DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Action is in response to the applicant's reply of 6/29/2026. In view of the applicant's amendments, the previously presented objections to the drawings and claims, as well as all previously presented 35 USC 112(a) and 35 USC 112(b) rejections, have been withdrawn, unless restated herein.
Claims 1-9 are pending. Claim 10 is canceled.
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 .
Claim Interpretation
The term “group” has been interpreted to include two or more.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, (1) the second single-stage hydraulic cylinder left, middle, and right chambers, each separate and distinct from the other (claim 6), (2) a telescoping cylinder assembly with the wall and first and second single-stage cylinders clearly delineated (claim 6), and (3) the structure necessary to allow the shortening and lengthening of the piston rod (claim 6), must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). See the related Section 112(a) rejections. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because (1) all letters and numbers should be at least 0.32 cm (1/8 inch) tall (all Figs.), (2) reference numerals 103, 104, and 112 improperly point to the same structure (Figs. 4 and 6-9), (3) reference numerals 106 and 108 improperly point to the same chamber (at least Figs. 4 and 8), (4) piston 107 should have hatching (Figs. 8 and 9), (5) all cut sectional surfaces should have different hatching patterns, and the holes 113,114,115 must be clearly separated from hatching lines (Figs. 4 and 6-9), (6) all replacement sheets should have page numbers in the “1/5” format, etc., and (7) reference numerals 109 and 110 improperly point to the same chamber (at least Figs. 4, 7, and 9). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: “by setting” and “by controlling” should be “setting” and “controlling”, respectively, in order to have recited steps in a method claim (claim 7). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 This claim has been amended to require the connection of a sleeve 16 to a high and low pressure selection section (HLPSS) for “driving the sleeve”. Such “driving” requires an accurate description of the HLPSS interaction with the sleeve assembly and the manner in which the sleeve functions. This has not been provided. In this regard, note the following.
A. The HLPSS is shown in Fig. 4 to connect to the sleeve assembly 16 as a result of the joinder with lines 11,12,13,14,15 at the sleeve housing/wall 112. The sleeve further includes the housing/wall 112 having ports 113,114,115, as well as, three pistons, i.e., 107, 111, and the significantly larger, but unnumbered rightmost piston (formerly numbered 111). All pistons move relative to one another and relative to the housing/wall 112.
B. Piston movement is apparently on a rod (unnumbered), the rod changing lengths (with no description of how this is possible), and at least piston 111 appearing to move relative to the rod. (In this regard, the applicant did not provide a reference number for the rod, nor explain how the rod could change lengths, both being required in the first office action.)
C. The sleeve is also described as having chambers, however, drawing conflicts make it impossible to determine which chambers are, e.g., the left, right, and middle chambers described at paragraph [0060], such conflicts including, at least, (1) the right chamber 110 being shown to be both left and right of the third piston (e.g., Fig. 8 and Fig. 9), (2) a chamber to the right of the first piston 107 being numbered both a “right” chamber 106 and a “left” chamber 108 (e.g., Figs. 4,6 and paragraph [0060], (3) such chamber names being tied in the description to the “first hydraulic cylinder” 103 and the “second hydraulic cylinder 104, such cylinders 103,104 being drawn as part of, and not being distinguishable from, the housing/wall 112, nor each other (Fig. 7).
D. This claim now requires that the result of the HLPSS “driving” the sleeve is “to open or close”. As indicated in the related Section 112(b) rejection, the claim does not indicate what is opened or closed. Possibilities may include at least the fluid communication points of the housing/wall 112 with the lines 11, 12,13,14,15 and the radial holes 113,114,115. The inadequate description of the cylinders, pistons, rod, and chambers, discussed in the foregoing, prevents an understanding of the required “open or close,” since all are actively associated with such communication points and radial holes.
Thus, the application fails to adequately describe the now-specified connection and functional relationship of the sleeve to the HLPSS.
Claims 2-9 depend from claim 1.
Claim 6 This claim recites separate first and second hydraulic cylinders, in a telescopic hydraulic cylinder having a wall, and each must have two chambers and a piston. Nothing in the specification nor drawings depicts two structures within the telescopic hydraulic cylinder, each such structure having a chamber and a piston. In this regard, associated reference numbers (103,104) are shown only with respect to a uniform, integral structure on all sleeve figures, e.g., Fig. 4, such structure also being numbered 112 and having the radial holes, which shows that the structure is actually the “wall” of this claim 6, with no other structures depicted that separately have two chambers and a piston each. Claim 8 depends from claim 6.
Claim 6 Comparing the views of Figs. 6-9, it is clear that the performance of the sleeve requires that the piston rod (unnumbered) be of varying lengths. Nothing in the specification nor drawings describes how this can be done. Claim 8 depends from claim 6.
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 It is unclear what is opened or closed by the sleeve, as recited in the last sub-paragraph. Claims 2-9 depend from claim 1.
Claim 8 This claim recites “the piston cylinder” and depends from claim 6 which recites two pistons and a cylinder having two cylinders, making it unclear which of the two pistons and which of the two cylinders are being reference.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Xue et al. (CN111663920 – the primary reference D1 in both PCT/CN2022/080894 and CN202111461911) discloses a control method of three-pipeline control six-layer position sliding sleeve (Fig. 2). Zhang et al. (CN109356899) discloses a three-line control six-layer sliding sleeve downhole hydraulic system (Fig. 10). Shen et al. (CN102031953) discloses a downhole position selecting hydraulic decoding method and device (Fig. 1).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE STERLING GRAY whose telephone number is (313)446-4820. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4 Eastern - M-F.
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.
/GEORGE S GRAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights