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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/22/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-5, 10-12, 14-17 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2009/0145607 A') and further in view of Eluru et al. (US 2019/0127629 A1) and Claims 1-5, 10-12, 14-17 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2009/0145607 A') and further in view of Crews et al. (US 2007/0299142 A1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made set forth below.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
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.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Claims 1-9, 10, 11, 14-22, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2019/0062619 A1) (“’619” herein) and further in view of Li (US 2009/0145607 A') ("Li' herein- cited previously)
Claim 1.
‘619 disclosers a fracturing fluid, comprising:
a dual-polymer fluid operable as a base fluid for all stages of a hydraulic fracturing operation, including:
polymers; [0003, 0025-0027]
0.06 wt. % - 1 wt.% of a temperature stabilizer comprising an ethoxylated sugar alcohol derivative based on total weight of the fracturing fluid; [0023-0024]
a clay stabilizer, wherein the clay stabilizer comprises one or more of a polymeric-based clay stabilizer, sodium chloride, or any combination thereof; [0031] and
an acidic buffer, [0032]
wherein a pH of the dual-polymer fluid ranges from about 4 to about 6. [0032]
‘619 however does not discloses the polymer as a polysaccharide and polyacrylamide polymers.
Li discloses the above limitation (See paragraphs 0008→ Li teaches this limitation in that treatment fluid for treating a subterranean formation is formed from an aqueous solution of a polysaccharide, a polyacrylamide, a crosslinking agent and less than 0.1% by weight of any clay component. The polysaccharide may be used in an amount of from about 0.1% or more and may be selected from carboxymethylhydroxypropyl guar (CMHPG), carboxymethyl guar, hydroxypropyl guar, guar and combinations of these. The polyacrylamide may be a polyacrylamide homopolymer, a copolymer of acrylamide and acrylate monomers or a copolymer of acrylamide and other monomers and may have an average molecular weight of from greater than 0.5 million to about 20 million. The polyacrylamide may be used in the treatment fluid in an amount of from about 0.01% to about 1% by weight of the fluid.) for the purpose of using polymer fluids composition used and methods of using such fluids in high temperature applications, such as high temperature fracturing operations. [0007]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the polymers of ‘619 with the above limitation, as taught by Li, in order to use polymer fluids composition and methods of using such fluids in high temperature applications, such as high temperature fracturing operations.
Claim 2.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1. ‘619 however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the polysaccharide polymer is selected from the group consisting of a carboxymethyl hydroxypropyl guar (CMHPG), a hydroxyl propyl guar (HPG), a guar, a polysaccharide derivative wherein the derivative has six or more repeating units, a polysaccharide containing a side group capable of hydrogen bonding, and any combination thereof. (Same as claim 1)
Claim 3.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the polyacrylamide polymer is a synthetic polymer. [0025]
Claim 4.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 3, wherein the synthetic polymer further comprises monomers including an acrylamide (AM), an acrylic acid (AA), and a 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonic acid (AMPS). [0025]
Claim 5.
‘ ‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1. ‘619 however does not explicitly disclose, (, wherein a volume ratio of polysaccharide polymer to polyacrylamide polymer is 1:1, 1:2 or 2:1. (Same as claim 1)
Claim 6
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 4, wherein the polyacrylamide polymer further comprises 10 - 30 wt. % AMPS, 0.5 - 2.0 wt.% of AA, and a remainder of the polyacrylamide comprises AM. [0025]
Claim 7.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the clay stabilizer is present at about 0.1 vol. % to about 1.0 vol. %. [0031]
Claim 8.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 7, wherein the clay stabilizer further comprises one or more components selected from the group consisting of a tetramethyl ammonium chloride (TMAC), an ammonium chloride, a potassium chloride (KCI), a choline chloride, and any combination thereof. [0031]
Claim 10.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, further comprising 0.05 vol. % - 1.0 vol. % surfactant. [0040-0042]
Claim 11.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the temperature stabilizer is present at a concentration of about 0.5 vol% to about 0.8 vol%, based on total volume of the fracturing fluid. [0024]
Claim 14.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the pH of the dual-polymer fluid ranges from about 4.5 to about 5.5. [0032]
Claim 15.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, further comprising 0.01 vol.% - 2 vol.% metallic crosslinker. [0011-0012, 0028]
Claim 16.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 15, wherein the metallic crosslinker is selected from the group consisting of a zirconium lactate, a zirconium lactate and triethanolamine, a zirconium triethanolamine lactate, a zirconium lactate and propylene glycol, a titanium based crosslinker, a hafnium based crosslinker, an aluminum based crosslinker, and any combination thereof. [0011-0012, 0028]
Claim 17.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the pH of the dual-polymer fluid is about 5. [0032]
Claim 18.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the acidic buffer comprises acetic acid and sodium acetate. [0032]
Claim 19.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 7, wherein the clay stabilizer is tetramethyl ammonium chloride (TMAC). [0031]
Claim 20
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1. ‘619 however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the polysaccharide polymer is present at about 0.05 wt.% to about 1 wt.%, based on total weight of the fracturing fluid. (Same as claim 1)
Claim 21
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 15, wherein the metallic crosslinker comprises zirconium lactate and propylene glycol. [0011-0012, 0028]
Claim 22.
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the temperature stabilizer further comprises sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate. [0031]
‘619 discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 22, wherein the sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate is present at about 0.06 wt%, based on total weight of the fracturing fluid. [0031]
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10, 11, 14-17, 19-20, 22, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2009/0145607 A') ("Li' herein- cited previously) and further in view of Li et al. (US 2019/0062619 A1) (“’619” herein).
Claims 1, 7, 8, 11, 14, 17, 19,
Li discloses a fracturing fluid, comprising:
a dual-polymer fluid operable as a base fluid for all stages of a hydraulic fracturing operation, including:
a polysaccharide polymer; and
a polyacrylamide polymer. [0007-0008, 0021-0022, 0024, 0031]
acid buffer. [0027]
0.06 wt. % - 1 wt.% of a temperature stabilizer based on total weight of the fracturing fluid; [0041, 0044]
about 0.1 vol. % to about 1.0 vol. %. clay stabilizer, wherein the clay stabilizer comprises one or more of a polymeric-based clay stabilizer, sodium chloride, or any combination thereof; wherein the clay stabilizer is present at, wherein the clay stabilizer further comprises one or more components selected from the group consisting of a tetramethyl ammonium chloride (TMAC), an ammonium chloride, a potassium chloride (KCI), a choline chloride, and any combination thereof. [0035, 0041]
Li however does not explicitly disclose a temperature stabilizer selected from the group consisting of an ethoxylated sugar alcohol derivative.
‘619 teaches the above limitation (See paragraphs 0024 ‘619 teaches this limitation in that the additive includes a sugar alcohol derivative or a mixture of sugar alcohol derivatives. Examples of suitable sugar alcohol derivatives include derivatives of sorbitol, erythritol, mannitol, lactitol, xylitol, and maltitol. Examples of suitable derivatives include alkylated derivatives, such as ETHOX 3571 (an alkylated sorbitol derivative available from Ethox Chemicals, LLC). A concentration of the sugar alcohol derivative is in a range of 0.01 wt. % to 10 wt. wt. % of the fracturing fluid.) for the purpose of using the composition in hydraulic fracturing operations, particularly those compatible with high temperatures of about 280° F. up to about 450° F., for use with hard water or water with high total dissolved solids (TDS). [0001]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Li, with the above limitation, as taught by ‘619, in order to use the composition in hydraulic fracturing operations, particularly those compatible with high temperatures of about 280° F. up to about 450° F., for use with hard water or water with high total dissolved solids (TDS).
Since Li discloses the same composition comprising a polysaccharide polymer and a polyacrylamide polymer, an acid buffer, clay inhibitor, temperature stabilizer, it would be a dual-polymer fluid operable for all stages of a hydraulic fracturing having the dual-polymer fluid pH ranges from about 4 to about 6 or about 4.5 to about 5.5 or about 5.0.
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties". A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01 (I), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp V Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp V DF Newtield Co, 7F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY 1934).
Claim 2.
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the polysaccharide polymer is selected from the group consisting of a carboxymethyl hydroxypropyl guar (CMHPG), a hydroxyl propy! guar (HPG), a guar, a polysaccharide derivative wherein the derivative has six or more repeating units, a polysaccharide containing a side group capable of hydrogen bonding, and any combination thereof. [0008, 0021-0022]
Claim 3
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the polyacrylamide polymer is a synthetic polymer. [0008, 0023-0024, 0035]
Claim 4
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 3, wherein the synthetic polymer further comprises monomers including an acrylamide (AM), an acrylic acid (AA), and a 2- acrylamido-2- methylpropane sulfonic acid (AMPS). [0008, 0023-0024, 0035] .
Claim 5
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein a ratio of polysaccharide polymer to polyacrylamide polymer is 1:1, 1:2 or 2:1. [0008, 0024]
Claim 10
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, further comprising 0.05 vol. % - 1.0 vol. % surfactant. [0028]
Claim 11
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, further wherein the temperature stabilizer is present at concentration of about 0.5-0.8 vol. % temperature stabilizer. [0041, 0044]
Claim 15
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, further comprising 0.01 vol. % - 2 vol. % metallic crosslinker. [0009, 0025]
Claim 16 .
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 15, wherein the metallic crosslinker is selected from the group consisting of a zirconium lactate, a zirconium lactate and triethanolamine, a zirconium triethanolamine lactate, a zirconium lactate and propylene glycol, a titanium based crosslinker, a hafnium based crosslinker, an aluminum based crosslinker, and any combination thereof. [0009, 0025]
Claim 20
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the polysaccharide polymer is present at about 0.05 wt. % to about 1 wt. %, based on total weight of the fracturing fluid. [0008]
Claim 22.
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1, wherein the temperature stabilizer further comprises sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate. [0041, 0044]
Claim 23.
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 22, wherein the sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate is present at about 0.06 wt%, based on total weight of the fracturing fluid. [0041, 0044]
Claim 6 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, ‘619, as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of Funkhouser et al. (US 2004/021 1568 A1) (“Funkhouser” herein- cited previously).
Claim 6
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 4. Li however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the polyacrylamide polymer further comprises,
10 - 30 wt. % AMPS,
0.5 - 2.0 wt. % of AA, and
a remainder of the polyacrylamide comprises AM.
Funkhouser teaches the above limitation (See paragraph 0023 → Funkhouser teaches this limitation in that the "AMPS.RTM." is present in the terpolymer in an amount in the range of from about 15 weight % to about 80 weight %. The acrylamide is present therein in an amount in the range of from about 20 weight % to about 85 weight % and the acrylic acid or salts thereof are present in an amount in the range of from about 0 weight % to about 10 weight %.) for the purpose of having a terpolymer that is very rapidly cross-linked with metal ions which allow the aqueous solution of the terpolymer to be mixed with a metal ion cross-linker on-the-fly. [0024]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Li fracturing fluid with the above limitation, as taught by Funkhouser, in order to have a terpolymer that is very rapidly cross-linked with metal ions which allow the aqueous solution of the terpolymer to be mixed with a metal ion cross-linker on-the-fly.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, ‘619, as applied to claims 1 above, and in further view of Reddy et al. (US 2014/0338907 A1) ("Reddy" herein-cited previously)
Claim 18.
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 1. Li however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the acidic buffer is an acetic acid and sodium acetate buffer.
Reddy teaches the above limitation (See paragraph 0054→ Reddy teaches this limitation in that Nonlimiting examples of chemical combinations which can be used as pH buffers include acetic acid/sodium acetate; sodium carbonate/sodium bicarbonate; and sodium dihydrogen phosphate/sodium monohydrogen phosphate) for the purpose of having the pH buffer comprising a combination of weak acids or weak bases, in combination with the corresponding salts to maintain the pH of a fluid in a desired range. [0054]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Li, with the above limitation, as taught by Reddy, in order to maintain the pH of a fluid in a desired range.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, ‘619, as applied to claims 1 above, and in further view of Zhou et al. (US 2014/0332214 A1) ("Zhou" herein- cited previously).
Claim 21
Li discloses the fracturing fluid of claim 15. Li however does not explicitly disclose, wherein the metallic crosslinker comprises zirconium lactate and propylene glycol.
Zhou teaches the above limitation (See paragraph 0042→ Zho teaches this limitation in that In an embodiment, surface crosslinkers have multiple different functional groups such as polyols, polyamines, polyaminoalcohols, and alkylene
carbonates. Ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, triethylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, glycerol, polyglycerol, propylene glycol, diethanolamine, triethanolamine, polypropylene glycol, block copolymers of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide, sorbitan fatty acid esters, ethoxylated sorbitan fatty acid esters, trimethylolpropane, ethoxylated trimethylolpropane, pentaerythritol, ethoxylated pentaerythritol, polyvinyl alcohol, sorbitol, ethylene carbonate, and propylene carbonate can be used. Zirconium crosslinkers, e.g., zirconium lactates (e.g., sodium zirconium lactate), triethanolamines, 2,2'-iminodiethanol, or a combination thereof are used in certain embodiments.) for the purpose of controlling the amount of swelling (i.e., fluid absorption or volume expansion) of the SAP based on the degree of crosslinking in the SAP. [0040]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Li, with the above limitation as taught by Zhou, in order to control the amount of swelling (i.e., fluid absorption or volume expansion) of the SAP based on the degree of crosslinking in the SAP.
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 SILVANA C RUNYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5415. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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, Sue Liu can be reached at 571-272-5539. 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.
/SILVANA C RUNYAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1616 08/31/2026
Prosecution Insights