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 02/24/2026, the Applicant amended claim 1, added new Independent claim 20, and argued against the rejections in the Non-Final Rejection dated 01/14/2026.
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains 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 Claim 20, the disclosure of the present application fails to describe a concrete formulation, consisting of:
a cement component including a calcium sulfoaluminate cement and a Portland cement wherein the calcium sulfoaluminate cement is a primary cement component; and
an aggregate component including coarse aggregates between 62.5 microns and 1,200 microns in diameter and fine aggregates between 62.5 microns to less than 5 microns in diameter.
Stated differently, the disclosure fails to expressly mention an embodiment of the concrete formulation that only comprises all of the expressly recited elements of Claim 20.
Accordingly, Claim 20 fails 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 Claim 20.
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 1-9, 11-12, 14-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clodic et al (U.S Patent 8,999,057) (“Clodic”) in view of Dubey (U.S Patent 10,221,096) (“Dubey”).
Regarding Claim 1, Clodic discloses a concrete formulation (Abstract; Col 2, lines 29-31), comprising:
a cement component including a calcium sulfoaluminate cement and a Portland cement (Col 1, lines 37-40 and lines 62-67; Col 4, lines 40-67 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a cement composition comprising calcium sulfoaluminate cement); and
an aggregate component including coarse aggregates and fine aggregates (Col 1, 60-67; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 21, lines 51-67; Col 22, lines 1-43 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses aggregates comprising a variety of diameter sizes). Although silent to wherein “the aggregate component includes coarse aggregates between 62.5 microns and 1,200 microns in diameter and fine aggregates between 62.5 microns to less than 5 microns in diameter,” 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 coarse and fine aggregates diameters 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).
Clodic discloses wherein the concrete composition comprises a combination of carbonate (i.e., metastable component such as vaterite, amorphous calcium carbonate etc) and calcium aluminate cements (CAC) and discloses wherein calcium sulfoaluminate cement is added to the concrete formulation (Col 2, lines 29-36 and Col 3, lines 11-18); however, reference Clodic fails to expressly disclose wherein the calcium sulfoaluminate cement is a primary cement component of the concrete formulation above.
Dubey teaches wherein calcium sulfoaluminate cement is a primary cement component of a concrete formulation (Abstract; Col 2, lines 34-47; Col 4, lines 16-21; Col 22, lines 55-67; Table 54 in Col 74; Col 76, lines 7-12; Col 80, lines 17-18 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Dubey teaches a concrete geopolymer cementitious product comprising calcium sulfoaluminate cements) for the purpose of improving the dimensional stability during and after curing and increasing the compressive strength of the geopolymer concrete cementitious composition (Col 3, lines 34-47). Further, the geopolymer cementitious composition comprising calcium sulfoaluminate cement provides rapid setting behaviour while maintaining a sufficiently long open time (Col 76, line 7-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Clodic to expressly disclose wherein calcium sulfoaluminate cement is a primary cement component of a concrete formulation, as taught by Dubey, because doing so would improve the dimensional stability during and after curing and increase the compressive strength of the geopolymer concrete cementitious composition. Further advantages of the geopolymer cementitious composition comprising calcium sulfoaluminate cement include providing rapid setting behaviour while maintaining a sufficiently long open time.
Regarding Claim 2, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 1, further including a foaming agent (Abstract; Col 50, lines 1-20 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additives and components that can be added to the cement compositions comprising a foaming agent).
Regarding Claim 3, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 2, wherein the foaming agent is sufficient to create a microcellular foamed concrete (Abstract; Col 2, lines 29-31; Col 50, lines 1-20 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additives and components that can be added to the concrete cement compositions comprising a foaming agent). Although silent to wherein “the foaming agent has densities ranging from 600 kg/m3- 1500 kg/m3,” 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 density of the foaming agents 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 4, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 3, wherein the foaming agent is selected from a group consisting of an organic foaming agent, an inorganic foaming agent and combinations thereof (Abstract; Col 50, lines 1-20 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additives and components that can be added to the cement compositions comprising a foaming agent).
Regarding Claim 5, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 1, wherein the foaming agent is selected from a group consisting of an organic foaming agent, an inorganic foaming agent and combinations thereof (Abstract; Col 50, lines 1-20 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additives and components that can be added to the cement compositions comprising a foaming agent).
Regarding Claim 6, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 2, wherein the aggregate component includes screen fractions of aggregates (Col 1, 60-67; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 21, lines 51-67; Col 22, lines 1-43 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses aggregates comprising a variety of diameter sizes). Although silent to wherein “the aggregate component includes screen fractions of aggregates that are less than 250 microns in diameter consisting of multiple sizes or fractions of limestone (or dolomitic limestone, dolomite, or quartz sand) aggregates ranging up to no more than 200 microns in diameter and fine aggregates that include milled limestone, Class F fly ash, and/or quartz flour wherein a relative proportion of fine aggregate and cement increases proportionately with a targeted decrease in concrete density,” 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 coarse and fine aggregates diameters 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, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 3, wherein the aggregate component includes screen fractions of aggregates (Col 1, 60-67; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 21, lines 51-67; Col 22, lines 1-43 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses aggregates comprising a variety of diameter sizes). Although silent to wherein “the aggregate component includes screen fractions of aggregates that are less than 250 microns in diameter consisting of multiple sizes or fractions of limestone (or dolomitic limestone, dolomite, or quartz sand) aggregates ranging up to no more than 200 microns in diameter and fine aggregates that include milled limestone, Class F fly ash, and/or quartz flour wherein a relative proportion of fine aggregate and cement increases proportionately with a targeted decrease in concrete density,” 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 coarse and fine aggregates diameters 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 8, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 2, wherein the concrete formulation further includes (a) a water reducing agent, (b) a set time retarder or (c) a set time retarder and a water reducing agent (Abstract; Col 14, lines 43-67 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additional components comprising retarders).
Regarding Claim 9, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 3, wherein the concrete formulation further includes (a) a water reducing agent, (b) a set time retarder or (c) a set time retarder and a water reducing agent (Abstract; Col 14, lines 43-67 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additional components comprising retarders).
Regarding Claim 11, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 10, wherein the concrete formulation further includes (a) a water reducing agent, (b) a set time retarder or (c) a set time retarder and a water reducing agent (Abstract; Col 14, lines 43-67 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additional components comprising retarders).
Regarding Claim 12, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 11, wherein the aggregate component includes screen fractions of coarse aggregates (Col 1, 60-67; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 21, lines 51-67; Col 22, lines 1-43 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses aggregates comprising a variety of diameter sizes). Although silent to wherein “the aggregate component includes screen fractions of aggregates (i.e. +62.5 microns) consisting of multiple sizes or fractions of limestone (or dolomitic limestone, dolomite, or quartz sand) aggregates ranging up to 1,200 microns in diameter down to 62.5 microns in diameter and fine aggregates, of less than 62.5 microns, that include milled limestone, Class F fly ash, and/or quartz flour,” 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 coarse and fine aggregates diameters 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 14, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 13, wherein the concrete formulation further includes (a) a water reducing agent, (b) a set time retarder or (c) a set time retarder and a water reducing agent (Abstract; Col 14, lines 43-67 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additional components comprising retarders).
Regarding Claim 15, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 14, wherein the aggregate component includes screen fractions of coarse aggregates (Col 1, 60-67; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 21, lines 51-67; Col 22, lines 1-43 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses aggregates comprising a variety of diameter sizes). Although silent to wherein “the aggregate component includes screen fractions of aggregates (i.e. +62.5 microns) consisting of multiple sizes or fractions of limestone (or dolomitic limestone, dolomite, or quartz sand) aggregates ranging up to 1,200 microns in diameter down to 62.5 microns in diameter and fine aggregates, of less than 62.5 microns, that include milled limestone, Class F fly ash, and/or quartz flour,” 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 coarse and fine aggregates diameters 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 17, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 16, wherein the foaming agent is sufficient to create a microcellular foamed concrete (Abstract; Col 2, lines 29-31; Col 50, lines 1-20 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additives and components that can be added to the concrete cement compositions comprising a foaming agent). Although silent to wherein “the foaming agent has densities ranging from 600 kg/m3- 1500 kg/m3,” 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 density of the foaming agents 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 18, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 17, wherein the concrete formulation further includes (a) a water reducing agent, (b) a set time retarder or (c) a set time retarder and a water reducing agent (Abstract; Col 14, lines 43-67 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a variety of additional components comprising retarders).
Regarding Claim 19, Clodic discloses the concrete formulation of claim 18, wherein the aggregate component includes screen fractions of aggregates (Col 1, 60-67; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 21, lines 51-67; Col 22, lines 1-43 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses aggregates comprising a variety of diameter sizes). Although silent to wherein “the aggregate component includes screen fractions of aggregates that are less than 250 microns in diameter consisting of multiple sizes or fractions of limestone (or dolomitic limestone, dolomite, or quartz sand) aggregates ranging up to no more than 200 microns in diameter and fine aggregates that include milled limestone, Class F fly ash, and/or quartz flour wherein a relative proportion of fine aggregate and cement increases proportionately with a targeted decrease in concrete density,” 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 coarse and fine aggregates diameters 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 20, Clodic discloses a concrete formulation (Abstract; Col 2, lines 29-31), consisting of:
a cement component including a calcium sulfoaluminate cement and a Portland cement (Col 1, lines 37-40 and lines 62-67; Col 4, lines 40-67 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses a cement composition comprising calcium aluminates (such as calcium sulfoaluminate cement) and a precipitation material or a composition comprising carbonates, bicarbonates or a combination of both); and
an aggregate component including coarse aggregates (Col 1, 60-67; Col 4, lines 40-67; Col 21, lines 51-67; Col 22, lines 1-43 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Clodic discloses aggregates comprising a variety of diameter sizes). Although silent to wherein “the aggregate component includes coarse aggregates between 62.5 microns and 1,200 microns in diameter and fine aggregates between 62.5 microns to less than 5 microns in diameter,” 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 coarse and fine aggregates diameters 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).
Clodic discloses wherein the concrete composition comprises a combination of carbonate (i.e., metastable component such as vaterite, amorphous calcium carbonate etc) and calcium aluminate cements (CAC) and discloses wherein calcium sulfoaluminate cement is added to the concrete formulation (Col 2, lines 29-36 and Col 3, lines 11-18); however, reference Clodic fails to expressly disclose wherein the calcium sulfoaluminate cement is a primary cement component of the concrete formulation above.
Dubey teaches wherein calcium sulfoaluminate cement is a primary cement component of a concrete formulation (Abstract; Col 2, lines 34-47; Col 4, lines 16-21; Col 22, lines 55-67 [Wingdings font/0xE0] Dubey teaches a concrete geopolymer cementitious product by mixing a blend of two or more types of calcium aluminate cements and calcium sulfoaluminate cements downhole) for the purpose of mixing two blends of specific cements downhole in order to improve the dimensional stability during and after curing and increase the compressive strength of the geopolymer concrete cementitious composition (Col 3, lines 34-47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Clodic to expressly disclose wherein calcium sulfoaluminate cement is a primary cement component of a concrete formulation, as taught by Dubey, because doing so would help to mix two specific blends of cements downhole in order to improve the dimensional stability during and after curing and increase the compressive strength of the geopolymer concrete cementitious composition.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 13 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 02/24/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Dubey (U.S Patent 10,221,096) (“Dubey”).
Upon further search and consideration of the Applicant’s arguments/remarks with respect to dependent claims 10, 13 and 16 which recites “wherein the cement component having a ratio by weight of Portland cement to calcium sulfoaluminate cement ranging from 1/19 to 1/5, an aggregate component having gradation spanning 1,200 microns to less than 5 microns and wherein a concrete formulation forming a fill plug within or above a production zone of a well bore of an oil or gas well below any aquifers,” the examiner finds the Applicant’s arguments/remarks persuasive and therefore has indicated claims 10, 13 and 16 as allowable subject matter (see above).
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