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 Objections
Claims 1, 2, 4 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 18, “wherein” should be added after the semicolon.
In claim 1, line 23, “wherein” should be added after the semicolon.
In claim 1, lines 25-26, “the generated gas is transported” should be changed to “transporting the generated gas”.
In claim 2, line 3, “and” should be added after the semicolon.
In claim 4, line 4, “wherein” should be added after “and”.
In claim 6, line 10, “a” should be deleted, and “upperoil” should be changed to “upper oil”.
In claim 6, line 18, “wherein” should be added after the semicolon.
In claim 6, line 24, “wherein” should be added after the semicolon.
In claim 6, lines 27-28, “the generated gas is transported” should be changed to “transporting the generated gas”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the term “comprising” in line 2 is placed after a comma and therefore it is unclear which element is being referenced. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “comprising” to mean “the method comprising”. Further, the step of “constructing a first horizontal well” in line 7 is confusing because a previous step of “constructing a horizontal well” in lines 4-5 is previously recited. How can a first horizontal well be constructed after another horizontal well? The examiner recommends deleting the limitation “then constructing a horizontal well in the target coal seam” in lines 4-5. Further, the term “high-pressure” in line 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-pressure” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “high-pressure” to mean “pressurized”. Further, the term “slowly” in line 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slowly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “slowly” to mean “gradually”. Further, the term “honeycomb briquette like” in lines 23-24 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what aspect of the honeycomb briquette is required to satisfy the claim limitation. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “honeycomb briquette like” to mean “honeycomb briquette”. Finally, the term “igniting” in line 25 is placed after a comma and therefore it is unclear which element is being referenced. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “igniting” to mean “igniting the gasification agent”. Claims 2-5 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 2, the wording of “constructing the first horizontal well based on a position of the first section of coal and an injection well layout plan” in lines 2-3 is confusing. The step of constructing the first horizontal well is previously recited in claim 1, therefore the additional positive recitation of “constructing” requires a second constructing of the first horizontal well. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “constructing the first horizontal well based on a position of the first section of coal and an injection well layout plan” to mean “the constructing the first horizontal well is based on a position of the first section of coal and an injection well layout plan”. Further, it is unclear which second horizontal well is meant by “the second horizontal well” in line 5 because plural second horizontal wells are previously recited. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “the second horizontal well” to mean “the second horizontal wells”.
Regarding claim 4, the wording of “wherein in step 3, it further comprises an ignition device; using the ignition device” in lines 2-3 is confusing. The term “it” is placed after a comma and therefore it is unclear which element is being referenced. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “wherein in step 3, it further comprises an ignition device; using the ignition device” to mean “step 3 further comprising using an ignition device”. Further, the term “high-temperature” in line 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-pressure” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 6, the term “comprising” in line 2 is placed after a comma and therefore it is unclear which element is being referenced. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “comprising” to mean “the method comprising”. Further, the step of “constructing a first horizontal well” in line 7 is confusing because a previous step of “constructing a horizontal well” in lines 4-5 is previously recited. How can a first horizontal well be constructed after another horizontal well? The examiner recommends deleting the limitation “then constructing a horizontal well in the target coal seam” in lines 4-5. Further, the term “high-pressure” in line 11 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-pressure” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “high-pressure” to mean “pressurized”. Further, the term “slowly” in line 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slowly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “slowly” to mean “gradually”. Further, the term “honeycomb briquette like” in line 25 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what aspect of the honeycomb briquette is required to satisfy the claim limitation. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “honeycomb briquette like” to mean “honeycomb briquette”. Further, the term “igniting” in line 27 is placed after a comma and therefore it is unclear which element is being referenced. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “igniting” to mean “igniting the gasification agent”. Finally, the wording of “after the oil-bearing coal seam in the second section of coal is performed oil displacement” in the second to last line is confusing. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the second section of coal”. The limitation “is performed oil displacement” does not make sense. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “after the oil-bearing coal seam in the second section of coal is performed oil displacement” to mean “after performing oil displacement in the oil-bearing coal seam in the next section”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
None of the prior art, individually or in combination, discloses or teaches a method comprising the following steps: step 1, drilling an injection well to a target coal seam; step 2, constructing a first horizontal well in a first section of the coal, wherein the first horizontal well serves as both a fracturing-C02 injection well and a water pressure well; constructing second horizontal wells on both sides of the first horizontal well, wherein the second horizontal wells serve as both an oil transportation well and a coalbed methane transportation well; injecting pressurized liquid through the first horizontal well to perform hydraulic fracturing of the oil-bearing coal seam in the first section of coal, followed by injecting carbon dioxide for oil displacement, and transporting the obtained kerosene to surface oil tanks through the oil transportation well; for coal seam containing coalbed methane in the first section of coal, arranging a plurality of ventilation boreholes in the first section of coal for extracting the coalbed methane, wherein the overall structure of the plurality of the ventilation boreholes is honeycomb shaped, the first horizontal well is used as a water pressure well to maintain the stability of the plurality of the ventilation boreholes; wherein when water pressure is lower than pressure of the coalbed methane, the second horizontal wells are used as the coalbed methane transportation well, and the coalbed methane is released and collected through the coalbed methane transportation well; step 3, transforming the horizontal wells on both sides of the first section of coal into coal gasification production wells, and constructing ventilation boreholes in the coal gasification production wells; wherein by arranging the ventilation boreholes, the first section of coal forms a honeycomb briquette structure to construct a gasifier; injecting gasification agent on one side of the coal gasification production wells, igniting the gasification agent for complete combustion and gasification, and transporting the generated gas to surface facilities through the other side of the coal gasification production wells.
Xing et al (CN 112878978) discloses a method comprising the following steps: step 1, drilling an injection well to a target coal seam (e.g. Fig. 2, claim 1, step 1); step 2, constructing a first horizontal well in a first section of the coal, wherein the first horizontal well serves as both a fracturing injection well and a water pressure well (e.g. 3, Fig. 2, claim 1, step 1, paragraph 0024); constructing second horizontal wells on both sides of the first horizontal well (e.g. 2, Fig. 2, claim 1, step 1); and injecting pressurized liquid through the first horizontal well to perform hydraulic fracturing of the oil-bearing coal seam in the first section of coal (e.g. Fig. 2, paragraph 0024), step 3, transforming the horizontal wells on both sides of the first section of coal into coal gasification production wells, and constructing ventilation boreholes in the coal gasification production wells (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraphs 0024 and 0026); injecting gasification agent on one side of the coal gasification production wells (e.g. claim 1, step 4), igniting the gasification agent for complete combustion and gasification (e.g. claim 1, step 4), and transporting the generated gas to surface facilities (e.g. claim 1, step 5). Xing does not disclose that the first horizontal well also serves as a C02 injection well and the second horizontal wells serve as both an oil transportation well and a coalbed methane transportation well, or injecting carbon dioxide for oil displacement and transporting the obtained kerosene to surface oil tanks through the oil transportation well, or arranging a plurality of ventilation boreholes in the first section of coal for extracting coalbed methane; or that the first section of coal forms a honeycomb briquette structure to construct a gasifier. There is no teaching for such a combination of purposes for the first and second horizontal wells or the arrangement of the ventilation boreholes to form a honeycomb briquette structure.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STACY N LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7515. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-3pm.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.
/S.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3678
/AMBER R ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights