DETAILED ACTION
The amendment filed 07/01/2026 has been entered.
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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 07/01/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Patent No. 12,116,748 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 10-12, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mathis (WO 2017/091085 A1).
With regard to claim 1 and 10, Mathis discloses a method/system of connecting a lower pipe portion to a subsea foundation (e.g. fig. 9a-9c), the method comprising: providing the subsea foundation (1) , an upper pipe portion (14) connected to the subsea foundation; providing the lower pipe portion (143) and a pipe overlap section (fig. 9c); and connecting the lower pipe portion to the upper pipe portion such that the pipe overlaps section overlaps a part of the upper pipe portion and a part the lower pipe portion (fig. 9c).
With regard to claims 2 and 11, Mathis further discloses the upper pipe portion does not protrude beyond the bottom of the subsea foundation (figs. 9b-9c) and when the lower pipe portion is connected to the upper pipe portion, at least part of the lower pipe portion protrudes beyond the bottom of the subsea foundation (fig. 9c).
With regard to claims 3 and 12, Mathis further discloses connecting the lower pipe portion to the subsea foundation in a stowed position (fig. 9a); deploying the subsea foundation subsea with the lower pipe portion in the stowed position (fig. 9b); and releasing the lower pipe portion from the stowed position subsea (fig. 9c).
With regard to claims 7 and 16, Mathis further discloses the subsea foundation comprises a suction anchor (abstract).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eide et al. (WO 2017/179992 A1) in view of Pond (4,697,829).
With regard to claim 1, 4, 10, and 13, Eide discloses a method/system of connecting a lower pipe portion to a subsea foundation (e.g. fig. 4), the method comprising: providing the subsea foundation (4), an upper pipe portion(6a) connected to the subsea foundation (fig. 4); providing a lower pipe portion (6b); and connecting the lower pipe portion to the upper pipe portion (fig. 4) and connecting the lower pipe portion to a pull-in arrangement (15/17) and then deploying the subsea foundation subsea with the lower pipe portion connected to the pull-in arrangement, wherein connecting the lower pipe portion to the upper pipe portion comprises using the pull-in arrangement to connect the lower pipe portion to the upper pipe portion (pg. 23, lines 25-33).
Eide discloses the invention substantially as claimed however is silent regarding a pipe overlap section the pipe overlap section overlaps a portion of the upper pipe portion and the lower pipe portion.
Pond discloses subsea pipe connection wherein when connecting subsea pipes there is a pipe overlap section the pipe overlap section overlaps a portion of the upper pipe portion and/or the lower pipe portion (abstract; fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Eide and utilize a pipe overlap section as taught in Pond, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide the expected benefit of having a friction fit engagement between the pipe sections.
With regard to claims 6 and 15, Eide, as modified further discloses the pipe overlap section is fixed to the lower pipe portion and overlaps a portion of the upper pipe portion when the lower pipe portion is connected to the upper pipe portion (Pond; fig. 2).
With regard to claims 8 and 17, Eide, as modified further discloses the inner diameter of the lower pipe portion is the same as the inner diameter of the upper pipe portion and the outer diameter of the lower pipe portion is the same as the outer diameter of the upper pipe portion (Pond; fig. 2).
Claim(s) 5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eide et al. (WO 2017/179992 A1) in view of Pond (4,697,829) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Giovannini et al. (6,729,802).
With regard to claims 5 and 14, Eide, as modified, discloses the invention substantially as claimed however is silent regarding the pull-in arrangement is connected to the lower pipe portion via the pipe overlap section.
Giovannini discloses attaching a pulling arrangement to the end of pipes while pulling subsea pipes (figs 4-5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Eide and connect the pull in arrangement to the end of the pipe (and therefore the overlap) as taught in Giovannini, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow the pipe portion to be aligned properly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: see reasons for indication of allowable subject matter in the office action dated 04/02/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments regarding the pipe overlap section, the examiner disagrees. The examiner contends that the telescoping nature of the two pipes meets the claimed limitations of the pipe overlap section as the overlapping of the pipes includes the lower pipe section and the upper pipe section.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BENJAMIN F FIORELLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7012. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM-4:30PM EST.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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.
/BENJAMIN F FIORELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
BF
09/01/2026
Prosecution Insights