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 .
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.
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(s) 1, 2, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20150361747 A1 to Lafferty in view of US 20210381334 A1 to Goodman and US 20230088984 A1
To Underbrink.
Regarding claim 1: Lafferty discloses 1. A multipressure cycling completion tool, for completing a wellbore comprising a plurality of downhole elements, each having a wireless tag, the tool comprising:
a. an activation assembly (Figure 3) for an expandable deployment mechanism 310, which, (i) upon activation, causes expansion of an expandable anchor ring and sealing element (bridge plug [0024]),; and (ii) upon deactivation, causes retraction of the expandable anchor ring and sealing element ([0070], self-release);
b. a wireless sensor 330 configured to detect a wireless tag associated with a downhole element([0052],[0058], [0089]; and
c. at least one pressure sensor 720 configured to generate pressure data [0065]; and
d. a controller 324 operatively connected to the wireless sensor, the at least one pressure sensor, and the activation assembly, and configured to: activate the activation assembly in response to sensing of a wireless tag([0057],[0089]) and (ii) deactivate the activation assembly [0049], [0070]
However Lafferty fails to disclose the details of the deployment mechanism are comprising an expandable anchor ring and sealing element, or where the deactivation of the activation assembly is based on the pressure data from the at least one pressure sensor.
Goodman teaches an expandable plug design with, and an expandable anchor ring 72 and sealing element 52 (Figure 1)
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date (AIA ) to have modified Lafferty and use for his expandable deployment mechanism a plug in the style of Goodman with an expandable anchor ring and sealing element, as no more than combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Underbrink teaches a pressure sensor 20 connected to a control board 24 and a downhole tool, such as a packer, wherein a signal generated by the pressure sensors may cause the actuation device to actuate or release the downhole tool. (Figure 8, [0032]).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date (AIA ) to have modified Lafferty and allow his actuator to release the dart upon pressure data from the at least one pressure sensor, in view of Underbrink, so as to allow a signal to be sent from surface and to communicate with the downhole tool to release [0032]. Furthermore, modifying Lafferty to allow a pressure signal from the surface to interact with the controller would amount to no more than the se of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
Regarding claim 2: Lafferty discloses wherein the wireless sensor comprises an RFID sensor (([0052],[0058], [0089], the sensor is interpreted as being disclosed as a sensor capable of sensing the RFID tags, thus an RFID sensor) and the wireless tags 160 each comprise a passive or active RFID tag.[0052]
Regarding claim 14: Lafferty discloses 14. (New) The tool of claim 1, wherein the wireless sensor 330 is further configured to identify the wireless tag. ([0052],[0054],[0060], counting the downhole markers is interpreted as identifying it, in that it has to sense it and identify it from a background signal in order to count it)
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20150361747 A1 to Lafferty, in view of US 20210381334 A1 to Goodman and US 20230088984 A1 to Underbrink, further in view of US 20190264539 A1 to Sehsah.
Regarding claim 5: Lafferty discloses the claimed invention except wherein the at least one pressure sensor comprises an uphole pressure sensor and a downhole pressure sensor.
Sehsah teaches measuring uphole and downhole pressure with respective pressure sensors (56, 58) [0035].
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date (AIA ) to have modified Lafferty to use and an uphole pressure sensor and a downhole pressure sensor, in view of Sehsah, as it is well known to use two pressure sensors to find the difference to between two zones [0035], and replacing his differential pressure sensors with two pressure sensors would amount to no more than applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 6: Lafferty discloses 6. (Currently Amended) The tool of claim 5, wherein the tool further comprises a battery 340 and is battery powered 340.(Fig 3); and wherein the tool is configured to be deployed in the wellbore and not be physically connected to any surface equipment.(Abstract, “untethered”)
Claim(s) 15 s/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20150361747 A1 to Lafferty, in view of US 20210381334 A1 to Goodman and US 20230088984 A1 to Underbrink, further in view of US 20190178045 A1 to Frazier.
Regarding claim 15: Lafferty discloses the claimed invention except fails to disclose the details of the deployment/ activation mechanism are comprising an activation motor, a transmission, a longitudinally moveable cone, and the expandable anchor ring and sealing element disposed around the cone, wherein the activation motor causes longitudinal movement of the cone.
Frazier teaches a setting tool 100 as part of a downhole tool, with a motor 66, a transmission 76 to set for a bridge plug 112 (Figure 4, [0045])
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date (AIA ) to have modified Lafferty and use for his actuator, a motor and transmission, in view of Frazier, in order to provide a linear force to set the bridge plug.
Goodman teaches an expandable plug design with a longitudinally moveable cone 32, and an expandable anchor ring 72 and sealing element 52 disposed around the cone(Figure 1)
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date (AIA ) to have modified Lafferty and use for his expandable deployment mechanism, a plug in the style of Goodman with a longitudinally moveable cone, and an expandable anchor ring and sealing element disposed around the cone, as no more than combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
The combination is interpreted as teaching wherein the activation motor causes longitudinal movement of the cone, which causes expansion or retraction of the anchor ring and sealing element;
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments dated 3/17/2026 have been reviewed and considered.
In view of the amendments, the drawing objections and 112 rejections are withdrawn.
The amendments have overcome the prior rejections and new rejections with the inclusion of US 20230088984 A1 to Underbrink are made. US 20230088984 A1 to Underbrink is included to address the newly amended limitations of “ the deactivation of the activation assembly is based on the pressure data from the at least one pressure sensor.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 STEVEN MACDONALD whose telephone number is (571)272-8763. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30 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, Doug Hutton can be reached at (571) 272-4137. 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.
/STEVEN A MACDONALD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674