regard the force created by the rotation would be considered “artificial gravity” other than any other force and therefore these claims are indefinite. As best understood by the examiner, in the invention, a centrifugal force is generated which provides the separation via density as claimed, but use of the term “artificial gravity” is confusing since it is not clear how this is related to the gravitational force. Claims 16-19 are indefinite as being dependent from an indefinite claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-10, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Donovan et al. (US 5,762,149).
In regard to claim 1, Donovan et al. discloses a fluid separator system, comprising: a separator housing (258, as in fig 15); a turbine chamber (as within 258) formed within the separator housing; a fluid inlet (254) configured to receive formation fluid and direct the formation fluid into the turbine chamber, wherein the formation fluid includes oil and water; a turbine (262/276A-H/283 etc) disposed within the turbine chamber, wherein the turbine is configured to rotate to at least partially separate the formation fluid into formation oil and formation water (col. 14, lines 5-10); an oil outlet (256) configured to receive the formation oil separated from the formation fluid and direct the formation oil toward an upper production tubing (304); and a water outlet (290) configured to receive the formation water separated from the formation fluid and direct the formation water out of the separator housing (col. 15, lines 7-9).
In regard to claim 2, Donovan et al. disclose wherein the turbine is configured to rotate at a speed above a threshold speed to generate artificial gravity for the formation fluid disposed in the turbine chamber (as providing a centrifugal force as rotating, col. 14, lines 5-10; also see 112 above where it is not clear what is required by the term “artificial gravity”), and wherein the artificial gravity is configured to separate the formation oil of the formation fluid from the formation water of the formation fluid based on density (as performing separation, col. 14, lines 66-67; col. 15, lines 33+).
In regard to claim 3, Donovan et al. disclose wherein the turbine includes a base portion (280) and a bladed portion (276A-H), wherein a radially outer surface of the base portion includes a cylindrical shape (as in fig 15), and wherein the bladed portion includes a plurality of blades (276A-H) secured to the radially outer surface of the base portion (as in fig 15).
In regard to claim 4, Donovan et al. disclose wherein the base portion includes a hollow central portion (281), and wherein the oil outlet is disposed within the hollow central portion of the base portion of the turbine (where oil outlet may be end of 280 connecting with 256 as in fig 15).
In regard to claim 7, Donovan et al. disclose a motor (264) configured to drive rotation of the turbine.
In regard to claim 8, Donovan et al. disclose wherein a lower axial end of the turbine is axially offset from a bottom surface of the turbine chamber to form a lower flow path for the formation oil to flow across the turbine to the oil outlet (as in fig 15, at 268), and wherein an upper axial end of the turbine is axially offset from a top surface of the turbine chamber to form an upper flow path for the formation oil to flow across the turbine to the oil outlet (as in fig 15 where flow path may include upper end).
In regard to claim 9, Donovan et al. disclose wherein the separator housing is configured to be positioned within a multilateral well at a junction between a main bore and at least one lateral bore of the multilateral well (col. 13, lines 52-57, as shown in figs 5-8 and 11).
In regard to claim 10, Donovan et al. disclose wherein the separator housing is configured to be positioned within a vertical portion of a multilateral well (col., 13, lines 55-57).
In regard to claim 14, Donovan et al. disclose wherein the fluid inlet is configured fluidly connect a lower production tubing (96, as in fig 8, with separator 98, col. 13, lines 54-57) to the turbine chamber, wherein the fluid inlet is configured to receive the formation fluid from the lower production tubing and direct the formation fluid into the turbine chamber.
In regard to claim 20, Donovan et al. disclose a method, comprising: drawing a formation fluid into a fluid separator (as in fig 15, at 254), wherein the fluid separator comprises: a separator housing (258, as in fig 15); a turbine chamber (as within 258) formed within the housing; a fluid inlet (254) configured to receive formation fluid and direct the formation fluid into the turbine chamber, wherein the formation fluid includes oil and water; a turbine (262/276A-H/283 etc) disposed within the turbine chamber, wherein the turbine is configured to rotate to at least partially separate the formation fluid into formation water and formation oil (col. 14, lines 5-10); an oil outlet (256) configured to receive the formation oil separated from the formation fluid and direct the formation oil toward an upper production tubing (304); and a water outlet (290) configured to receive the formation water separated from the formation fluid and direct the formation water out of the separator housing (col. 15, lines 7-9); separating the formation oil of the formation fluid from the formation water of the formation fluid via artificial gravity generated via rotation of the turbine (col. 14, lines 66-67); drawing the formation oil separated from the formation fluid to a surface via the upper production tubing (as in fig 15); and expelling the formation water from the fluid separator and into an annulus of a main bore and/or a lateral bore of a multilateral well (as in fig 15).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan et al. in view of Andersson Aginger (US 2014/0018227).
In regard to claim 5, Donovan et al. disclose all the limitations of this claim, as applied above, except for an inlet nozzle as claimed. Andersson Aginger discloses a fluid separator system wherein a fluid inlet includes an inlet nozzle (17a, as in fig 3) configured accelerate the flow rate of the formation fluid passing through the fluid inlet and to direct the flow of the formation fluid toward a turbine (as in fig 3, paragraph 32), and wherein a force exerted on at least one blade of the turbine via the flow of the formation fluid is configured to drive rotation of the turbine within the turbine chamber (paragraph 32, also as inherent in fluid impinging on turbine as shown). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide the fluid separator of Donovan et al. with the nozzle as taught by Andersson Aginger in order to increase efficiency of the turbine (as in paragraph 32 of Andersson Aginger).
In regard to claim 6, as combined above, the turbine is disposed in the turbine chamber in a position axially between the inlet nozzle and the water outlet (with nozzle as within fluid inlet at 254).
Claim(s) 11-13, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan et al. in view of Kennedy et al. (US 5,730,871).
In regard to claim 11, Donovan et al. disclose all the limitations of this claim, as applied above, except for an assembly housing with the separator housing within.
Kennedy et al. disclose a system comprising: a separator housing (100) is disposed within an assembly housing of a fluid separator assembly (34, outer structure of fig 11); wherein the assembly housing includes a hollow interior extending through the assembly housing, and wherein the separator housing is secured within the hollow interior of the assembly housing (as in fig 11). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide the separator of Donovan as with an assembly housing as taught by Kennedy et al. since combining prior art element according to known methods to yield predictable results is considered obvious to one of ordinary skill.
In regard to claim 12, Donovan et al. discloses a pump (66) and wherein the water outlet is fluidly coupled to the pump, and wherein the pump is configured to drive the formation water separated from the formation fluid out of the assembly (col. 9, lines 34-36). Donovan et al. do not disclose this pump is within the assembly housing. Kennedy et al. disclose wherein a pump, with a separator housing, is within an assembly housing (with fig 11, as within string of fig 10, where outer housings together form assembly housing). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide the system of Donovan et al., as modified by Kennedy et al. with the additional feature of a pump within the assembly housing, as taught by Kennedy et al. in order to provide the system as a single string insertable into a well in a single downhole operation.
In regard to claim 13, Donovan et al. disclose wherein the assembly housing further includes at least one oil outlet line (303) extending through the assembly housing (as would be necessarily positioned as combined as within assembly housing which would be the outer housing), wherein the oil outlet line is configured to fluidly couple the oil outlet with the upper production tubing (304).
In regard to claim 15, Donovan et al. disclose a system, comprising: a fluid separator (as in fig 15), wherein the fluid separator comprises: a separator housing (258); a turbine chamber (as within 258) formed within the separator housing; a fluid inlet (254) configured to receive formation fluid and direct the formation fluid into the turbine chamber, wherein the formation fluid includes oil and water; a turbine (262/276A-H/283 etc) disposed within the turbine chamber, wherein the turbine is configured to rotate above a threshold speed to generate artificial gravity for the formation fluid disposed in the turbine chamber, wherein the artificial gravity is configured to at least partially separate the formation fluid into formation water and formation oil (col. 14, lines 5-10); an oil outlet (256) configured to receive the formation oil separated from the formation fluid and direct the formation oil toward an upper production tubing (304); and a water outlet (290) configured to receive the formation water separated from the formation fluid and direct the formation water out of the separator housing. Donovan et al. also disclose wherein the water outlet is fluidly coupled to a pump (66 as coupled with separator 64 as in fig 6), wherein the pump is configured to drive the formation water separated from the formation fluid (col. 9, lines 34-40) and wherein the pump and separator are within the same housing (as in fig 6 where as shown as within same structure), but do not disclose an assembly housing with the separator housing within, a lower production tubing or that the pump is an electrical submersible pump.
Kennedy et al. disclose a system comprising: an assembly housing (34, outer structure of fig 11); a fluid separator positioned within the assembly housing (66 as within); wherein the fluid separator comprises a fluid separator housing (100) and an electrical submersible pump (32, col. 4, lines 5-10) for pumping separated fluids; and wherein a lower production tubing feed a fluid inlet (98 as in fig 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide the separator of Donovan as within a separator housing (separately from an outer housing) as taught by Kennedy et al. in order to provide the separator as a modular unit (e.g. as being replaceable for maintenance) and to provide a lower production tubing feeding the inlet since combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is considered obvious to one of ordinary skill. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide the pump of Donovan et al. as an electric submersible pump, as taught by Kennedy et al. since choosing from a finite number of identified predictable solutions (for a downhole pump) with a reasonable expectation of success is considered obvious to one of ordinary skill.
In regard to claim 16, Donovan et al. also does not disclose a second submersible pump. Kennedy et al. discloses a second electrical submersible pump (32 as distinct from 28) positioned within an assembly housing (as in fig 10, with all outer housings as connected forming a single housing), wherein an oil outlet is fluidly coupled to the second electrical submersible pump, and wherein the second electrical submersible pump is configured to drive formation oil separated from formation fluid toward upper production tubing (as in fig 2 or fig 9; see e.g. col. 6, lines 44+). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide the system of Donovan et al. as modified by Kennedy et al. above, with a second pump within the assembly housing, as further taught by Kennedy et al. in order to motivate separated fluids to the surface and provide the system as a single unit for deployment.
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan et al. in view of Kennedy et al. as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Bertuzzi et al. (US 2,872,985).
In regard to claim 17, Donovan et al. as modified by Kennedy et al. as applied to claim 15 teaches all the elements of this claim except for disclosing a plurality of fluid separators in parallel. Bertuzzi et al. discloses a system wherein a plurality of fluid separators connected in parallel (col. 3, lines 26-31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide a plurality of fluid separators in parallel as taught by Bertuzzi et al. with the assembly of Donovan et al. as modified by Kennedy et al. in order to increase capacity of separation.
In regard to claim 18, Donovan et al. as modified by Kennedy et al. as applied to claim 15 teaches all the elements of this claim except for disclosing a plurality of fluid separators in series. Bertuzzi et al. discloses a system wherein a plurality of fluid separators connected in series (col. 3, lines 35-43). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide a plurality of fluid separators in series as taught by Bertuzzi et al. with the assembly of Donovan et al. as modified by Kennedy et al. in order to increase effectiveness of the separation.
In regard to claim 19, Donovan et al. as modified by Kennedy et al. as applied to claim 15 teaches all the limitations of this claim with Donovan et al. including a water outlet line (extending from 290 in fig 15) and the electrical submersible pump fluidly connected to an annulus of a main bore of a multilateral well (as in fig 6, with pump 66), except for a one-way check valve disposed within the water outlet line, wherein the one-way check valve is configured to prevent water from flowing back into the fluid separator. Bertuzzi et al. disclose a system within an outlet line of a separator includes a one-way check valve configured to prevent fluid from flowing back into the separator (col. 2, lines 54-59). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to include a one-way valve with the water outlet line of Donovan et al., as modified by Kennedy et al., as taught by Bertuzzi et al. in order to prevent water from flowing back into the separator.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Thompson et al. (US 2009/0194295) and Brown (US 2009/0151953) both disclose separator systems with pumps within a housing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D Andrews whose telephone number is (571)272-6558. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-3.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at 571-272-5405. 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.
/D. ANDREWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
11/6/2025