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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 of this title, 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, 3, 6, 7, 10-12, 14, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallagher et al (US 11,788,374) in view of Hulsey (US 3,504,885).
As concerns claim 1, Gallagher discloses a blowout preventer, comprising:
a main body (Gallagher - 12) having a through bore;
an insert (Gallagher - 28) having a first segment and a second segment defining a passage between the segments (Gallagher - 28) oriented transverse to the through bore;
the first segment and the second segment each configured with a seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) to restrict fluid flow from the through bore,
wherein each seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) is configured for energization;
a cutter (Gallagher - 30) configured for motion to sever objects in the through bore;
a gate (Gallagher - 22) configured for motion in the transverse passage; and
a charge (Gallagher - 24) configured for activation to propel the gate (Gallagher - 22) to move the cutter (Gallagher - 30) across the through bore.
Gallagher fails to specify a plurality of seals for each segment.
Hulsey (US 3,504,885) teaches wherein a valve assembly uses a plurality of seals (Hulsey – 158 and 160) for restricting fluid flow from a through bore.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Gallagher as further taught by Hulsey to include a plurality of seals, for the expected benefit of insuring proper sealing by building in redundancy to the system, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 3, the combination discloses the blowout preventer of claim 1, wherein the first segment and the second segment are each configured with at least one seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) to restrict fluid flow between the though bore and the main body (Gallagher - 12).
As concerns claim 6, the combination discloses the blowout preventer of claim 1, wherein the plurality of seals (Gallagher - 36, 38) on the first segment and the second segment are each configured for energization.
As concerns claim 7, the combination discloses the blowout preventer of claim 6, wherein at least one seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) on the first segment or at least one seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) on the second segment is configured for continuous energization. (As best understood, as the term ‘continuous energization’ is not defined beyond the common understanding of a PHOSITA, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term is being taken. That is to say that ‘continuous energization’ is for any length of time. Additionally, as the claimed subject matter is reflected by the prior art, it is understood that the prior art is capable of meeting the claimed configuration as well.)
As concerns claim 10, the combination discloses the blowout preventer of claim 1, wherein the cutter (Gallagher - 30) is configured for positioning with an opening on the cutter (Gallagher - 30) coincident with the through bore.
As concerns claim 11, Gallagher discloses a blowout preventer, comprising:
a main body (Gallagher - 12) having a through bore;
an insert (Gallagher - 28) having a first segment and a second segment defining a passage between the segments (Gallagher - 28) oriented transverse to the through bore;
the first segment and the second segment each configured with a seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) to restrict fluid flow from though bore,
wherein each seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) is configured for energization;
a cutter (Gallagher - 30) configured for motion to sever objects in the through bore; and
a gate (Gallagher - 22) configured for motion along the passage in response to activation of a charge (Gallagher - 24), wherein the gate (Gallagher - 22) is configured to move along the passage between a position spaced apart from the cutter (Gallagher - 30) to a position where the gate (Gallagher - 22) contacts the cutter (Gallagher - 30) to move the cutter (Gallagher - 30) across the through bore.
Gallagher fails to specify a plurality of seals for each segment.
Hulsey (US 3,504,885) teaches wherein a valve assembly uses a plurality of seals (Hulsey – 158 and 160) for restricting fluid flow from a through bore.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Gallagher as further taught by Hulsey to include a plurality of seals, for the expected benefit of insuring proper sealing by building in redundancy to the system, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 12, Gallagher discloses a method of operating a blowout preventer having a body with a through bore, comprising:
actuating a charge (Gallagher - 24) to propel a gate (Gallagher - 22) along a passage in an insert (Gallagher - 28) disposed in the body;
wherein the insert (Gallagher - 28) is configured with a first segment and a second segment defining the passage between the segments (Gallagher - 28) to be oriented transverse to the through bore;
wherein the gate (Gallagher - 22) is propelled from a position spaced apart from a cutter (Gallagher - 30) disposed in the passage to a position where the gate (Gallagher - 22) contacts the cutter (Gallagher - 30);
allowing the propelled gate (Gallagher - 22) to move the cutter (Gallagher - 30) across the through bore; and
energizing a seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) on each of the first segment and the second segment to restrict fluid flow from the though bore.
Gallagher fails to specify a plurality of seals for each segment.
Hulsey (US 3,504,885) teaches wherein a valve assembly uses a plurality of seals (Hulsey – 158 and 160) for restricting fluid flow from a through bore.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Gallagher as further taught by Hulsey to include a plurality of seals, for the expected benefit of insuring proper sealing by building in redundancy to the system, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 14, the combination discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the first segment and the second segment are each configured with at least one seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) to restrict fluid flow between the through bore and the body.
As concerns claim 17, the combination discloses the method of claim 12, wherein at least one seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) on the first segment or at least one seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) on the second segment is configured for continuous energization.
As concerns claim 20, the combination discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the cutter (Gallagher - 30) is configured for positioning with an opening on the cutter (Gallagher - 30) coincident with the through bore.
Claims 2, 8, 13, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallagher and Hulsey in view of Springett et al (US 10,000,987).
As concerns claim 2, the combination discloses the blowout preventer of claim 1, however fail to specify further comprising at least one sensor to detect a fluid pressure associated with at least one seal of the first segment or at least one seal of the second segment.
Springett et al (US 10,000,987) however teaches a blowout preventer further comprising at least one sensor (Springett – at least 240) to detect a fluid pressure (Column 5, Lines 9-24, “ Sensors, such as seal sensor 240 a and actuator sensor 240 b, may be positioned about the BOP 222 for measuring BOP parameters, such as pressure, temperature, position, force displacement, ram cycle, valve pressure, fluid flow, equipment, rubber displacement, historical data, and/or other parameters.”) associated with at least one seal of the first segment or at least one seal of the second segment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as further taught by Springett to include the at least one sensor for the expected benefit of determining seal effectiveness and other parameters, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 8, the combination discloses the blowout preventer of claim 7, however fails to specify further comprising a plurality of sensors to detect internal pressures associated with the seals.
Springett et al (US 10,000,987) however teaches a blowout preventer further comprising a plurality of sensors (Springett – at least 240) to detect a fluid pressure (Column 5, Lines 9-24, “ Sensors, such as seal sensor 240 a and actuator sensor 240 b, may be positioned about the BOP 222 for measuring BOP parameters, such as pressure, temperature, position, force displacement, ram cycle, valve pressure, fluid flow, equipment, rubber displacement, historical data, and/or other parameters.”) associated with the seals.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as further taught by Springett to include the at least one sensor for the expected benefit of determining seal effectiveness and other parameters, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 13, the combination discloses the method of claim 12, however fails to specify wherein the body comprises at least one sensor to detect a fluid pressure associated with the seals (Gallagher - 36, 38) on the first segment or the second segment.
Springett et al (US 10,000,987) however teaches a blowout preventer further comprising at least one sensor (Springett – at least 240) to detect a fluid pressure (Column 5, Lines 9-24, “ Sensors, such as seal sensor 240 a and actuator sensor 240 b, may be positioned about the BOP 222 for measuring BOP parameters, such as pressure, temperature, position, force displacement, ram cycle, valve pressure, fluid flow, equipment, rubber displacement, historical data, and/or other parameters.”) associated with at least one seal of the first segment or at least one seal of the second segment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as further taught by Springett to include the at least one sensor for the expected benefit of determining seal effectiveness and other parameters, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 18, the combination discloses the method of claim 17, however fails to specify further comprising monitoring a pressure associated with the at least one seal (Gallagher - 36, 38) configured for continuous energization.
Springett et al (US 10,000,987) however teaches a blowout preventer further comprising a plurality of sensors (Springett – at least 240) to detect a fluid pressure (Column 5, Lines 9-24, “ Sensors, such as seal sensor 240 a and actuator sensor 240 b, may be positioned about the BOP 222 for measuring BOP parameters, such as pressure, temperature, position, force displacement, ram cycle, valve pressure, fluid flow, equipment, rubber displacement, historical data, and/or other parameters.”) associated with the seals.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as further taught by Springett to include the at least one sensor for the expected benefit of determining seal effectiveness and other parameters, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 19, the combination discloses the method of claim 18, further comprising monitoring internal pressures associated with the seal (Gallagher - 36, 38). (Springett – Column 5, Line 9-24)
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallagher, Hulsey and further in view of Reyes et al (US 9,804,039).
As concerns claim 4, the combination discloses the blowout preventer of claim 1, however fails to specify further comprising at least one sensor to detect an internal pressure associated with a chamber configured to house the charge.
Reyes et al (US 9,804,039) however teaches a system further comprising a sensor (Reyes - 413) to detect an internal pressure associated with a chamber configured to house a charge (the internal pressurized section of the accumulator is considered to be analogous to a charge).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as taught by Reyes to include a chamber sensor for the expected benefit of monitoring the pressure within the chamber to determine the status of the system, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 15, the combination discloses the method of claim 12, however fails to specify further comprising monitoring an internal pressure associated with a chamber configured to house the charge (Gallagher - 24).
Reyes et al (US 9,804,039) however teaches a system further comprising a sensor (Reyes - 413) to detect an internal pressure associated with a chamber configured to house a charge (the internal pressurized section of the accumulator is considered to be analogous to a charge).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as taught by Reyes to include a chamber sensor for the expected benefit of monitoring the pressure within the chamber to determine the status of the system, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallagher and Hulsey further in view of Papadimitriou et al (US 10,145,198).
As concerns claim 9, the combination discloses the blowout preventer of claim 1, however fails to specify further comprising at least one sensor to detect an external ambient pressure.
Papadimitriou et al (US 10,145,198) however teaches a system comprising sensors (Papadimitriou – at least 25) for detecting an external ambient pressure. (Column 15, Line 65 to Column 16, Line 6)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as taught by Papadimitriou to include ambient pressure sensors, for the expected benefit of monitoring the overall health and effectiveness of the BOP, obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As concerns claims 5 and 16, the combination of Armstrong, Hulsey and Gallagher discloses the blowout preventer of claim 1 or 12, however fails to specify further comprising at least one sensor to detect an internal pressure associated with a pressure chamber configured to house the gate.
Gallagher discloses a blowout preventer with the claimed pressure chambers. Amsellem et al (US 10,900,347), Springett et al (US 10,000,987) and Reyes III et al US 9,804,039) teach a blowout preventer further comprising various sensors.
Neither Amsellem nor any additionally cited art of record teaches or fairly suggests, alone or in combination, inter alia, wherein it would have been obvious to place a sensor within the gate chamber of Gallagher (‘374) for detecting an internal pressure thereof, without improper hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON L LEMBO whose telephone number is (571)270-3065. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am-4pm.
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 on (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.
/AARON L LEMBO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3679