Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/893,149

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BARRIER INSTALLATION IN A WELLBORE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Sep 23, 2024
Examiner
CRAIG, DANIEL THOMAS
Art Unit
3676
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Expro North Sea Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
19 granted / 22 resolved
+34.4% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 7m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
52
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.9%
-37.1% vs TC avg
§103
48.0%
+8.0% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 22 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Status of Claims This action is in reply to the Applicant’s claims, filed 12/09/2025. Claims 1-3, 5, 8-12, 14 and 17 are amended. Claims 4, 6-7, 13, 16, and 18-22 have been cancelled. Claims 1-3, 5, 8-12, 14-18, and 17 are currently pending and have been examined. Response to Amendment The amendment filed 12/09/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 5, 8-12, 14-18, and 17 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the specification have overcome the drawing objection and 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Final Office Action filed 10/09/2025. Applicant’s amendments with respect to the prior art rejections of claims 1-3, 5, 8-12, 14-18, and 17 have been considered and introduce new issues that a new ground(s) of rejection is made. 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. Claim 8 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 8 recites the limitation: wherein within the single trip the method comprises: running the collar on a bottom of the casing; running an inner string inside the casing until the latch-in adaptor engages into the drill pipe latch-in receiver. This limitation reads that the collar system and inner string are installed as part of a “single trip” method into the wellbore, rather than the collar being installed during a prior operation and the inner string installed during a later operation. The written description describes the collar system being pre-installed before the inner string is installed ([0006]). As the collar is preinstalled in the wellbore before the inner string is installed, the specification does not describe running the collar and inner string together in a single trip. While the specification describes the disclosed method to eliminate the need for a separate drill/clean out trip to save days of rig time (i.e. fewer trips), this does not equate to a single trip installation of the collar and running string. The specification does not support installing the collar and inner string in single trip, but instead describes installing the running string after the collar has already been preinstalled; therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Claims 9-12, 14-15, and 17 are rejected for being dependent of a rejected indefinite claim. 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. Claims 1-3, 5, 8-12, 14-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruce (US20200263533) in view of Neacsu et al. (US12012823). Claim 1. Bruce discloses: A collar system (Fig. 1) for wellbore cementation, comprising: a collar (22 float shoe or coupling, Fig. 1; [0109]) provided to run at the bottom of a casing (20 casing, Fig. 1), wherein the collar comprises: a barrier plug (44 ball or dart, Fig. 3) a barrier plug receiver (24 aperture, Fig. 1) and a drill pipe latch-in receiver (latch down receptacle, [0108]); a latch-in adaptor (68 latching or stab in connector, Fig. 1); an inner string (10 work sting, Fig. 1) running inside the casing to be cemented (54 settable material, Fig. 2) until the latch-in adaptor engages into the drill pipe latch-in receiver; wherein the inner string is fully rotatable (70 telescopic coupling, Fig. 1; when retracted by compression the spline arrangement is disengaged and the coupling does not transfer torque i.e. fully rotatable, [0114]) to ensure make-up of a casing running tool to the casing ([0115]); wherein full rotation of the inner string allows for make-up of the casing running tool to the casing; and wherein as the inner string is disconnected and pulled out of the collar ([0140]). Bruce does not disclose: a barrier plug and the barrier plug is tensionally set into a sealing and locking position in the collar. Neacsu discloses a wellbore assembly for deploying cement comprising of a work string, packer, and flapper valve wherein cement is flowed downhole through the work string to a target zone. Neacus teaches: barrier plug (108 cement retainer comprising of 112 packer, Fig. 1-6) that is tensionally set (packer is set mechanically by applying overpull (i.e. tension set); Col. 5, lines 8-11) into a sealing (packer creates fluid tight seal; Col. 6, lines 62-63 or 120 valve; Col. 5, lines 25-38) and locking position (109 teeth; Fig. 3 or closed 120 valve; Col. 5, lines 25-38) in the collar (104 casing, Fig. 2) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the aperture closing dart of Bruce with the cement retainer of Neacsu with a reasonable expectation of success in order to deploy a cement retainer on the work string into a collar wherein the cement retainer is tensionally set into a sealing and locking position, allows settable material to flow from the work sting into the annular area below the coupling, and creates a seal to restrict the fluid from flowing through the cement retainer when the work string is retrieved as suggested by Neacsu (Fig. 1-6; Col. 5 line 5 – Col. 7 line 54). Claim 2. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The system of claim 1. Bruce discloses: the inner string in the casing is configured to supply a settable material to a casing annulus (Bruce: Fig. 1-4, [0104-0142]) and to allow hardening of the settable material to secure or seal the casing in a drilled bore (Bruce: [0007-0096]). Claim 3. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The system of claim 1. Bruce discloses: the inner string in the casing, is configured to permit a fluid flow (Bruce: flushing fluid, [0036]; Neacsu: C cement, Fig. 6) through the inner string and into an outer annulus to facilitate translation of the casing into a drilled bore (Bruce: [0125]; Neacsu, Fig. 6). Claim 5. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The system of claim 1. Bruce does not disclose: the barrier plug comprises a double-acting lock-ring to seal the barrier plug with an inner diameter of the collar to provide a bi-directional pressure containment. Neacsu further teaches: the barrier plug comprises a double-acting lock ring to seal (112 packer and 109 teeth, Fig. 1-6) the barrier plug with an inner diameter of the collar (Fig. 3-6) to provide a bi-directional pressure containment (112 packer provides fluid tight bi-directional seal; Fig. 3-6). Claim 8. Bruce discloses: (see previously rejected claim 1) A method for wellbore cementation of a casing, the method comprising: using a collar system to cement a casing and install a barrier plug in the casing in a single trip of the collar system into the casing, wherein the collar system includes a collar, the barrier plug, and a latch-in adaptor, and wherein the collar includes a barrier plug receiver and a drill pipe latch-in receiver; wherein within the single trip the method comprises: running the collar on a bottom of the casing; running an inner string inside the casing until the latch-in adaptor engages into the drill pipe latch-in receiver; rotating an inner string for make-up of a casing running tool to the casing; and running the collar system so that as the inner string is disconnected and pulled out of the collar (Bruce: [0104-0142]). Bruce does not disclose: the barrier plug is tensionally set into a sealing and locking position in the collar. Neacsu teaches: a barrier plug is tensionally set into a sealing and locking position in the collar. Regarding the limitation: using a collar system to cement a casing and install a barrier plug in the casing in a single trip of the collar system into the casing. Examiner is reading this as “installing the work string and barrier plug into the collar system of the casing in a single trip (see 112(a) rejection above).” Neacsu teaches: installing the work string and barrier plug into the collar system of the casing in a single trip (Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, modify the system of Fredd with the cement retainer of Neacsu with a reasonable expectation of success in order to deploy, in a single trip, a cement retainer on the work string wherein the cement retainer is tensionally set into a sealing and locking position, allows settable material to flow from the work sting into the annular area below the collar, and creates a seal to restrict the fluid from flowing uphole when the work string is retrieved as suggested by Neacsu (Fig. 1-6; Col. 5 line 5 – Col. 7 line 54). Claim 9. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The method of claim 8. Bruce discloses: the inner string includes a tool that can be stroked partially closed to allow for full rotation for make-up of the casing running tool to the casing (Bruce: [0014]). Claim 10. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The method of claim 8. Bruce discloses: supplying a settable material to a casing annulus through the inner string (Bruce: Fig. 1-4, [0104-0142]). Claim 11. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The method of claim 10. Bruce discloses: flowing fluid through the inner string and into the casing annulus to facilitate translation of the casing into a drilled bore (see previously rejected claim 3). Claim 12. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The method of claim 8. Bruce discloses: flowing a settable material into the outer annulus to fill an outer annulus at least partially, and allowing hardening of the settable material to secure or seal the casing in a drilled bore (Bruce: [0016-0138]). Claim 14. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The method of claim 8. Bruce does not disclose: engaging the barrier plug to seal an inner diameter of the collar with a double-acting lock-ring for a bi-directional pressure containment. Neacsu further teaches: engaging the barrier plug to seal an inner diameter of the collar with a double-acting lock-ring for a bi-directional pressure containment (see previously rejected claim 5). Claim 15. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The method of claim 14. Bruce does not disclose: the bi-directional pressure containment is within range of 10-15 ksi at 400o F. Neacsu further teaches: bi-directional pressure containment (see previously rejected claim 3). Regarding the limitation: pressure containment is within range of 10-15 ksi at 400o F, Neacsu does not explicitly teach; however, Neacsu does teach positive sealing engagement and utilizing the packer to create a fluid tight seal. Neacsu discloses the claimed invention, except for the specific numerical range recited in claim 15. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the packer of Fredd to contain pressures withing a range of 10-15k ksi at 400o F since it is well established in the art that pressure containing packers for high pressure and high temperature applications (e.g. oilfield or high-performance hydraulic systems) commonly use material and geometries capable of withstanding the claimed conditions as instantly claimed based on choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Claim 17. Bruce and Neacsu teach: The method of claim 8. Bruce does not disclose: shearing off a barrier plug stem from the barrier plug. Neacsu further teaches: shearing (148 shear pins : Col. 5, lines 48-59) off the barrier plug stem (110 housing, Fig. 2) from the barrier plug. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Craig whose telephone number is (571)270-0747. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thurs 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM CST. 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. /DANIEL T CRAIG/Examiner, Art Unit 3676 /TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 23, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Sep 17, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 09, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601243
FLUID INJECTION FOR DEHYDROGENATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590513
SAND SCREEN WITH A NON-WOVEN FIBER POLYMER FILTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590501
SURFACE SWIVEL FOR WELLHEAD ORIENTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12571273
DOWNHOLE RADIAL FORCE TOOL ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12534973
DOWNHOLE TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.3%)
1y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 22 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month