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 § 112(b)
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “(c) pumping the fracturing fluid into a wellbore while controlling for a stable flowrate” in line 6. The term “stable” in Claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “stable” 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “(h) using data obtained from step (d) in a programmatic algorithm to determine an optimized concentration of the friction reducer” in lines 12-13. It is unclear what exact data is obtained, how the data is used in the programmatic algorithm to determine an optimized concentration, and what algorithm is required to meet the claimed invention based on the instant claim language. Additionally, the term “optimized” in Claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “optimized” 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). However, the claims contain novel subject matter, as indicated below. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1. A method of optimizing friction reducer content, the method comprising steps of:
(a) mixing a fracturing fluid that includes water, proppant, a friction reducer, an emulsifying surfactant, and an inverting surfactant,
(b) each of the friction reducer, emulsifying surfactant and inverting surfactant being respectively provided at predetermined concentrations;
(c) pumping the fracturing fluid into a wellbore while controlling for a stable flowrate;
(d) monitoring a pressure of the fracturing fluid over a period of time while the step of pumping is underway;
(e) changing a selected one of the predetermined concentrations to a different concentration;
(f) repeating the foregoing steps (a) through (e) at the different concentration;
(g) repeating step (f) a plurality of times;
(h) using data obtained from step (d) in a programmatic algorithm to determine an optimized concentration of the friction reducer;
(i) mixing the optimized concentration of the friction reducer in one or more subsequent fracturing fluids; and
(j) introducing the one or more subsequent fracturing fluids into a geologic formation to stimulate production therefrom.
Kaushik et al. (US 2017/0364607) discloses a method comprising: defining operational parameters for an initial composition design; generating an initial composition design from the defined operational parameters; predicting the performance of the initial composition design using a statistical model; comparing the performance of the initial composition design with the operational parameters; optimizing the initial composition design according to the defined operational parameters; and outputting a final composition design (Abstract; [0015]; Claim 1). Kaushik discloses that the method may be used to formulate wellbore fluids that include fracturing fluids, pads, and spacer fluids used in fracturing operations with control over fluid performance characteristics such as, rheology and/or friction ([0014]); wherein a composition design for a wellbore fluid may take into account the concentration of various components within the fluid, the type of job such as completions or drilling, the length of tubing with the well, the depth of the well, the range of operating temperatures, rheology and friction gradients ([0016]). Kaushik discloses that the statistical model is built on the historical data using the composition chemicals operating parameters, such as temperatures, pressure etc. ([0015]).
Singh et al. (US 2022/0010190) discloses real-time tailoring of a cement slurry based on a thickening time model, wherein the model takes into account temperature and/or pressure under downhole conditions ([0018]).
Chetty et al. (US 2024/0191129) discloses water-based, friction reducing (WB-FR) slurry compositions comprising a friction-reducing (FR) base fluid; a dry particulate, water-soluble, friction-reducing (DP-WS-FR) polymer composition; and a FR salt effective amount of a FR salt composition ([0008]; Claim 1); wherein the slurry compositions may include fluid additives, such as proppant particulates and/or surfactants ([0114]).
However, the prior art references, alone or in combination, fail to disclose: (a) mixing a fracturing fluid that includes water, proppant, a friction reducer, an emulsifying surfactant, and an inverting surfactant; (i) mixing the optimized concentration of the friction reducer in one or more subsequent fracturing fluids; and (j) introducing the one or more subsequent fracturing fluids into a geologic formation to stimulate production therefrom.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Crystal J. Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-6242. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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.
/CRYSTAL J LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674