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 .
The amended claims filed 2/27/26 are acknowledged; claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zimmerman et al. (US 20020040783).
. CLAIM 1: Zimmerman discloses a system for automatic well intervention in a wellbore. The system comprises a robotic tool assembly (520); and a plurality of subassemblies comprising a first subassembly and a second subassembly stored at or within the robotic tool assembly (524, 528, 530). The robotic tool assembly is configured to assemble a the first subassembly and the second subassembly to form at least part of a downhole tool string (see paragraphs 0056-57; Fig. 17)., and wherein a subassembly, of the plurality of subassemblies, comprises an energy storage subsystem configured to provide power to the downhole tool (battery 820, part of sensor 624, part of tool 565, part of carousel 528).
CLAIM 8: The energy storage subsystem may be charged at a charging station (see paragraph 0078).
CLAIM 9: The charging station uses contact charging to charge the energy storage subsystem (paragraph 0078).
CLAIMS 17 and 18: Zimmerman discloses a plurality of subassemblies and storage locations (see Fig. 1).
CLAIM 20: Zimmerman discloses an assembly space configured to receive the subset of subassemblies for assembly of the downhole tool (see Fig. 17).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 10 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmerman et al. (US 20020040783).
CLAIM 10: Zimmerman fails to disclose wherein the charging station uses non-contact charging to charge the energy storage subsystem.
Examiner takes official notice that non-contact charging is well known in the art as means of supplying power.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of Zimmerman to be non-contact with a reasonable expectation of success as the use of a known charging method used in the established manner to charge the batteries.
CLAIM 19: Zimmerman fails to disclose wherein the desired wellbore operation is a logging operation, and wherein the downhole tool is tethered during the logging operation.
Examiner takes official notice that logging tools are well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zimmerman to supply a logging tool with a reasonable expectation of success as the specific tool would not change the system setup of claimed invention and the use of any known subsea tool would be known and operate in their known manner.
Claim(s) 2-5 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmerman in view of Zhang et al. (US 20020011335).
CLAIMS 2-5: Robertson-Miller discloses the elements of claim 1 as discussed above.
Robertson-Miller fails to disclose the energy storage subsystem comprises a fuel cell (clam 2), wherein the fuel cell is configured to operate using hydrogen and oxygen stored within the subassembly (claim 3), wherein the hydrogen and the oxygen are stored in separate containers, absorbed to substrates, or stored in a chemical form (claim 4), or wherein the hydrogen and the oxygen are generated via electrolysis (claim 5).
Zhang discloses a fuel cell for downhole and subsea power systems.
Zhang discloses a fuel cell (10), wherein the fuel cell is configured to operate using hydrogen and oxygen stored within the subassembly (paragraph 0052), wherein the hydrogen and the oxygen are stored in separate containers, absorbed to substrates, or stored in a chemical form (paragraph 0052 describes how they come from separate containers), and wherein the hydrogen and the oxygen are generated via electrolysis (see paragraph 0043).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Zimmerman to be the fuel cell of Zhang with reasonable expectation of success as both are sources of power for similar subsea use.
CLAIM 11: See discussion above for claims 2-5 for the combination of Zimmerman and the fuel cell of Zhang.
CLAIMS 12-14: The methods are inherent to the above structures.
Claim(s) 6 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmerman in view of Hall et al. (US 8033328).
Zimmerman discloses the elements of claims 1 and 11 as discussed above.
Zimmerman fails to disclose the energy storage subsystem comprises a turbine-based power generator configured to convert production flow energy of the wellbore into electrical energy.
Hall disclose a downhole electric power generator.
Hall discloses a turbine (34) that supplies power to the downhole tool with electrical generator 38 by using fluid flow.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Zimmerman to be charged via turbine as in Hall with reasonable expectation of success as both are sources of power for similar subsea use.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmerman in view of McMillon et al. (US 8881832).
Zimmerman fails to disclose wherein the energy storage subsystem further comprises an ultra-capacitor.
McMillon discloses a downhole supercapacitor device.
McMillon discloses an ultra-capacitor (col. 3, lines 55-68) to store electrical energy.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Zimmerman to be utilize ultra-capacitor to store power as in Hall with reasonable expectation of success as both are known storage methods of power for similar subsea use.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) filed 2/27/26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The newly cited art teaches the combining of assemblies as required in the amended claims.
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 PATRICK F LAMBE whose telephone number is (571)270-1932. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-4.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571)270-7741. 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.
/PATRICK F LAMBE/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights