Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/938,904

BI-DIRECTIONAL METAL TO METAL SEALING SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 06, 2024
Examiner
CRAIG, DANIEL THOMAS
Art Unit
3676
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
BAKER HUGHES OILFIELD OPERATIONS LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
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

§102 §103
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 on 11/06/2024. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Information Disclosure Statement The multiple information disclosure statements have been received and considered. However, the statements include a number of U.S. patents or U. S. patent application references that appears to have no relevancy to the claimed invention and has not been considered. These inclusions have not been considered as shown on the struck through IDS. 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. Claims 13-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dubedout et al. (US20070132236). Claim 13. Dubedout discloses: A sealing system (Fig. 10-12), comprising: a first sealing surface (DC3 sealing surface, Fig. 11) associated with a first wellbore component (box connection of tubular joint, Fig, 11), the first sealing surface arranged along an outer region of the first wellbore component (Fig. 11); a second sealing surface (SE2 sealing surface, Fig 11) associated with the first wellbore component, the second sealing surface arranged within a recess (LO annular recess, Fig. 11) formed in the first wellbore component; a third sealing surface (DC4 sealing surface, Fig. 10) associated with a second wellbore component (pin connection of tubular joint, Fig. 10), the third sealing surface arranged along an outer diameter of the second wellbore component (Fig. 10); and a fourth sealing surface (SI1 sealing surface, Fig. 10) associated with the second wellbore component, the fourth sealing surface arranged along a base region of the second wellbore component (SI1 is along the base region, Fig. 12); wherein the second wellbore component is coupled to the first wellbore component to drive the third sealing surface against the first sealing surface to establish a first seal and to drive the fourth sealing surface against the second sealing surface to establish a second seal ([0079-0082; 0117-0132]), and wherein the first seal is configured to resist a bore pressure (tightness to gases under internal pressure, [0084]) and the second seal is configured to resist a tubing and casing annulus pressure (seals under external pressure, [0084]). Claim 14. Dubedout discloses: The sealing system of claim 13, wherein each of the first seal and the second seal are metal to metal seals (components are steel, [0151]; surfaces create seals, [0079-0082; 0117-0132]). Claim 15. Dubedout discloses: The sealing system of claim 13, wherein the fourth sealing surface includes at least one of a flat, a bump, or a radius (SI1 is a radius, Fig. 10). Claim 18. Dubedout discloses: A system for establishing a bi-directional (tightness to gases under internal pressure and seals under external pressure, [0084]) metal to metal seal (components are steel, [0151]; surfaces create seals, [0079-0082; 0117-0132]) between a first downhole component (box connection of tubing joint, Fig. 10) and a second downhole component (pin connection of tubing joint, Fig. 12), comprising: a first metal to metal seal between the first downhole component and the second downhole component, the first metal to metal seal formed at a first contact location between a first sealing surface along an outer region of the first downhole component and a second sealing surface along an outer diameter of the second downhole component (DC3-DC4 sealing surface, Fig. 12; see previously rejected claim 13) and a second metal to metal seal between the first downhole component and the second downhole component, the second metal to metal seal formed at a second contact location between a third sealing surface within a recessed portion of the first downhole component and a fourth sealing surface along a base region of the second downhole component (SE2-SE1 sealing surface, Fig. 12; see previously rejected claim 13) wherein each of the first metal to metal seal and the second metal to metal seal are configured to resist pressure from an opposite radial direction (internal and external is opposite, [0084]; see previously rejected claim 13). Claim 19. Dubedout discloses: The system of claim 18, wherein the fourth sealing surface includes at least one of a flat, a bump, or a radius (SI1 is a radius, Fig. 10); see previously rejected claim 15). Claim 20. Dubedout discloses: The system of claim 18, wherein the third sealing surface is a sloped surface (DC3-DC4 is sloped per α10-11; Fig. 10-11). 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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kent (US5638903) in view of Dubedout et al. (US20070132236). Claim 1. Kent discloses: A wellbore system (mandrel hanger, Fig. 1A), comprising: a mandrel hanger body (39 tubular body, Fig. 5), comprising: an associated tool component configured to couple to the mandrel hanger body (37 running tool, 13 mandrel or 11 tieback casing, Fig. 1A), comprising: Kent does not disclose: a recessed portion; a primary sealing surface; a secondary sealing surface forming at least a part of the recessed portion; and a retaining skirt; or a nose including a first nose sealing surface and a second nose sealing surface; wherein the nose is configured to be positioned, at least in part, within the recessed portion such that the primary sealing surface engages the first nose sealing surface to form a first metal to metal seal and the secondary sealing surface engages the second nose sealing surface to form a second metal to metal seal. Dubedout discloses a tubular joint comprising of multiple seal surfaces and an annular lip for coupling components to each outer. Therefore, Dubedout teaches: a recessed portion (LO annular recess, Fig. 11); a primary sealing surface (DC3 sealing surface, Fig. 12); a secondary sealing surface forming at least a part of the recessed portion (SB3 sealing surface is part of LO, Fig. 12; provides seal [0097]) ; and a retaining skirt (L2 second annular lip, Fig. 12); and a nose (L1 fist annular lip, Fig. 10) including a first nose sealing surface (DC4 sealing surface, Fig. 10) and a second nose sealing surface (SB2 sealing surface, Fig 10); wherein the nose is configured to be positioned, at least in part, within the recessed portion (Fig. 12) such that the primary sealing surface engages the first nose sealing surface to form a first metal to metal seal and the secondary sealing surface engages the second nose sealing surface to form a second metal to metal seal (components are steel, [0151]; surfaces creates seals, [0079-0082; 0117-0132]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the joint design of Dubedout for the connections for the mandrel hanger system (tubular body, mandrel running tool, casing tieback) of Kent with a reasonable expectation of success as suggested by Dubedout because both perform the same function in similar contexts and to create a metal to metal seal between the components. Such a substitution represents the use of a known element according to its established function, and the results would have been predictable. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Claim 2. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 1, wherein the secondary sealing surface is a sloped surface (Dubedout: surface of SB2 and SB3 is sloped per α4, Fig. 10). Claim 3. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 2, wherein the sloped surface is a reverse rake (Dubedout: surface of SB2 and SB3 is sloped per α4 and a negative rake, Fig. 10). Claim 4. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 1, wherein the nose is a flexible metallic component that elastically deforms to form the first metal to metal seal and the second metal to metal seal (Dubedout: interference contact of sealing surfaces during makeup inherently elastically deforms the surfaces, [0141-0145]). Claim 5. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 1, wherein the retaining skirt is configured to block radial inward collapse of the nose responsive to a radially inward force (Dubedout: L2 would inherently support L1 under a radially inward force, Fig. 12). Claim 6. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 1, wherein the first metal to metal seal is configured to resist pressure from a first direction (Dubedout: seals under external pressure, [0084]) and the second metal to metal seal is configured to resist pressure from a second direction (Dubedout: tightness to gases under internal pressure, [0084]), the first direction being opposite the second direction (Dubedout: external is opposite of internal). Claim 7. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 1, wherein the second nose sealing surface includes at least one of a flat, a bump, or a radius (Dubedout: SB2-SB3 seal surface is flat, Fig. 12). Claim 8. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 1, wherein the recessed portion further comprises a void extending, at least in part, axially lower than the secondary sealing surface (Dubedout: void between surface SI1 and SE2 that is axially lower than SB2-SB3 seal surface, Fig. 12). Claim 9. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 1, further comprising: a third metal to metal seal (Dubedout: SI1-SE2 creates a seal, [0083]) formed between a third nose sealing surface (Dubedout: SI1 seal surface, Fig. 10) and a third sealing surface of the recessed portion (Dubedout: SE2 seal surface, Fig. 11) positioned, at least in part, on the retaining skirt (Dubedout: SE2 is on L2, Fig. 11). Claim 10. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 1, wherein the associated tool component is at least one of a running tool or a tieback tool (see previously rejected claim 1). Claim 11. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 10, wherein the nose forms a portion of the running tool and the first metal to metal seal is formed proximate the recessed portion (Kent: 45 piston pin connection of 37 running tool, Fig. 1A when substituted for the joint of Dubedout). Claim 12. Kent in view of Dubedout teaches: The wellbore system of claim 10, wherein the nose forms a portion of the tieback tool and the first metal to metal seal is formed axially higher than the recessed portion (Kent: pin connection of 13 casing tieback, Fig. 1A when substituted for the joint of Dubedout). Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dubedout et al. (US20070132236). Claim 16. Dubedout discloses: The sealing system of claim 13. Dubedout does not disclose: the second sealing surface is a sloped surface in a reverse rake configuration. Dubedout does teach a reverse rake for sealing surfaces SB2 and SB3 (Fig. 12) therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the second sealing surface by incorporating a reverse rake as taught by Dubedout with a reasonable expectation of success in order to create an abutment surface for generating a radial and sealing interference ([0143]). Claim 17. Dubedout teaches: The sealing system of claim 13. Dubedout does not disclose: a void space axially lower than the second sealing surface. Dubedout does teach a void space axially lower than a sealing surface (void between surface SI1 and SE2 that is axially lower than SB2-SB3 seal surface, Fig. 12) therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the second sealing surface by incorporating a void space axially lower than the second sealing surface as taught by Dubedout with a reasonable expectation of success in order to create an void to reduce the possible risk of accidental interference or galling before the seal surfaces contact ([0080]). 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

Nov 06, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.3%)
1y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
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