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 .
Applicant’s Response
In the response date 03/19/2026, the Applicant argued against the rejections in the Non-Final Rejection dated 12/19/2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the phrase "The process of claim 1" in Line 1 should be amended to ― The process of claim [[1]]2 ― because the "pipe string" and the "well bore" recited in Claim 11 is first recited in Claim 2.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation 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.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claims 16 and 17, the disclosure of the present application fails to describe a process for forming a curable cement composition or a cemented production well, where the calcium-deficient calcium silicate consists of the ground calcium silicate having the median particle size of from about 5 to about 200 μm.
Stated differently, the disclosure fails to expressly mention an embodiment of the process for forming a curable cement composition or the cemented production well that comprises only the ground calcium silicate having the median particle size of from about 5 to about 200 μm, as recited in Claims 16 and 17.
Accordingly, Claims 16 and 17 fail to comply with the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
If the examiner has overlooked the portion of the original Specification that describes this newly-recited subject matter, then Applicant should point it out (by paragraph number) in the response to this Office Action.
Applicant may obviate this rejection by canceling Claims 16 and 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueller et al (U.S Patent 6,230,804) (“Mueller”) in view of DiLullo et al (U.S Pub 2002/0157575) (“DiLullo”).
Regarding Claim 1, Mueller discloses a process for forming a curable cement composition (Abstract; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 5, lines 38-61), the process comprising:
providing a cement composition including a calcium-deficient calcium silicate (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses a fibrous material such as wollastonite which is a fibrous calcium silicate material), where the calcium-deficient calcium silicate includes ground calcium silicate (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wherein the fibrous calcium silicate mineral has a fibrous, aggregate crystal structure), where the ground calcium silicate has a median particle size of from about 5 to about 200 µm (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wollastonite (a fibrous calcium silicate material) having a particle size range from about 25 to about 40 µm).
Mueller, however, fails to expressly disclose wherein the method includes (b) mixing the cement composition with carbon dioxide to form a curable cement composition.
DiLullo teaches the methods above wherein the methods include (b) mixing the cement composition with carbon dioxide to form a curable cement composition (Abstract; Page 2, paragraphs [0015]-[0016]; Page 7, paragraph [0058] [Wingdings font/0xE0] DiLullo teaches forming an energized phase composition comprising a foamed fibrous mineral-containing cement with a gaseous material such as carbon dioxide) for the purpose of forming a foamed fibrous-material containing cement in order to help create a hardened cement composition possessing high resilience, elasticity, and/or ductility at relatively high temperatures (Abstract; paragraphs [0014] and [0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Mueller to include methods of mixing the cement composition with carbon dioxide to form a curable cement composition, as taught by DiLullo, because doing so would help form a foamed fibrous-material containing cement in order to help create a hardened cement composition possessing high resilience, elasticity, and/or ductility at relatively high temperatures.
Regarding Claim 2, Mueller discloses the process of claim 1, further comprising steps of:
(c) mixing the curable cement composition with water to form a foamed cement (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 16, lines 28-51; Col 18, lines 26-40 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses mixing the cement composition with water and creating a foamed composition comprising a foaming agent); and
(d) placing the foamed cement in an annular space between a pipe string and a well bore (Abstract; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 5, lines 38-61 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses introducing the foamed cement composition in an annular region).
Regarding Claim 3, Mueller discloses the process of claim 2, where said step of mixing the curable cement composition with water further includes mixing the curable cement composition with a foaming agent (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 16, lines 28-51; Col 18, lines 26-40 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses mixing the cement composition with water and creating a foamed composition comprising a foaming agent).
Regarding Claim 4, Mueller discloses the process of claim 1, where the calcium-deficient calcium silicate is selected from the group consisting of wollastonite, pseudowollastonite, rankinite, and mixtures of two or more thereof (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wollastonite).
Regarding Claim 5, Mueller discloses the process of claim 1, where the ground calcium silicate has a bulk density of from about 18lbs/ft3 (Abstract; Col 13, lines 20-47). Although silent to wherein “the ground calcium silicate has a bulk density of from about 0.6 to about 0.8 g/mL,” as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide for a ground calcium silicate bulk density as claimed insofar as because it has been held "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 6, Mueller discloses the process of claim 1, where the ground calcium silicate has a surface area of from about 2.5 m2/g (Abstract; Col 13, lines 20-47). Although silent to wherein “the ground calcium silicate has a surface area of from about 1.5 to about 2.0 m2/g,” as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide for the ground calcium silicate surface area as claimed insofar as because it has been held "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 7, Mueller discloses the process of claim 1, where the cement composition includes greater than 50 wt % of the calcium-deficient calcium silicate (Col 14, lines 16-57 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wherein the calcium silicate has a concentration composition from about 40% and about 55% CaO and between about 60% and about 45% SiO2).
Regarding Claim 8, Mueller discloses the process of claim 4, where the cement composition includes greater than 50 wt % of the calcium-deficient calcium silicate selected from the group consisting of wollastonite, pseudowollastonite, and mixtures thereof (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wollastonite).
Regarding Claim 9, DiLullo teaches the process of claim 1, where the foamed cement has a carbon dioxide volume fraction of from about 8 to about 70% (Abstract; Page 2, paragraphs [0015]-[0016]; Page 7, paragraph [0058]).
Regarding Claim 10, DiLullo teaches the process of claim 1, where said step (b) of mixing the cement composition with carbon dioxide includes pressurizing the carbon dioxide to form a pressurized stream of carbon dioxide, and then contacting the pressurized stream of carbon dioxide with the cement composition (Abstract; Page 2, paragraphs [0015]-[0016]; Page 7, paragraph [0058] [Wingdings font/0xE0] DiLullo teaches wherein the cement composition is pressurized).
Regarding Claim 11, Mueller discloses the process of claim 1, where the pipe string has a generally tubular configuration with a surface opening at or proximate to a surface opening in the well bore and a downhole opening opposite the surface opening (Abstract; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 5, lines 38-61 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses a tubular used inside the wellbore), where said step (d) of placing the foamed cement includes first placing the foamed cement into the pipe string to form a foamed cement column within the pipe string, and then applying downward force on the foamed cement column to force the foamed cement out of the pipe string through the downhole opening and into the annular space (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 18, lines 26-40 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wherein the cement composition is introduced into an annular region).
Regarding Claim 12, Mueller discloses the process of claim 1, where the amount of carbon dioxide combined with the calcium-deficient calcium silicate is in excess of the carbon dioxide required to cure the calcium-deficient calcium silicate (Col 14, lines 16-57 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wherein the calcium silicate has a concentration composition from about 40% and about 55% CaO and between about 60% and about 45% SiO2).
Regarding Claim 13, Mueller discloses a cemented production well including a carbon dioxide capture and sequestration region within a cement casing (Abstract; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 5, lines 38-61), the cemented production well comprising:
(a) a wellbore (Abstract; Col 4, lines 40-67);
(b) a pipe string within said wellbore (Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 5, lines 38-61 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller disclose a tubular string);
(c) a generally annular column of cement within at least a portion of the space between the pipe string and the wellbore (Abstract; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 5, lines 38-61 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wherein the cement composition can be introduced into an annular region);
(d) a first generally annular region within the generally annular column of cement, said first generally annular region including a calcium-deficient calcium silicate (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses a fibrous material such as wollastonite which is a fibrous calcium silicate material), wherein said first generally annular region is a carbon dioxide sequestration region which is reactive to carbon dioxide, wherein the calcium-deficient calcium silicate includes ground calcium silicate with a median particle size of less than 200µm (Abstract; Col 13, lines 11-48 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wollastonite (a fibrous calcium silicate material) having a particle size range from about 25 to about 40 µm); and
(e) a second generally annular region within the generally annular column of cement, said second generally annular region including a calcium-rich calcium silicate (Abstract; Col 13, lines 11-48 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses a fibrous material such as wollastonite which is a fibrous calcium silicate material).
Mueller, however, fails to expressly disclose wherein the method includes mixing the cement slurry with carbon dioxide to form a foamed cement.
DiLullo teaches the methods above wherein the methods include mixing the cement slurry with carbon dioxide to form a foamed cement (Abstract; Page 2, paragraphs [0015]-[0016]; Page 7, paragraph [0058] [Wingdings font/0xE0] DiLullo teaches forming an energized phase composition comprising a foamed fibrous mineral-containing cement with a gaseous material such as carbon dioxide) for the purpose of forming a foamed fibrous-material containing cement in order to help create a hardened cement composition possessing high resilience, elasticity, and/or ductility at relatively high temperatures (Abstract; paragraphs [0014] and [0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Mueller to include methods of mixing the cement slurry with carbon dioxide to form a foamed cement, as taught by DiLullo, because doing so would help form a foamed fibrous-material containing cement in order to help create a hardened cement composition possessing high resilience, elasticity, and/or ductility at relatively high temperatures.
Regarding Claim 14, Mueller discloses the cemented production well of claim 22, where the well bore includes a surface opening and a well bottom, and where the first generally annular region is proximate to the surface of the opening of the well bore relative to the second generally annular region (Abstract; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 5, lines 38-61).
Regarding Claim 15, Mueller discloses the cemented production well of claim 22, where the calcium-deficient calcium silicate is selected from the group consisting of wollastonite, pseudowollastonite, rankinite, and mixtures of two or more thereof (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wollastonite), wherein the calcium-deficient calcium silicate includes ground calcium silicate with a medium particle size of from 5 µm to less than 200 µm (Abstract; Col 13, lines 11-48 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wollastonite (a fibrous calcium silicate material) having a particle size range from about 25 to about 40 µm).
Regarding Claim 16, Mueller discloses the process of claim 1, where the calcium-deficient calcium silicate consists of the ground calcium silicate (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wherein the fibrous calcium silicate mineral has a fibrous, aggregate crystal structure) having the median particle size of from about 5 to about 200 µm (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wollastonite (a fibrous calcium silicate material) having a particle size range from about 25 to about 40 µm).
Regarding Claim 17, Mueller discloses the cemented production well of claim 13, where the calcium-deficient calcium silicate consists of the ground calcium silicate (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wherein the fibrous calcium silicate mineral has a fibrous, aggregate crystal structure) having the median particle size of about 5 to about 200 µm (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Mueller discloses wollastonite (a fibrous calcium silicate material) having a particle size range from about 25 to about 40 µm).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/19/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
The applicant argues wherein the combination of references Mueller and DiLullo fail to disclose and/or teach “wherein the curable cement composition includes a calcium-deficient calcium silicate, wherein the calcium-deficient calcium silicate includes ground calcium silicate, where the ground calcium silicate has a median particle size of from about 5 to about 200µm,” as instantly recited by Independent claims 1 and 13.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The primary reference Mueller discloses a method of cementing an annular space between a pipe string and a wellbore (Abstract; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 5, lines 38-61), the method comprising the steps of providing a cement composition including a calcium-deficient calcium silicate (Col 4, lines 32-47; Col 5, lines 45-67; Col 14, lines 5-34). Mueller further discloses wherein the calcium-deficient calcium silicate is ground to a medium particle size of less than 200 µm (Abstract; Col 13, lines 11-48) and wherein mixing the cement composition with water forms a cement slurry (Col 4, lines 32-47). Reference Mueller specifically discloses wherein a fibrous mineral-containing cement slurry contains a mixture of a fibrous material (Col 14, lines 5-34), which in most cases Wollastonite is employed (which is a specific type of a calcium-deficient calcium silicate, see dependent claim #4 as recited by Applicant). Mueller further mentions wherein Wollastonite (which is calcium silicate) is a very fine mineral which indicates that calcium silicate is a ground and grinded calcium silicate type as disclosed by Independent claims 1 and 13. Mueller also discloses wherein Wollastonite has diameters that are similar to that of the particles of cements used (typically from about 25 to about 40 µm), which falls within the range of about 5 to about 200 µm, as instantly recited by the Applicant.
Further, simply grinding a well-known material in the cement and concrete industry like wollastonite that naturally comes in bulk form will not patentably distinguish the claims from the cited Prior Art. Mueller expressly discloses that wollastonite is a naturally occurring mineral that forms a fiberous, crystalline structure in its aggregate form and is typically available as very fine or micro-fibers in the shape of acicular particles having diameters similar to that of cement particles (25-40 µm). See Column 14, Lines 5-34. These express teachings, at a minimum, imply that the wollastonite is ground into the acicular particle/fiber form for use in the cement.
As a result, in light of the arguments present, the rejection stands as previously set forth.
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 ASHISH K VARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-9565. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-5:30pm, Telework Mondays and Fridays.
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.
/ASHISH K VARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3674
/WILLIAM D HUTTON JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3674
Prosecution Insights