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 .
Preliminary Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the preliminary amendment filed on 11/04/2024.
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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 1, the claim recites the method steps of “feeding the second fluid”, “retrieving first fluid and/or second fluid”, “blocking the first channel”, and “to obtain the target initial first saturation profile” without disclosing the device(s) for performing those method steps. The claim is incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements (see MPEP § 2172.01). The omitted elements are: the device or devices for retrieving first fluid and/or second fluid, for feeding the second fluid, for blocking the channel, and for generating the target initial first saturation profile. Further clarification is respectfully requested
Claims 2-12 are rejected as being dependent on the rejected base claim.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gilliland et al. (Pat. No. US 5,297,420) (hereafter Gilliland).
Regarding claim 1, Gilliland teaches a method for preparing a rock sample with a target initial first fluid saturation profile along a rock sample axis, the rock sample comprising an inlet face (i.e., at end plug 16) (see Fig. 1) and an outlet face (i.e., at end plug 17) (see Fig. 1), the inlet face and the outlet face being opposed relatively to the rock sample axis and being transverse to the rock sample axis, the method comprising the successive steps of:
providing a rock sample saturated in a first fluid (i.e., a clean core sample 10 is initially saturated with water or brine flowing from a water supply reservoir 30 under pressure from pump 31 through open valve 32, pipe 33, inlet 14, end plug 16 and Berea sandstone plug 20) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28);
primary flooding of the rock sample with a second fluid (i.e., core sample is desaturated to effect a first irreducible water saturation condition) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28), comprising:
feeding the second fluid in the rock sample from the inlet face (i.e., first flowing gas from gas supply 35 as pressured by pump 31 through open valve 36, inlet pipes 37 and 14, and plugs 16 and 20 into core sample 10) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28), and
retrieving first fluid and/or second fluid from a first open channel (i.e., outlet line 23) (see Fig. 1 directly connected to the outlet face of the rock sample (i.e., displace water from the core sample 10 through water and gas permeable plug 21, outlet line 23 and open valve 39) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28);
secondary flooding of the rock sample with the second fluid (i.e., to complete the desaturation process) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28), to obtain the target initial first fluid saturation profile along the rock sample axis (i.e., CT scanning is carried out at a plurality of intervals during desaturation to measure X-ray attenuation and thereby monitor water saturation decrease) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28), comprising:
blocking the first channel to close the first channel and prevent any fluid to flow through the first channel (i.e., closing valve 39 and opening valve 38) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28);
feeding second fluid in the rock sample from the inlet face (i.e., flowing gas from gas supply 35 as pressured by pump 31 through open valve 36, inlet pipes 37 and 14, and plugs 16 and 20 into core sample 10) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28), and
retrieving first fluid from a second channel (i.e., fluid outlet line 15) (see Fig. 1) connected to the outlet face of the rock sample through a porous barrier element (i.e., a water-permeable and gas-impermeable plug 22) (see Fig. 1), the porous barrier element being permeable to the first fluid and impervious to the second fluid (i.e., to complete the desaturation process by closing valve 39 and opening valve 38, forcing the remaining water through preferentially water permeable plug 22, outlet line 15 and valve 38) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 28).
Regarding claim 2, Gilliland teaches that the first fluid is water (i.e., a clean core sample 10 is initially saturated with water or brine flowing from a water supply reservoir 30) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 2) and/or the second fluid is oil.
Regarding claim 3, Gilliland teaches that the primary flooding comprises blocking the second channel to close the second channel and prevent any fluid to flow through the second channel (i.e., valve 38 is closed) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 2).
Regarding claim 4, Gilliand teaches that the target initial first fluid saturation profile along the rock sample axis is obtained by controlling a second fluid flowrate and/or pressure during the primary flooding and/or the secondary flooding (i.e., desaturation is performed in a series of steps of varying differential pressures as measured by pressure gauges on the inlet and outlet flow connections of the test apparatus) (see Column 4, lines 1-34).
Regarding claim 5, Gilliland teaches that the second fluid is fed in the rock sample with a constant flowrate during the primary flooding (i.e., flowing gas from gas supply 35 as pressured by pump 31. Desaturation is accomplished in stepwise fashion. Upon reaching each step in the desaturation process, the system is held static until pressure differential across the system indicated by difference between gauges 40 and 41, and water saturation as measured by CT scan stabilize) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 2).
Regarding claim 6, Gilliland teaches that the second fluid is fed in the rock sample with a constant pressure during the primary flooding (i.e., flowing gas from gas supply 35 as pressured by pump 31. Desaturation is accomplished in stepwise fashion. Upon reaching each step in the desaturation process, the system is held static until pressure differential across the system indicated by difference between gauges 40 and 41, and water saturation as measured by CT scan stabilize) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 2).
Regarding claim 7, Gilliland teaches that the second fluid is fed in the rock sample with a constant pressure during the secondary flooding (i.e., flowing gas from gas supply 35 as pressured by pump 31 through open valve 36, inlet pipes 37 and 14, and plugs 16 and 20 into core sample 10 to reach a water saturation attainable by viscous flow, then to complete the desaturation process, flowing gas from gas supply 35 and forcing the remaining water through water permeable plug 22) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 2).
Regarding claim 8, Gilliland teaches that the secondary flooding immediately follows the primary flooding, the second fluid being fed at a start of the secondary flooding at a same pressure as the second fluid is fed at an end of the primary flooding (i.e., first flowing gas from gas supply 35 as pressured by pump 31 through open valve 36, inlet pipes 37 and 14, and plugs 16 and 20 into core sample 10 to displace water from the core sample 10 through water and gas permeable plug 21, outlet line 23 and open valve 39 to reach a water saturation attainable by viscous flow, then to complete the desaturation process by closing valve 39 and opening valve 38, forcing the remaining water through preferentially water permeable plug 22) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 2).
Regarding claim 9, Gilliland teaches that the primary flooding is stopped (i.e., upon reaching each step in the desaturation process, the system is held static until pressure differential across the system indicated by difference between gauges 40 and 41, and water saturation as measured by CT scan stabilize) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 2) and the secondary flooding is started when only second fluid is retrieved from the first channel during the primary flooding (i.e., via open valve 39 to teach a water saturation) (see Column 5, line 23, to Column 6, line 2).
Regarding claim 12, Gilliland teaches that an upstream face of the porous barrier element is placed in contact with the outlet face (i.e., via plug 21) (see Fig. 1), the first channel passing through the porous barrier element (i.e., outlet line 23 bypasses the plug 22) (see Fig. 1), the second channel opening facing a downstream face of the porous barrier element (i.e., to outlet line 15 via plug 17) (see Fig. 1).
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilliland et al. (Pat. No. US 5,297,420) (hereafter Gilliland) in view of Godbole et al. (Pat. No. US 11,965,848) (hereafter Godbole).
Regarding claim 10, Gilliland as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach that the first fluid saturation profile along the rock sample axis is monitored by nuclear magnetic resonance imaging during the primary flooding and/or the secondary flooding. However, Godbole teaches that the first fluid saturation profile along the rock sample axis is monitored by nuclear magnetic resonance imaging during the primary flooding and/or the secondary flooding (i.e., the total liquid filled volume within the pore space of the core sample and the content of oil and water volumes in the core sample are determined by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. NMR spectroscopy provides a method to cross check the measurement of the saturation of the core sample) (see Column 4, line 42, to Column 5, line 15). In view of the teaching of Godbole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used NMR spectroscopy or imaging in order to accurately determine and predict the soil parameters.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilliland et al. (Pat. No. US 5,297,420) (hereafter Gilliland)
Regarding claim 11, Gilliland as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach that the target initial first fluid saturation profile is above 40% along the rock sample axis and/or the rock sample permeability is under 50 mD. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected rock sample having any fluid saturation profile and any permeability. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice (see MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAN M. TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0307. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 11:30am - 7:00pm.
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, Laura Martin can be reached on (571)-272-2160. 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.
/Tran M. Tran/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights