DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed November 28, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1 – 15 are pending in the application. The amendment to the claims has overcome the claim objections and all of the 35 USC 112 rejections set forth in the last Non-Final Action mailed August 28, 2025.
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.
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 2025/0180006 – herein after Sun) in view of Krone, John J (US 5,064,005 – herein after Krone).
In reference to claim 1, Sun teaches a system (see fig. 1A), comprising:
a pumping assembly (pump system 126, see fig. 1B) for providing pressurized liquid (see ¶27: drilling operation), the pumping assembly comprising:
at least two pump modules (118A+120A, 118N+120N; see fig. 1B), each comprising at least one liquid pump (118A/118N; see fig. 1B), at least one electric motor (see ¶33-¶34 and ¶64) arranged to drive said at least one liquid pump and a liquid outlet (see fig. 1B) for providing pressurized liquid from the at least one liquid pump; and
an outlet manifold (manifold corresponding to total flow rate 132; see fig. 1B) connecting the liquid outlets of the at least two pump modules in parallel (as evident from fig. 1B) to provide a common liquid outlet for connection,
wherein said pump modules are each configured to provide a liquid flow of 200-600 l/min [each pump module is capable of providing flow rate within the claimed range; see ¶19-¶21: each pump is capable of operating up to 6 BPM (715.44 liters per minute) depending on the overall pump system requirement, wherein the system’s minimum requirement is disclosed as being 5 BPM (596.20 liters per minute) and maximum requirement is disclosed as being 7 BPM (834.68 liters per minute)].
Sun remains silent on the system, comprising: “a liquid propelled drill or hammer”; the pumping assembly providing pressurized liquid “to the liquid propelled drill or hammer” and the outlet manifold providing the common liquid outlet “for connection to said liquid propelled drill or hammer”.
However, Krone teaches a system comprising a liquid propelled drill or hammer (hydraulic hammer 10); and a pumping assembly (control arrangement 11 that comprises pump 27) for providing pressurized liquid to the liquid propelled drill or hammer.
Sun teaches a pumping assembly comprising multiple pump modules connected in parallel to a manifold (see fig. 1B and ¶37). While Sun describes a pumping system primarily in the context of fracturing, Sun explicitly acknowledges in the background that the wellhead and fluid conduits are utilized in drilling operations (see ¶1, ¶27). It is well known in the art that hydraulic drilling tools, such as liquid propelled drills or hammers, require a source of pressurized liquid to operate. Krone teaches a pumping assembly connected to a hydraulic hammer.. Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Sun’s system by connecting Sun’s pumping assembly to a liquid propelled drill or hammer as taught by Krone for the purpose of utilizing Sun’s smooth-flow pumping assembly for drilling operations.
In reference to claim 15, Sun teaches the system, wherein said pump modules are configured to provide a maximum liquid pressure.
Sun remains silent on the system, wherein said pump modules are configured to provide a maximum liquid pressure of 120-240 bar.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the pump modules in the modified pumping assembly of Sun for providing a maximum liquid pressure of 120-240 bar since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in the instant application, see ¶9 of filed specification, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation of having the maximum liquid pressure of 120-240 bar.
Claims 2, 3, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Krone and Chedygov et al. (US 11,018,610 – herein after Chedygov).
In reference to claim 2, Sun teaches the system, wherein each pump module comprises a control system (120A/120N, see fig. 1B and ¶33-¶35).
Sun remains silent on the system wherein each pump module’s control system is provided with a communication interface for wired or wireless connection between the pump modules, wherein each control system is provided with a lead setting and a follower setting, wherein the control system of the first pump module of the at least two pump modules, when in said lead setting, is configured to control, via said communication interface, at least one other pump module of said at least two pump modules having its control system set to the follower setting”.
However, Chedygov teaches the system (see fig. 15A, 17 and disclosure in col. 13, lines 13-44; col. 15, lines 60-67; col. 16, lines 1-67 and col. 17, lines 1-14) with at least two pump modules (22a+32a+pump; 22b+32b+pump; 22c+32c+pump) configured with lead and lag features, wherein each pump module comprises a control system (“VFD1”, “VFD2”, “VFD3”) provided with a communication interface (“COM”) for wired or wireless connection between the pump modules [see col. 13, lines 27-32: “The COM lines may transmit analog or digital signals. Example analog signals comprise 4-20 mA signals, 0-10 VDC signals, and AC voltage signals (e.g. 110 VAC). Example digital signals comprise wireless signals such as WiFi, serial communication signals such as RS-485, and discrete binary signals (ON/OFF)”; transmission of analog signals implies “wired connection” and transmission of digital signals implies “wireless connection”] wherein the control system (“VFD1”) of a first pump module (22a+32a+pump) of the at least two pump modules is provided with a lead setting (referred as “lead pump driver” or “lead pump”), the control system (“VFD2”/”VFD3”) of a second pump module (22b+32b+pump / 22c+32c+pump) of the at least two pump modules is provided with a follower setting (referred as “lag pump driver” or “lag pump”), wherein in said lead setting, the control system (“VFD1”) of the first pump module is configured to control, via said communication interface (“COM”), the control system (“VFD2”) of the second pump module set to the follower setting (for instance, see disclosure of “multiple pump systems”, “alternating function” or “duplex pump configuration” in col. 13, col. 15 and col. 16).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Sun to provide lead and follower settings to the control systems of the pump modules as taught by Chedygov for the purpose of (a) having the pump configuration operate in a mode where one pump module supplements another pump module as per demand condition, as recognized by Chedygov (see col. 15, lines 60-67 and col. 16, lines 1-3) and/or (b) having the pump configuration operate in a mode where two pumps provide an alternate function and pump redundancy, as recognized by Chedygov (see col. 16, lines 34-41).
In reference to claim 3, Sun, as modified, teaches the system, wherein the control system (modified 120A in fig. 1B of Sun) of the first pump module (118A+120A; see Sun), when in said lead setting, is configured to, in response to instructions from an operator [human; in view of disclosure in Sun’s ¶33 and ¶53: the control system of first pump module is capable of receiving instructions from human], control the electric motor of the first pump module and to control, via said communication interface (provided using the teaching of Chedygov), the electric motor of the at least one other pump module (118N+120N; see Sun).
In reference to claim 7, Sun, as modified, teaches the system (see Sun), wherein at least one of (i) the control system of each pump module comprises at least one control panel provided with a user interface or (ii) the pumping assembly comprises at least one wireless remote-control unit (Sun’s wireless interface; see Sun’s ¶55) configured to communicate with at least one of the control systems (120A/120N in Sun).
In reference to claim 8, Sun, as modified, teaches the system, wherein each control system is adapted to selectively activate the lead setting or the follower setting in response to instructions received from at least one of said control panel or said at least one wireless remote-control unit (the modified control system is capable of performing claimed function; for instance, “activation of lead setting” when instruction to power on is received).
Claims 4, 5, 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Krone, Chedygov and further in view of Golden et al. (US 2020/0284122 – herein after Golden).
In reference to claim 4, Sun remains silent on the system, wherein each pump module further comprises a pressure relief valve at its liquid outlet, the pressure relief valve having a controllable relief pressure, and being connected to a buffer tank to divert surplus liquid thereto.
However, Golden teaches (see fig. 9) a pump module (900) comprises a pressure relief valve (pressure relief valve system 200) at its liquid outlet (250), the pressure relief valve having a controllable relief pressure (see col. 16, lines 6-11), and being connected to a buffer tank (860) to divert surplus liquid thereto.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide each of the pump modules in the system of Sun with a pressure relieve valve on outlet side as taught by Golden for the purpose of providing electronically controlled pressure relief system to protect the integrity of the well head and reduce equipment failures such as blown tubing and cracked pumps, as recognized by Golden (see col. 4, lines 30-33).
In reference to claim 5, Sun teaches the system, wherein the control system of the first pump module, when in said lead setting, is further configured to, in response to instructions from an operator, control the pressure relief valve of the first pump module and to control, via said communication interface, the pressure relief valve of the at least one other pump module [in view of the proposed modification, the pressure relief valve system of Golden is present at each of the fluid modules outlet; this pressure relief valve system has a controller 220 (see Golden’s ¶100) that sends signal to the operator (see Golden’s ¶118); Sun’s pump controller 120A (control system of the first pump module) is in communication with information handling system 122 either in wired or wireless manner so that the pump module can be controlled by system 122 (see Sun’s ¶33); this handling system 122 is capable of being connected to other various components of fracturing environment (see Sun’s ¶35) and further has a human interface device which facilitates user interaction (see Sun’s ¶53); therefore, in view of the proposed modification, the control system of each pump module is viewed as being formed by components 120 (of Sun) + 220 (of Golden) which is in communication with handling system 122 having human interface device; thus, in the modified pumping assembly, the control system of the first pump module, when in said lead setting, is capable of performing claimed functions either in direct manner or indirect manner].
In reference to claim 6, Sun, as modified, teaches the system, wherein said instructions comprise at least one of a target outgoing liquid pressure or a target pump speed, and wherein said control system of the first pump module is configured to control at least one of the electric motors or the pressure relief valves to achieve at least one of said target outgoing liquid pressure or said target pump speed [in view of disclosure in Golden’s ¶32: the controller component (considered to be part of the control system of the pump module in the modified pumping assembly) of the pressure relief valve system is programmable so that an operator may set the stored pressure threshold to a desired value; thus, in the modified pumping assembly, the control system of the first pump module is capable of performing claimed function of either controlling its corresponding motor or pressure relief valve to achieve the target outgoing pressure].
In reference to claim 10, Sun, as modified, teaches the system,
wherein at least one of (i) the control system of each pump module comprises at least one control panel provided with a user interface or (ii) the pumping assembly comprises at least one wireless remote-control unit (Sun’s wireless interface; see Sun’s ¶55) configured to communicate with at least one of the control systems (120A/120N in Sun),
wherein each control system (corresponding to any one of the pump modules) is adapted to (in view of discussion made above in claim 6) receive said instructions comprising at least one of the target outgoing liquid pressure or the target pump speed from at least one of said control panel or said at least one wireless remote-control unit (Sun’s user interface is part of Sun’s handling system 122 that has wireless interface through which signals/instructions are communicated to the control system).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Krone and Chowdhury et al. (US 2025/0207528 – herein after Chowdhury).
In reference to claim 11, Sun remains silent on the system, wherein at least one pump module of the at least two pump modules is provided with a battery set connected to, and dimensioned to intermittently drive, its electric motor, and a charger configured to charge the battery set.
However, Chowdury teaches the system, wherein (see fig. 1) at least one pump module (formed of motor and pump, see ¶35) is provided with a battery set (70, see¶37) connected to, and dimensioned to intermittently drive (hybrid mode), its electric motor (88), and a charger (combustion engine 10, see ¶39) configured to charge the battery set.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify pump module in the system of Sun for being provided with a battery set connected to, and dimensioned to intermittently drive, its electric motor, and a charger configured to charge the battery set as taught by Chowdury for the purpose of providing hybrid motor to operate the fluid pump, as recognized by Chowdury (see ¶6), so that the fluid pump can be operated, as desired, in electric-only mode or engine mode.
In reference to claim 12, Sun, as modified, teaches the system, wherein (see Chowdury) the charger (combustion engine 10) has a Iower power rating (34 kW for instance, see ¶50) than a maximum power rating (50 kW, see ¶39) of the electric motor.
Claims 11, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Krone and Newman, Frederic (US 11,448,050 – herein after Newman).
In reference to claim 11, Sun remains silent on the system, wherein at least one pump module of the at least two pump modules is provided with a battery set connected to, and dimensioned to intermittently drive, its electric motor, and a charger configured to charge the battery set.
However, Newman teaches the system, wherein (see fig. 1) at least one pump module (motor 88+ pump 90) is provided with a battery set (rechargeable electric power storage system 18; see col. 5, line 4 onwards) connected to, and dimensioned to intermittently drive (“selective interrupting”, see col. 5, line 22), its electric motor (88), and a charger (inherently present in view of disclosure in col. 5, lines 38-41; charger being connected to power grid 63) configured to charge the battery set (18).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a battery set as taught by Newman for being connected to the motor in the pump module of Sun for the purpose of providing power to the motor from the battery set that includes circuitry for controlling, regulating and/or limiting the incoming and/or outgoing flow of electrical energy, as recognized by Newman (see col. 5, lines 17-19).
In reference to claim 13, Sun, as modified, teaches the system, wherein the charger is configured to be driven off a 3-phase 125A power supply or less (Newman’s charger is capable of being driven of claimed power supply).
In reference to claim 14, Sun, as modified, teaches the system, wherein said battery set has a capacity of at least 100kWh (Newman’s battery set is at least 75 kWh, see col. 5, lines 34-35).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the battery set in the modified pumping assembly of Sun with a capacity of at least 100 kWh since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in the instant application, see ¶20 of filed specification, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation of having the capacity of at least 100 kWh.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable, for same reasons as discussed in the last office action, if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
The following arguments filed November 28, 2025 have been fully considered:
Arguments with respect to rejection of claim 14 under 35 USC 112(b): This argument is found to be persuasive and thus, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Arguments with respect to amended claim 1 positively requiring the structure of “a liquid propelled drill or hammer”: These arguments are moot. The amendment to independent claim 1 changed the scope of the claim. As a result, the prior arts have been re-evaluated and re-applied to claim 1, in view of newly found reference of Krone.
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 CHIRAG JARIWALA whose telephone number is (571)272-0467. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM-5 PM.
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, ESSAMA OMGBA can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/CHIRAG JARIWALA/Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/ESSAMA OMGBA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746