DETAILED ACTION
The amendment filed 7/6/2026 has been entered.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I in the reply filed on 7/6/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figures 1-2, 5a, 5b and 6 all appear to show multiple views combined where distinguishing components is not clear (i.e. multiple cross sectional views appear combined into one for each of these figures). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are also objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the threaded connected (as in claim 13, see 112 rejection below) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-15 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.
Claims 1 lacks antecedent basis for “each expandable ring” and is therefore indefinite.
Claims 4 and 5 both recite “wherein a said cylindrical mounting surface” which is indefinite as only a single cylindrical mounting surface has been previously recited and therefore this limitation should be recited as “the” or merely “said” cylindrical mounting surface.
Claim 6 recites “the cylindrical mounting” which is indefinite as lacking antecedent basis where this recitation should apparently recite – the cylindrical mounting surface --.
Claim 8 lacks antecedent basis for “the outer surface of the set of multiple rings” and is therefore indefinite.
Claim 10 is indefinite as reciting “the ring” where multiple rings are previously recited and therefore it is not clear if this limitation would apply to all previously reciting rings or a subset.
Claim 12 lacks antecedent basis for “the tubular housing” and is therefore indefinite.
Claim 13 lacks antecedent basis for “the sub section” and is therefore indefinite, where it appears this limitation should be recited as “the tubular sub section” as previously recited in the claim. Claim 13 is also indefinite as reciting “threaded connected”, which appears to intend to recite – threaded connection – as later recited in the claim.
Claim 14 lacks antecedent basis for “the threaded connection” and is therefore indefinite.
Claim 15 is indefinite as reciting a method including the step of “axially compressed the multiple rings” where it appears this should be recited as -- axially compressing the multiple rings – in order to provide a positive method step.
The remaining claims are indefinite as being dependent on an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Weinberg (US 4,433,847).
In regard to claim 1, Weinberg discloses a Downhole Sealing Tool comprising: a tubular section (30) forming an enclosed channel (as in fig 1), the tubular section comprising a cylindrical mounting surface extending at least partially along the length of the channel (20a or 30a); a set of multiple rings (12/14 and 16) mounted on the cylindrical mounting surface (as in fig 1), wherein the set of multiple rings comprise alternating deflection (12/14) and deformable rings (16), wherein each deflection ring has angled sides such that the deflection ring is wider towards the cylindrical mounting surface (12/14 as in fig 2), wherein each deformable ring has angled sides complementary to the angled sides of the deflection rings such that the deformable ring is wider away from the cylindrical mounting surface (as in fig 2); and wherein, in response to the multiple rings being axially compressed from a non-compressed configuration to a compressed configuration, each expandable ring (see 112 rejection above) is pushed away from the cylindrical mounting surface by the complementary angled sides (as in fig 2-4 where 12/14 is pushed away).
In regard to claim 2, Weinberg discloses wherein at least one of the deformable rings is formed from metal (col. 5, line 5).
In regard to claim 4, Weinberg discloses wherein a said cylindrical mounting surface faces outwards away from the channel (as in figs 1-4).
In regard to claim 6, Weinberg discloses wherein the cylindrical mounting is recessed from an outer diameter of the tubular section (tubular section as being 30/32/34).
In regard to claim 8, Weinberg discloses wherein, in a non-compressed configuration, the outer surface of the set of multiple rings is aligned with a surface of the tubular section (as in fig 2 as aligned with 32).
In regard to claim 10, Weinberg discloses wherein the ring is circularly symmetric (as in fig 1, all portions 12/14/16 appear circularly symmetric).
In regard to claim 13, Weinberg discloses wherein Downhole Sealing Tool comprises a tubular sub section (32) which has a threaded connected for connecting to the tubular section (as in fig 1), such that when the threaded connection between the tubular section and the sub section is tightened, the multiple rings are axially compressed (col. 5, lines 19-29).
In regard to claim 15, Weinberg discloses s method of activating a Downhole Sealing Tool according to claim 1 (as above), the method comprising: axially compressed the multiple rings from a non-compressed configuration to a compressed configuration (fig 3 to fig 4), thereby pushing each expandable ring away from the cylindrical mounting surface (as in fig 3 to fig 4).
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Baker (US 3,048,412).
In regard to claim 1, Baker discloses a Downhole Sealing Tool comprising: a tubular section (10) forming an enclosed channel (as in the figure containing 20), the tubular section comprising a cylindrical mounting surface extending at least partially along the length of the channel (inside surface of 10 in the figure); a set of multiple rings (30,32,34,36,38,40,42) mounted on the cylindrical mounting surface (as in the figure), wherein the set of multiple rings comprise alternating deflection (30/32/34/36) and deformable rings (38/40/42), wherein each deflection ring has angled sides such that the deflection ring is wider towards the cylindrical mounting surface (as in the figure), wherein each deformable ring has angled sides complementary to the angled sides of the deflection rings such that the deformable ring is wider away from the cylindrical mounting surface (as in the figure); and wherein, in response to the multiple rings being axially compressed from a non-compressed configuration to a compressed configuration, each expandable ring (see 112 rejection above) is pushed away from the cylindrical mounting surface by the complementary angled sides (as occurs with compression col., 2, lines 6-8).
In regard to claim 5, Baker discloses wherein a said cylindrical mounting surface faces inwards towards the channel (as in the figure).
In regard to claim 7, Baker discloses wherein the cylindrical mounting surface is recessed from an inner diameter of the tubular section (as recessed from surface 24).
In regard to claim 14, Baker discloses wherein wherein the Downhole Sealing Tool comprises a spring bed (28) positioned between the threaded connection (see 112 rejection above, threaded connection at 18 at least) and the multiple rings (as in the figure spring 28 is generally between threaded connection 18 and rings 30/32/34 etc).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Callihan et al. (US 4,479,544) in view of Weinberg.
In regard to claim 1, Callihan et al. disclose a Downhole Sealing Tool comprising: a tubular section (10d, as in fig 4) forming an enclosed channel (10a), the tubular section comprising a cylindrical mounting surface extending at least partially along the length of the channel (10f); a set of multiple rings (22/21) mounted on the cylindrical mounting surface (as in fig 4), wherein the set of multiple rings comprise alternating deflection (21) and deformable ring (22), wherein each deflection ring has angled sides such that the deflection ring is wider towards the cylindrical mounting surface (21 as in fig 4), wherein each deformable ring has angled sides complementary to the angled sides of the deflection rings such that the deformable ring is wider away from the cylindrical mounting surface (22 as in fig 4); and wherein, in response to the multiple rings being axially compressed from a non-compressed configuration to a compressed configuration, each expandable ring (see 112 rejection above) is pushed away from the cylindrical mounting surface by the complementary angled sides (as would occur with compression from 23). Callihan et al. do not disclose a set of multiple rings including multiple deflection rings alternating with the deformable rings.
Weinberg disclose a downhole sealing tool comprising a set of multiple rings (12/14 and 16) mounted on the cylindrical mounting surface (as in fig 1), wherein the set of multiple rings comprise alternating deflection (12/14) and deformable rings (16), wherein each deflection ring has angled sides such that the deflection ring is wider towards the cylindrical mounting surface (12/14 as in fig 2), wherein each deformable ring has angled sides complementary to the angled sides of the deflection rings such that the deformable ring is wider away from the cylindrical mounting surface (as in fig 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide the seal ring assembly of Callihan et al. with multiple deflection rings alternating with the deformable rings as taught by Weinberg in order to provide redundant and better sealing.
In regard to claim 9, Callihan et al. disclose wherein each of the deformable rings is a cut ring (22a/22b).
In regard to claim 11, Callihan et al. disclose wherein the Downhole Sealing Tool is a liner hanger (col. 1, lines 5-10).
In regard to claim 12, Callihan et al. discloses a ratchet ring housing having an inner core (10e as in fig 4/4A) and an outer core (23) connected by a ratchet ring (16), which allows the inner core to be moved axially in only one permitted direction with respect to the outer core (col. 5, lines 48-54), and wherein one of the cores is aligned with the set of multiple rings (23) and the other core is connected to the tubular housing (as in fig 4/4A) such that when the ratchet ring is activated in the permitted direction, the multiple rings are compressed (col. 5, lines 45-54).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Callihan et al. in view of Weinberg and further in view of Least et al. (US 2023/0109351). Callihan et al. and Weinberg disclose all the limitations of this claim, as applied to claim 1 above, but do not disclose that the deformable rings are comprise at least one elastically deformable ring and at least one plastically deformable ring.
Least et al. disclose a downhole sealing tool comprising a ring which is both elastically and plastically deformable (paragraphs 28, 63). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to provide the sealing tool of Callihan et al. as modified by Weinberg to include the deformable rings as a material as taught by Least et al. since simple substitution for one known element (seal ring material) for another to obtain predictable results is considered obvious to one of ordinary skill.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shek et al. (US 2014/0262209), Mickey (US 2011/0303421), Miser (US 4,596,395), and Allison (US 4,406,469) all disclose downhole sealing tools with stacked seal assemblies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D Andrews whose telephone number is (571)272-6558. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-3.
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.
/D. ANDREWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
8/3/2026
Prosecution Insights