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 .
NEW GROUND(S) OF REJECTION
The ground(s) of rejection set forth in the Office action dated 10 December 2025 from which the notice of appeal is taken have been modified by the pre-appeal brief conference decision dated 23 March 2026.
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 11-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ravensbergen et al., U.S. 10,208,564 in view of Stannus et al., U.S. 12,492,612.
Claim 11: Ravensbergen et al. discloses a barrier valve (fig 1, rupture assembly 100; col. 4, lines 7-28) for use downhole in a wellbore (fig 1, 12), the barrier valve having a housing (fig 2, tubular members 116, 118; col. 4, lines 28-31) having an outer wall and an inner wall, the inner wall defining a passage (fig 2, ID₁) through the housing; a frangible barrier (fig 2, rupture members 102, 104; col. 4, lines 64-67) having a convex upper curved surface (fig 2, surface of rupture member 102 at tubular 116; col. 5, lines 14-23) and a convex lower surface (surface of rupture member 104 at tubular 118); and a mounting member (fig 5, impact carrier 108; col. 7, lines 2-10) configured to secure the frangible barrier in the housing; wherein the frangible barrier is comprised of heat strengthened glass (col. 2, lines 34-40).
Ravensbergen et al. discloses heat strengthened glass but does not disclose that the glass after heating undergoes a cooling or quench procedure that earns the moniker “tempered”, notwithstanding the similar un-claimed performative characteristics.
Stannus et al. teaches use of a tempered glass (col. 20, lines 25-45) rupture disc (30; col. 12, lines 15-26) in a wellbore tubular, wherein upon breakage the debris is small and there is little danger to the casing string from ruptured pieces, and the potential for clogging is low or minimal (col. 20, lines 43-45).
It would have bee obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make use of a well known glass and/or glass heat treating process as taught by Stannus et al. to achieve a desired or predictable results of the glass treatment process for the intended degree of useful fragmentation.
Claim 12, the base reference discloses the frangible barrier (102, 104) includes a -section having an outer wall, the outer wall mid-section being circular in shape (the hemispherical domed shapes of the rupture members 102 and 104 meet the circular limitations throughout the lengths of each).
Claim 13, the base reference discloses a seal (fig 2, O-rings 112; col. 4, lines 64-67) disposed about the mid-section (fig 2 the mid-section at projections 160) such that it is located between the inner wall of the housing (tubulars 116 and 118) and the mid-section.
Claim 14, the base reference discloses the inner wall of the housing (116, 118) includes an inner shoulder (fig 3, circumferential edge 140; col. 5, lines 48-58) configured to receive the upper curved surface (fig 3, surface of 102 via 106).
Claim 15, the base reference discloses a plurality of buttons (fig 3, impact projections 160; col. 7, lines 2-10) that protrude into the passage, the frangible barrier (102, 104) being moveable (col. 2, lines 40-50) relative to the housing to engage the buttons and destroy the frangible barrier (col. 3, lines 15-19).
Claim 16, the base reference discloses the mounting member (impact carrier 108) is adapted to move (col. 6, lines 53-63; and movement or deformation associated with the impact of the rupture members) along the inner wall of the housing (102, 104).
Claim 19, the base reference discloses the frangible barrier (102, 104) is configured to fracture into pieces (the glass is inherently breakable or configurable to break into small pieces within the claimed range) having a major diameter of less than 0.25 inches (the very small broken parts meet the configuration for the limitations of size, col. 2 lines 40-55).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Helms et al., U.S. 10,995,583.
Helms et al. discloses wellbore a barrier valve (fig 2, breakable barrier 85; col. 4, lines 7-25) having a housing (fig 2, outer case 36; col. 2, lines 14-18) with an outer wall (outer circumference) and an inner wall (inner bore) defining a passage (flow path 37) through the housing (36),
a frangible barrier (frangible disc 122; col. 4, lines 21-25) having a convex upper curved surface and a convex lower surface (fig 4. Disc 122 is hemispherical; col. 4, lines 11-14) and a mounting member (fig 5, tongue 126; col. 4, lines 16-20) configured to secure the frangible barrier (122) in the housing (36), wherein the frangible barrier (126) is comprised of tempered glass (col. 4, lines 20-25).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH L THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7037. The examiner can normally be reached Weekdays; 9:00-5:00, 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, 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.
23 March 2026
/KENNETH L THOMPSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676