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
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of the Species of “into the first well” pumping of the first well fluid; “a reservoir stress” property of the geothermal reservoir; “out of” the second well pumping of the second well fluid; and “out of” the third well pumping of the third well fluid, drawn to claims 1-3, 5-15, and 17-19, in the reply filed on 23 December 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “For example, the Restriction Requirement alleges that "depending on the combination elected, the different techniques would interact differently and raise different considerations" without offering a reasonable example to support these allegations” (p.7) and “Here, the Restriction Requirement alleges that "the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art" and "the inventions require a different field of search'' without identifying the purported statuses or the fields of search that would be required” (p.8). This is not found persuasive because, first, there is no “reasonable example” requirement or the like for Species Elections, and moreover the different considerations raised by the different interactions of the different techniques should be self-evident from the Specification because Applicant has disclosed that the different techniques result in different results, such as low-stress regions vs. high-stress regions ([0044]-[0045]). Second, as stated clearly in the Restriction/Election requirement, “the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter – because depending on the specific combination elected, these would require wholly different, non-overlapping treatment methodologies; and/or the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries) – because the differences in claim scopes would require substantially different search strategies” (p.3), and Applicant does not actually address the specific rationales provided by the Office. For example, the Office clearly identified the separate statuses (“wholly different, non-overlapping treatment methodologies”), and the different fields of search (“substantially different search strategies” due to “differences in claim scopes”). Unless Applicant actually addresses a deficiency in these specifically-articulated rationales (e.g., how the treatment methodologies would not be wholly different and non-overlapping between Species, or how the search strategies would not be substantially different between Species), Applicant’s argument cannot be persuasive.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 4, 16, and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Yuan (9,410,406) (also cited in parent 18/234,220).
Regarding independent claim 1, Yuan discloses A method (abstract “drilling and completing two wells in the formation, conditioning said wells to create a stress condition favorable for forming a fracture zone connecting said two wells and initiating and propagating the fracture zone in said formation” and Col. 8, lines 30-33 “In geothermal applications, two wells are drilled with one well injecting cold water and the other producing the heated water. The present invention can be used to form a fracture between the wells”) comprising:
selecting a first well of a geothermal reservoir (e.g., Col. 4, lines 33 “Two wells are first drilled and completed”);
preconditioning the first well by pumping a fluid into or out of the first well to change a property of the geothermal reservoir (Col. 5, lines 11-13 “the area where said two wells 4 to be connected via a fracture is conditioned via controlled injection into one or the two of said two wells 4”), the property of the geothermal reservoir being at least one of a reservoir fluid pressure, a reservoir fluid temperature, a reservoir stress, a reservoir poroelastic stress, or a reservoir thermoelastic stress (Col. 5, lines 47-48 “The pressure diffusion increases the pore pressure inside the formation 2” = bottomhole pressure; Col. 5, lines 48-50 “Similarly, temperature diffusion increases the temperature inside the formation 2” = fluid temperature; and Col. 5, lines 13-16 “The increased pressure and/or temperature field alters the original in-situ stress condition via poroelastic and/or thermoelastic mechanisms” = reservoir fluid pressure, temperature, stress, poroelastic stress, and thermoelastic stress);
selecting a second well of the geothermal reservoir (e.g., Col. 4, lines 33 “Two wells are first drilled and completed”); and
enhancing permeability of the geothermal reservoir by using a first reservoir stimulation technique at the first well and using a second reservoir stimulation technique corresponding with the first reservoir stimulation technique at the second well (Col. 8, lines 4-7 “Following stress modification, the injection pressure is increased further at one or the two of said two wells 4 to break down the formation 2 and to propagate the fracture zone 12 which will connect the two wells 4”), the first reservoir stimulation technique and the second reservoir stimulation technique causing fractures to propagate through the geothermal reservoir between the first well and the second well (e.g., Col. 4, lines 19-23 “the present inventors have found that the original in situ stress profile can be modified via interaction of said two wells in the pressure and/or temperature diffusion, and thereby change the orientation of induced fractures to the direction connecting the said two wells”).
Although not required to anticipate the claim as written, Applicant may see claim 11 below rejected over Yuan in view of An, regarding pumping a fluid out of the second well.
Regarding independent claim 12, Yuan discloses A system (abstract “drilling and completing two wells in the formation, conditioning said wells to create a stress condition favorable for forming a fracture zone connecting said two wells and initiating and propagating the fracture zone in said formation” and Col. 8, lines 30-33 “In geothermal applications, two wells are drilled with one well injecting cold water and the other producing the heated water. The present invention can be used to form a fracture between the wells”) comprising:
a first well of a geothermal reservoir (e.g., Col. 4, lines 33 “Two wells are first drilled and completed”), the first well preconditioned by pumping a fluid into or out of the first well to change a property of the geothermal reservoir (Col. 5, lines 11-13 “the area where said two wells 4 to be connected via a fracture is conditioned via controlled injection into one or the two of said two wells 4”), the property of the geothermal reservoir being at least one of a reservoir fluid pressure, a reservoir fluid temperature, a reservoir stress, a reservoir poroelastic stress, or a reservoir thermoelastic stress (Col. 5, lines 47-48 “The pressure diffusion increases the pore pressure inside the formation 2” = bottomhole pressure; Col. 5, lines 48-50 “Similarly, temperature diffusion increases the temperature inside the formation 2” = fluid temperature; and Col. 5, lines 13-16 “The increased pressure and/or temperature field alters the original in-situ stress condition via poroelastic and/or thermoelastic mechanisms” = reservoir fluid pressure, temperature, stress, poroelastic stress, and thermoelastic stress); and
a second well of the geothermal reservoir (e.g., Col. 4, lines 33 “Two wells are first drilled and completed”), wherein permeability of the geothermal reservoir is enhanced by using a first reservoir stimulation technique at the first well and using a second reservoir stimulation technique corresponding with the first reservoir stimulation technique at the second well (Col. 8, lines 4-7 “Following stress modification, the injection pressure is increased further at one or the two of said two wells 4 to break down the formation 2 and to propagate the fracture zone 12 which will connect the two wells 4”), the first reservoir stimulation technique and the second reservoir stimulation technique causing fractures to propagate through the geothermal reservoir between the first well and the second well (e.g., Col. 4, lines 19-23 “the present inventors have found that the original in situ stress profile can be modified via interaction of said two wells in the pressure and/or temperature diffusion, and thereby change the orientation of induced fractures to the direction connecting the said two wells”).
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Yuan discloses “The injection pressure is increased by increasing either the injection rate or injection pressure above the original in-situ minimum stress, Smin, until a fracture zone is initiated” (Col. 8, lines 34-36) and “Following stress modification, the injection pressure is increased further at … the two of said two wells 4 to break down the formation 2 and to propagate the fracture zone 12 which will connect the two wells 4” (Col. 8, lines 4-7). Accordingly, Yuan discloses:
(claims 5 and 17) wherein the first reservoir stimulation technique comprises at least one of hydraulic fracturing or hydroshearing, and the second reservoir stimulation technique comprises producing fluid from the second well or injecting fluid into the second well.
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Yuan discloses “Following stress modification, the injection pressure is increased further at one or the two of said two wells 4 to break down the formation 2 and to propagate the fracture zone 12 which will connect the two wells 4” (Col. 8, lines 4-7). Accordingly, Yuan discloses:
(claim 6) wherein enhancing permeability of the geothermal reservoir comprises:
creating a hydraulic connection between the first well and the second well using the first reservoir stimulation technique and the second reservoir stimulation technique; and/or
(claim 18) a hydraulic connection between the first well and the second well, the hydraulic connection created using the first reservoir stimulation technique and the second reservoir stimulation technique.
Regarding claim 9, Yuan discloses wherein enhancing permeability of the geothermal reservoir comprises:
manipulating a stress field in the geothermal reservoir through injection or production of fluid to cause the fractures to propagate through the geothermal reservoir between the first well and the second well (Col. 8, lines 4-7 “Following stress modification, the injection pressure is increased further at one or the two of said two wells 4 to break down the formation 2 and to propagate the fracture zone 12 which will connect the two wells 4”).
Regarding claim 10, Yuan discloses wherein the property of the geothermal reservoir includes the reservoir fluid pressure, the reservoir fluid temperature, the reservoir stress, the reservoir poroelastic stress, and the reservoir thermoelastic stress (these are all impacted in Yuan, e.g. Col. 5, lines 47-48 “The pressure diffusion increases the pore pressure inside the formation 2” = bottomhole pressure; Col. 5, lines 48-50 “Similarly, temperature diffusion increases the temperature inside the formation 2” = fluid temperature; and Col. 5, lines 13-16 “The increased pressure and/or temperature field alters the original in-situ stress condition via poroelastic and/or thermoelastic mechanisms” = reservoir fluid pressure, temperature, stress, poroelastic stress, and thermoelastic stress).
Regarding independent claim 19, Yuan discloses A method (abstract “drilling and completing two wells in the formation, conditioning said wells to create a stress condition favorable for forming a fracture zone connecting said two wells and initiating and propagating the fracture zone in said formation” and Col. 8, lines 30-33 “In geothermal applications, two wells are drilled with one well injecting cold water and the other producing the heated water. The present invention can be used to form a fracture between the wells”) comprising:
selecting a well of a geothermal reservoir (e.g., Col. 4, lines 33 “Two wells are first drilled and completed”), wherein a property of the geothermal reservoir is changed in response to a first reservoir stimulation technique (Col. 5, lines 11-13 “the area where said two wells 4 to be connected via a fracture is conditioned via controlled injection into one or the two of said two wells 4”), and the property of the geothermal reservoir is at least one of a reservoir fluid pressure, a reservoir fluid temperature, a reservoir stress, a reservoir poroelastic stress, or a reservoir thermoelastic stress (Col. 5, lines 47-48 “The pressure diffusion increases the pore pressure inside the formation 2” = bottomhole pressure; Col. 5, lines 48-50 “Similarly, temperature diffusion increases the temperature inside the formation 2” = fluid temperature; and Col. 5, lines 13-16 “The increased pressure and/or temperature field alters the original in-situ stress condition via poroelastic and/or thermoelastic mechanisms” = reservoir fluid pressure, temperature, stress, poroelastic stress, and thermoelastic stress);
preconditioning the well by pumping a fluid into or out of the well to change the property of the geothermal reservoir (e.g., Col. 5, lines 11-13 “the area where said two wells 4 to be connected via a fracture is conditioned via controlled injection into one or the two of said two wells 4”); and
enhancing permeability of the geothermal reservoir using a second reservoir stimulation technique (Col. 8, lines 4-7 “Following stress modification, the injection pressure is increased further at one or the two of said two wells 4 to break down the formation 2 and to propagate the fracture zone 12 which will connect the two wells 4”) to cause fractures to propagate through the geothermal reservoir away from or towards to the well (e.g., Col. 4, lines 19-23 “the present inventors have found that the original in situ stress profile can be modified via interaction of said two wells in the pressure and/or temperature diffusion, and thereby change the orientation of induced fractures to the direction connecting the said two wells”).
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.
Claims 2, 3, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yuan as in claims 1 and 12 above.
Regarding claims 2, 13, and 14, Yuan discloses “the present invention provides a method of forming a fracture connecting two wells in subterranean geological formations even though the connection of the said wells is not oriented perpendicular to the original in-situ minimum stress. … the present inventors have found that the original in situ stress profile can be modified via interaction of said two wells in the pressure and/or temperature diffusion, and thereby change the orientation of induced fractures to the direction connecting the said two wells” (Col. 4, lines 6-23) wherein “It is desirable to create a fracture connecting two neighboring wells” (Col. 1, lines 17-18) and e.g. “If the SAGD wells can be hydraulically fractured, forming a high-mobility conduit connecting the two SAGD wells, the inter-well communication can occur much earlier and stronger” (Col. 1, lines 62-65).
However, Yuan does not appear to disclose connecting additional/third wells in the same manner.
Nevertheless, Yuan teaches in the Background of Prior Art methods which, e.g., “controlled the direction of hydraulic fractures by employing at least three wells and a natural fracture system” and “creating an oriented fracture in the direction of the minimum in-situ stress from a first well by first hydraulically fracturing another well to condition the formation. Again, additional wells and sacrificial fractures are required before the targeted fracture can be formed” (Col. 2, lines 45-55), and thus Yuan establishes that it is known in the art to treat additional/third or more wells, not just two wells.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yuan to include repeating the method for additional/third or more wells, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to create a fracture connecting more neighboring wells, by which “the inter-well communication can occur much earlier and stronger” for geothermal applications, such as for a larger reservoir requiring more coverage (thereby including:
(claim 2) selecting a third well of the geothermal reservoir;
preconditioning the third well to change the property of the geothermal reservoir based on changes to the geothermal reservoir resulting from the first reservoir stimulation technique and the second reservoir stimulation technique; and
enhancing permeability of the geothermal reservoir using a third reservoir stimulation technique to cause fractures to propagate through the geothermal reservoir away from or towards to the third well; and/or
(claim 13) a third well of the geothermal reservoir, the third well preconditioned to change the property of the geothermal reservoir based on changes to the geothermal reservoir resulting from the first reservoir stimulation technique and the second reservoir stimulation technique; and further
(claim 14) wherein the permeability of the geothermal reservoir is enhanced by using a third reservoir stimulation technique to cause fractures to propagate through the geothermal reservoir away from or towards to the third well).
Applicant is reminded that "A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." KSR, 550 U.S. at 421, 82 USPQ2d at 1397. See MPEP 2141.
Although Applicant has elected the Species of “into the first well” pumping of the first well fluid; “out of” the second well pumping of the second well fluid; and “out of” the third well pumping of the third well fluid, the Office observes that claims 2, 13, and 14 do not appear to require this particular combination of methodologies. Thus, Yuan broadly teaches the claimed limitations, which merely require treating a third well to connect a fracture, like Yuan’s first and second wells connected by a fracture.
Regarding claims 3 and 15, Yuan discloses wherein the changes to the geothermal reservoir resulting from the first reservoir stimulation technique and the second reservoir stimulation technique comprise at least one of a change to a stress state in the geothermal reservoir (Col. 5, lines 13-16 “The increased pressure and/or temperature field alters the original in-situ stress condition via poroelastic and/or thermoelastic mechanisms”), a change to a fracture geometry in the geothermal reservoir (Col. 5, lines 16-18 “The new stress condition after the modification favors a fracture being formed to connect the exposed injection intervals 6 between said two wells 4”), or a change to a pressure field in the geothermal reservoir (Col. 5, lines 47-48 “The pressure diffusion increases the pore pressure inside the formation 2”).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yuan as in claims 1 above, and further in view of An (10,934,825).
Regarding claim 11, Yuan discloses wherein the first reservoir stimulation technique comprises injection of fluid at the first well (Col. 5, lines 11-13 “the area where said two wells 4 to be connected via a fracture is conditioned via controlled injection into one or the two of said two wells 4”)…
Regarding pumping a fluid out of the second borehole, Yuan as above discloses injecting fluid into the first borehole and/or second borehole to increase fluid pressure instead.
However, Yuan fails to disclose pumping fluid out of the second borehole.
Nevertheless, An teaches in the Background that “As more wells are drilled, the spacing between each well may decrease, which may increase the chances of an interwell communication event, which hereinafter is referred to as a “frac hit,” in which a pressure within a first well (e.g., a “parent well”) is affected by the hydraulic fracturing in a second well (e.g., a “child well” or an “infill well”) to cause an interaction between the parent well and the child well. In some aspects, fracturing treatment of the child well causes a fracture to grow towards the parent well when the reservoir pressure around the parent well is lower than the unstimulated/unproduced reservoir surrounding the child well” (Col. 1, lines 29-39).
Viewed through the lens of Yuan, this statement strongly suggests that Yuan’s pressure control method would also work in reverse, i.e. by selectively producing fluids from a second wellbore in order to lower the reservoir pressure to “modify the original in situ stress profile” and thereby “change the orientation of induced fractures to the direction connecting the said two wells.” Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yuan to include “wherein the first reservoir stimulation technique comprises injection of fluid at the first well, and the second reservoir stimulation technique comprises production of the fluid from the second well,” with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to “modify the original in situ stress profile” and thereby “change the orientation of induced fractures to the direction connecting the said two wells.”
Second, this modification is obvious as no more than (D) Applying a known technique (reducing reservoir pressure around a parent well and fracturing) to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement (a geothermal well pair) to yield predictable results (causing a fracture to grow towards the parent well). KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). See MPEP 2143 Examples of Basic Requirements of a Prima Facie Case of Obviousness.
Although An is otherwise directed to protecting the parent well from the fracturing of a child well, Applicant may note that An does not teach away from fracturing to connect the parent well and child well because Yuan already discloses that such a connection is desirable in certain geothermal systems.
Applicant is reminded that, as in MPEP 2123, "The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain." In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)).
Also, as in MPEP 2123, disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. In re Susi, 440 F.2d 442, 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971).
In this case, although An is generally directed to increasing a pressure to create a dynamic pressure cloud that prevents frac hits, An nevertheless also teaches that a lower pressure around the parent well causes fracturing treatment of a child well to grow toward the parent well. Because Yuan specifically desires forming a fracture zone connecting two wells (Yuan abstract), the proposed modification by An would not render Yuan unsatisfactory for its intended purpose or change the principle of operation of Yuan, instead being entirely within the desired goals of Yuan.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yuan as in claim 1 above, and further in view of Potapenko (2016/0215604) (cited in parent 18/234,200).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Yuan discloses wherein enhancing permeability of the geothermal reservoir comprises:
detecting an intersection between the fractures and the second well (Col. 8, lines 46-50 “Preferably, once the fracture has been initiated, one well is shut-in while the other well continues the injection. This enables detection of the inter-well communication. When pressure at the shut-in well increases, it means that the two wells 4 are in communication with each other”)…
Regarding causing proppant to become immobilized by producing fluid from the second well, Yuan discloses “The art of hydraulic fracturing as a stimulation method for hydrocarbon resource recovery has been practiced for a long time. In general, this method injects liquid at a high pressure into a well drilled through the target formation to be stimulated. The high pressure initiates a fracture from the injection well and propagates a sufficient distance into the formation. Then, the fracture is filled with proppants that are injected from the surface after the fracture is formed” (Col. 1, line 66-Col. 2, line 6).
However, Yuan fails to specify causing proppant to become immobilized by producing fluid from the second well.
Nevertheless, it is well-known to enact rapid fracture closure to evenly distribute proppant in a fracture. For example, Potapenko teaches a “WELL TREATMENT” (Title) wherein “the treatment fluid may further comprise proppant and/or the downhole structure may comprise a fracture, e.g., above a fracturing pressure of the formation” ([0013]) and “In some applications it may be desired to quickly break, dissipate, and/or flow back foamed fluids in downhole applications, e.g., to implement fracture closure” ([0003]), such as when “Rapid fracture closure in some fracturing embodiments can assist in achieving and/or retaining a desired proppant placement modality, for example, by reducing the opportunity for proppant to settle or excessively settle in the formation. In some embodiments, the proppant is “frozen” in place by rapid fracture closure, e.g., trapping the proppant in a relatively homogeneous distribution” ([0064]). Applicant may note that dissipation and/or flow back of fluids reduces the reservoir fluid pressure, which causes the fracture closure.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yuan to include quick flow back of the fracturing fluid, thereby causing rapid fracture closure, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to trap the proppant “in a relatively homogeneous distribution” (thereby including:
(claim 7) wherein enhancing permeability of the geothermal reservoir comprises:
detecting an intersection between the fractures and the second well; and
producing fluid from the second well in response to the intersection to decrease pressure in the fractures; and/or
(claim 8) wherein enhancing permeability of the geothermal reservoir comprises:
causing proppant in a fracture in the geothermal reservoir to become immobilized by producing fluid from the second well to drop the reservoir fluid pressure acting on the fracture; and
causing even distribution of the proppant within the fracture in the geothermal reservoir).
The Office observes that Applicant discloses “In this simulation, once the hydraulic fractures intersected the offset wells, fluid was produced from the offset wells causing the pressure in the fracture to decrease. This relatively fast fracture closure improved the distribution of proppant within the fracture” ([0076]).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 5-15, and 17-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,378,866 (also parent Application 18/234,220).
Regarding independent claims 1, 12, and 19, these correspond to 12,378,866 claims 1, 16, and 17.
Regarding claims 2, 3, 5-11, 13-15, 17, and 18, these correspond to 12,378,866 claims 1 and 11--17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
The reference to Shuck (4,005,750) discloses controlling the orientation of hydraulically-induced fractures by injecting liquid at a sufficiently high pressure into a first wellbore 20 to fracture 30 and stress the surrounding earth formation in a plane generally orthogonal to reorient the plane of stress and then inject liquid into a second wellbore 32 to effect a fracture 40 in the second wellbore toward the first wellbore (abstract and Figs. 9-10) wherein this may be utilized for fracturing subterranean earth formations for “geothermal” energy (3:58). However, this reference fails to disclose or teach pumping a fluid out of the 1st borehole to decrease fluid pressure, to orient a fracture from a 2nd wellbore to the 1st wellbore.
The reference to Zoback (2008/0249721) teaches predicting hydraulic fracture orientation based on changes in stress due to depletion (= [0008] “pore pressure reduction due to production”) from a reservoir (abstract), which would appear to predict that fractures would orient toward areas of depleted pressure. However, this reference fails to teach controlling the fracture direction by producing from a wellbore to change the pressure.
The reference to Dusterhoft (2019/0234194) teaches “during stimulation of the child well 230, asymmetrically induced fractures 232 may generate to propagate in the direction of the reservoir volume 202, i.e., the depleted reservoir volume. Specifically, the asymmetrically induced fractures 232 generated in the child well 230 migrate to lower pressure, i.e., lower stress, zones of the formation 201, such as the reservoir volume 202, or any other previously depleted well(s) with a low reservoir pressure. The fractures 232 of the child well 230 follow the path of least resistance or the path that requires less fracture energy, thus, resulting in the asymmetric fracture pattern. As shown in FIG. 2A, the asymmetrically induced fractures 232, as described herein, can include fractures that grow preferentially on one side of the child well 230 in the direction of the reservoir volume 202. Such asymmetric fracture growth restricts the fractures 232 from generating on another side of the child well 230 or fracturing in the direction of other producing reservoirs, such as the reservoir volume 204 that is pressured and capable of producing reservoir fluids. As a result, the reservoir volume 204 may be bypassed or untouched due to the asymmetric induced fractures 232 propagating in the direction of the reservoir volume 202” ([0021]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SUE-AKO whose telephone number is (571)272-9455. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM EST.
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 571-272-24137. 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.
/ANDREW SUE-AKO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674