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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 21-32 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 6, 2026.
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, the straight portion, flared portion, and end portion as recited in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). While these features are depicted in the figures, they are not labeled and thus it is difficult to distinguish these portions from the remainder of the features shown in the drawings. 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 the grey-scale shading in the figures makes it impossible to discern the different components of the claimed invention. It is not clear where one feature starts and the next begins. 37 CFR 1.84(m) requires that any shading in the figures not reduce legibility and not take the place of cross-hatching where appropriate.
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 Interpretation
The preamble of claim 1 recites “A system for expanding a tubular” with the expansion of the tubular recited merely as an intended use. However, the body of the claim contains positive recitation of the tubular and the expansion thereof. Consequently, the claim could be interpreted as being directed to the subcombination of the system or the system in combination with the expansion of a tubular.
In formulating an evaluation on the merits, the Examiner is considering that the claims are drawn to the combination and the claims will be rejected accordingly. If the applicant indicates by amendment that the combination claim is the intention, the language in the permeable should be made consistent with the language of the body of the claims. If the intent is to claim the subcombination, then the body of the claim must be amended to remove positive recitation of the combination. Applicant’s intentions in the regard must be clearly established by the claim language.
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 10-20 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.
Regarding claim 10: Line 1 of claim 10 recites “after the partially formable cone is formed” however neither claim 10, nor the claims it depends from, indicates how the partially formable cone is formed. Claim 1 lists the parts of the partially formable cone and claim 9 refers to the radial extension of the plurality of cone segments however there is no reference to the formation of the partially formable cone. Correction is required.
Regarding claim 11: Line 28 of claim 11 recites “extending the plurality of cone segments radially” however claim 11 fails to include any indication as to how the cone segments are radially extended. There is no correlation between the other components of the system or movement of other parts of the system and the extension of the cones. Correction is required.
Regarding claims 12-20: These claims are considered indefinite due to their dependence on claim 11.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 are allowed.
Claims 10-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 1 and 11: Yee et al. (US 2021/01898430 is considered the closest prior art to the claimed and elected invention.
Yee discloses a system Fig 3A, 3B for expanding a tubular 230, comprising:
a body 226;
a mandrel 210 having a longitudinal axis Fig 3A, 3B, the mandrel including a straight portion A (see reproduction of Figure 3A below) slidably coupled to the body, a flared portion B (see reproduction of Figure 3A below) having a slopped outer surface Fig 3A, 3B, and an end portion C (see reproduction of Figure 3A below) having a shoulder D (see reproduction of Figure 3A below), the flared portion being axially located between the straight portion and the end portion Fig 3A, 3B;
a partially formable cone 208, the partially formable cone including:
a unitary cone ring E (see reproduction of Figure 3A below) disposed around an entire circumference of the mandrel Fig 3A, 3B; and
a plurality of cone segments [0028] distributed around the circumference of the mandrel Fig 3A, 3B, the plurality of cone segments being axially located between the shoulder of the end portion and the unitary cone ring Fig 3A, 3B, the plurality of cone segments being slidably coupled to each other and to the flared portion of the mandrel so that the plurality of cone segments extend radially to form a portion of the partially formable cone when the mandrel slides relative to the plurality of cone segments Fig 3A - 3B,
a first seal F (see reproduction of Figure 3A below) between the straight portion of the mandrel and the body Fig 3A, 3B; and
wherein the mandrel includes a bore Fig 3A, 3B configured to flow wellbore fluid from surface to a volume located inside the tubular [0029], [0030], the volume being at least partially sealed by the first seal, the second seal, and the unitary cone ring Fig 3A, 3B.
PNG
media_image1.png
141
708
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yee fails to disclose that the unitary cone rig has an outer diameter larger than an innermost diameter of the tubular before the tubular is expanded, so that translation of the unitary cone ring through the tubular radially expands the tubular and is capable of sealing against the tubular and that the system has a second seal between the unitary cone ring and the body. The provision of a seal between components in the system as well as between components of the system and the surrounding tubular would be considered obvious as this would have achieved the predictable results of ensuring fluid isolation and control. However, the modification of Yee so that the unitary cone rig had an outer diameter larger than an innermost diameter of the tubular before the tubular is expanded, so that translation of the unitary cone ring through the tubular radially expands the tubular would not have been obvious.
As such, the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest a system for expanding a tubular that included a unitary cone rig that had an outer diameter larger than an innermost diameter of the tubular before the tubular is expanded, so that translation of the unitary cone ring through the tubular radially expands the tubular as recited in the claimed combination and method.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER H GAY whose telephone number is (571)272-7029. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 6-3:30 and every other Friday 6-11.
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, Anita Y Coupe can be reached at (571)270-3614. 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.
/JENNIFER H GAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
JHG
5/27/2026
Prosecution Insights