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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “geomechanical pumped storage system” 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.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the term “said” is stated in line 3. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claims 1 and 5 refer to a geomechanical pumped storage system, but fails to explain or described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Support in the specification [0009-0010] is merely a recitation of the term as presented in claims 1 and 5. Par. [0004] also does not give much further detail. The limitations of the claims do not refer to any apparatus/system parts, or any articles that may be linked to such a system, and therefore is non-enabling.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 (US 2018/0334903) or D2 (US 2018/0266183).
With respect to claim 1, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, a geomechanical pumped storage system with a vertical or near vertical wellbore, comprising: a free flowing fluid access to fractures, wherein the fractures are created with hydraulic fracturing techniques of a surrounding rock matrix that intersects the wellbore at any angle. With respect to D1, see especially Figs. 8-10 and [0047]. With respect to D2, see especially Figs. 1-6, (abs), [0002], [0026], [0027].
With respect to claim 2, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, the system of claim 1, wherein the access is enhanced by notching. With respect to D1, see especially notch (with 100). With respect to D2, see especially [0026].
With respect to claim 3, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, the system of claim 1, wherein the access is enhanced by perforating. With respect to D1, see especially Fig. 10. With respect to D2, see especially [0002].
With respect to claim 4, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, the system of claim 1, wherein a casing is disposed in the wellbore, and wherein the access is enhanced by cutting the casing. With respect to D1, see especially Fig. 10. With respect to D2, see especially Figs. 1-6, [0026].
With respect to claim 5, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, a geomechanical pumped storage system with a horizontal or near horizontal wellbore, comprising: a free flowing fluid access to fractures, wherein the fractures are created with hydraulic fracturing techniques of a surrounding rock matrix that intersects the wellbore at any angle. With respect to D1, see especially Figs. 8-10 and [0047]. With respect to D2, see especially Figs. 1-6, (abs), [0002], [0026], [0027].
With respect to claim 6, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, the system of claim 5, wherein the access is enhanced by notching. With respect to D1, see especially notch (with 100). With respect to D2, see especially [0026].
With respect to claim 7, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, the system of claim 5, wherein the access is enhanced by perforating. With respect to D1, see especially Fig. 10. With respect to D2, see especially [0002].
With respect to claim 8, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, the system of claim 5, wherein a casing is disposed in the wellbore, and wherein the access is enhanced by cutting the casing. With respect to D1, see especially Fig. 10. With respect to D2, see especially Figs. 1-6, [0026].
With respect to claim 9, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, the system of claim 5, wherein the access is enhanced by abrasive jet cutting. With respect to D1, see especially Fig. 10. With respect to D2, see especially Figs. 1-6, [0026].
With respect to claim 10, discloses, or otherwise makes obvious and/or as best understood, the system of claim 5, wherein a casing is disposed in the wellbore, and wherein the access is enhanced by slotting section of the casing. With respect to D1, see especially Fig. 10. With respect to D2, see especially Figs. 1-6, [0026].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2020/0256173 teaches a method of fracturing a tight (low permeability) geologic reservoir with a U-shaped well, but can also be used for similar hydrocarbon bearing formations. A first wellbore with a vertical section and a horizontal section is drilled from a first location. The first wellbore has a first end at a terranean surface and a second end at a downhole, or distal end, opposite the first end. A second, vertical well is drilled at a second location and intersects with the toe (distal end) of the first wellbore to form the U-shaped wellbore. The horizontal section of the “U” is divided into one or more compartments by retrievable mechanical packers. Fluid pressure is varied from each location depending on the horizontal location of the intended fracture. Fracturing fluid is pumped into the wellbore from topside facilities at both locations (the tops of the “U”) to provide the fluid pressure. The various packers used to isolate the horizontal section of the wellbore are configured to receive flow from both directions, and direct the flow into the formation from the wellbore to initiate a fracture.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAKIYA W BATES whose telephone number is (571)272-7039. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am - 5pm.
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 5712724137. 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.
/ZAKIYA W BATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 9/25/2025