Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/057,565

SUBSEA SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INTERCONNECTING PRODUCING AND INJECTING WELLS IN PAIRS TO AN AGGREGATING COMPONENT

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Feb 19, 2025
Examiner
SAYRE, JAMES G
Art Unit
3672
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
1123 granted / 1337 resolved
+32.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
1357
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
43.6%
+3.6% vs TC avg
§102
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§112
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1337 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Amendment The response of 03 February 2026 is acknowledged and has been entered. The submission of drawing replacement sheets for figure 3 and figure 4 is acknowledged. New grounds of rejection follow. The remarks have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claim 13 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. The claim recites a “node” of a blocking mechanism and a pigging valve, and this limitation is not supported by the written description and constitutes new matter. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-10 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2010/0307765 A1 (van Arkel et al.). As concerns claim 1, van Arkel et al. discloses a subsea system for interconnecting producing and injecting wells in pairs to an aggregating component, comprising: at least one production line 28 that connects the aggregating component 24 to a producing well 4, wherein the producing well is an oil, gas, or oil and gas producing well (0025); at least one water, gas, or alternating water and gas injection line 22 that connects the aggregating component to an injecting well 3, wherein the injecting well is configured to inject water, gas, or water and gas (0025) into a permeable reservoir 1; and at least one service line 16 that connects the producing well and the injecting well (see, 0026, gas fraction 12 is injected into gas lift 16, see figure 1). As concerns claim 2, van Arkel et al. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein each of the production line, the injection line, and the service line has a pressure class compatible with the pressure requirements of the production line and the injection line, and wherein each of the production line, the injection line, and the service line has a physical-chemical stability against fluids of the production line and the injection line (see 0043, discussing the corrosion minimizing for the lines, the examiner notes that, in as much as the conduits are being used for production and injection, they are implicitly suited for the disclosed purpose). As concerns claim 3, van Arkel et al. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the aggregating component 24 is a production unit or a subsea manifold (0028). As concerns claim 4, van Arkel et al. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one service line interconnects the injecting well and the producing well by means of respective annular or service hubs 21,23. As concerns claim 5, van Arkel et al. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the injecting well comprises a set of flow control valves for partitioning gas flow between the producing well and the injecting well (manifold 21 performs this function, see 0026). As concerns claim 6, van Arkel et al. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein a service line circuit comprises a blocking mechanism (packer 19) to isolate the fluids inside the service line in relation to the producing well and the injecting well. As concerns claim 7, van Arkel et al. discloses a method for interconnecting producing and injecting wells in pairs to an aggregating component, comprising: interconnecting a producing well 4 with a production aggregating component 28, wherein the producing well 4 is an oil, gas, or oil and gas producing well (0025): interconnecting an injecting well 3 with an injection aggregating component 24, wherein the injecting well is configured to inject water, gas, or water and gas (0025) into a permeable reservoir 1; and interconnecting the injecting well with the producing well (via the injection line 16). As concerns claim 8, van Arkel et al. discloses the method of claim 7, further comprising partitioning a flow between the producing well and the injecting well by means of a set of flow control valves of the injecting well (manifold 21 performs this function, see 0026). As concerns claim 9, van Arkel et al. discloses the method of claim 7, further comprising isolating fluids in a service line in relation to the producing well and the injecting well by means of actuating a blocking mechanism 19 in a service line circuit 16. As concerns claim 10, van Arkel et al. discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising an umbilical configured to inject gas into the producing well (the injection line 22 is equivalent here). As concerns claim 14, van Arkel et al. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the permeable reservoir 1 interconnects the injecting well and the producing well (figure 1). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van Arkel et al. in view of US 2020/0190952 A1 (Rodrigues et al.). As concerns claim 13, van Arkel et al. discloses the system of claim 6, wherein a node of the blocking mechanism 19 is coupled to the producing well (see figure 1 at 19), but lacks to expressly disclose a node of a pigging valve associated with the producing well, nevertheless Rodrigues et al. discloses a subsea system for pressurization of a subsea reservoir having interconnected wells 4, 4’ with service line 3 used for pigging operations. One of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing, would have obviously incorporated the pig valve and apparatus of Rodrigues et al. into the system of van Arkel et al. with a reasonable expectation of success, as this provides the desirable result of facilitating cleaning and purging of the lines, in view of the disclosure of Rodrigues et al. Claims 11 and 12 merely recite known types of umbilicals that are commonly used in subsea operations that would be selected by a person of ordinary skill in the art to suit a particular subsea application or operation. Please see US 2008/0264642 A1 (Horton), disclosing a subsea control system using service (chemical injection) and electro-hydraulic umbilical (0028, 0029). 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 JAMES G. SAYRE whose telephone number is (571)270-7045. The examiner can normally be reached from 9:30-6:00 Monday-Friday. 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, Nicole Coy can be reached at 571-272-5405. 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. JAMES G. SAYRE Primary Examiner Art Unit 3672 /JAMES G SAYRE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 19, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Feb 03, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601245
METHODS AND SYSTEMS ASSOCIATED WITH AN AUTOMATED ZIPPER MANIFOLD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595936
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR HARVESTING GEOTHERMAL ENERGY FROM A SUBTERRANEAN FORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595712
SUBSEA CONNECTION ENHANCEMENT ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590523
HANDS FREE FRAC LINE CONNECTION METHOD AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590497
UNTETHERED DOWNHOLE TOOLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1337 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