DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of invention of Group II, claims 12-18 in the reply filed on 07/07/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that In the present case, although the claimed subject matter may be classified in different
classes, Applicant respectfully submits that no unreasonable search or examination burden exists because multiple searches would likely yield a limited number of references (if any). Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the Restriction Requirement..
This is not found persuasive because examination is not limited to search. In addition to the search, much of the examination is devoted to determining patentability of claims. Said determination requires the formulation of rejection and responding to applicant’s arguments with regard to the same. The additional search and the determination of patentability for multiple, distinct species would place serious burden on the examiner.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 14-15,22, and 25-27 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims contain the term “about , therefore, an exactitude is not claimed, but rather a contemplated variation. Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The incorporation of essential material in the specification by reference to an unpublished U.S. application, foreign application or patent, or to a publication is improper. Applicant is required to amend the disclosure to include the material incorporated by reference, if the material is relied upon to overcome any objection, rejection, or other requirement imposed by the Office. The amendment must be accompanied by a statement executed by the applicant, or a practitioner representing the applicant, stating that the material being inserted is the material previously incorporated by reference and that the amendment contains no new matter. 37 CFR 1.57(g).
The attempt to incorporate subject matter into this application by reference to US Patent Application No. 18/126,194 is ineffective because it is an unpublished US Patent Application, it should be replaced by US Patent No. 12503637.
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.
(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 12-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a) (1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Tellez et al. (US 2017/0240804 A1) (“Tellez” herein)
Claim 1
Tellez discloses a composition for oil recovery, comprising:
a foam, the foam comprising: [0046, 0098]
a phase comprising a foaming fluid; [0047, 0072-0074] and
an aqueous phase comprising [0047, 0072-0074] a
first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) (i.e. 10 wt. %) [0069] and
a second surfactant represented by formula (FX1): (i.e. 1 wt. %) [0057, 0062]
PNG
media_image1.png
116
318
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein:
X of formula (FX1) is a number selected from 6 to 13;
y of formula (FX1) is a number selected from 0 to 3; each of R¹, R², R³, R⁴, R⁵, and R⁶ of formula (FX1), is, independently, hydrogen, substituted C1-3 hydrocarbyl, or unsubstituted C1-3 hydrocarbyl group;
the first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) and the second surfactant represented by formula (FX1) are different; and
the first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) (i.e. wt. 10%) is the surfactant of highest concentration in the aqueous phase. [0012, 0072-0074]
or a different interpretation of Tellez
Claim 1
Tellez discloses a composition for oil recovery, comprising:
a foam, the foam comprising: [0046-0047, 0098]
a phase comprising a foaming fluid; [0047, 0072-0076] and
an aqueous phase comprising [0047, 0072-0074] a
first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) (i.e. 10 wt. %) [0069] and
a second surfactant represented by formula (FX1): (i.e. 1 wt. %) [0057, 0062]
PNG
media_image1.png
116
318
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein:
X of formula (FX1) is a number selected from 6 to 13;
y of formula (FX1) is a number selected from 0 to 3; each of R¹, R², R³, R⁴, R⁵, and R⁶ of formula (FX1), is, independently, hydrogen, substituted C1-3 hydrocarbyl, or unsubstituted C1-3 hydrocarbyl group;
the first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) and the second surfactant represented by formula (FX1) are different; and
the first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) (i.e. 10 wt. %) is the surfactant of highest concentration in the aqueous phase. [0012,0047, 0072-0074]
Tellez does not explicitly disclose the terminology as recited within the claimed invention: a phase comprising a foaming fluid; and an aqueous phase composition. However, Tellez discloses that the method includes placing in a subterranean formation a form composition. The about 0.01 wt. % to about 10 wt. % of the foam composition is an ..surfactant, ... About 0.1 wt. % to about 20 wt. % of the foam composition is a foam agent... About 1 wt. % to about 30 wt. % of the composition is a ..foam stabilizer. About 50 wt. % to about 90 wt. % of the composition is a carrier fluid. About 10 vol % to about 90 vol % of the composition is a blowing agent. (i.e. foaming fluid))[0047] and the carrier fluid can be at least one… brine, produced water, flowback water, brackish water, and sea water.[0073] Blowing agents can be introduced at any suitable time during the process [0076] which serves as phase comprising a foaming fluid; and an aqueous phase composition. Therefore, the Examiner interprets this disclosure to read on the claimed invention.
Claim 13.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein the aqueous phase further comprises a brine. [0073]
Claim 14.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein the foaming fluid comprises:
about 50 wt.% to about 100 wt.% of a mixture of two or more hydrocarbons;
about 50 wt.% to about 100 wt.% of a pure hydrocarbon;
about 50 wt.% to about 100 wt.% CO₂;
about 50 wt.% to about 100 wt.% N₂;
or combinations thereof. [0047, 0072-0076]
Claim 15.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein the foaming fluid comprises about 50 wt.% to about 100 wt.% CO2 . [0075-0076]
Claim 16.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein a volume ratio of the aqueous phase to the phase comprising the foaming fluid of the foam is from about 80:20 to about 2:98. [0047, 0072-0076]
Claim 17.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein: R¹ of formula (FX1) is methyl; each of R⁵ and R⁶ of formula (FX1) is hydrogen; and the following moiety of formula (FX1)
PNG
media_image2.png
86
98
media_image2.png
Greyscale
including the carbonyl carbon to which the moiety is attached, comprises an octyl, nonyl, decyl, undecyl, lauryl, tridecyl, myristyl, cetyl, stearyl, isostearyl, or oleyl alkyl group. [0069]
Claim 18.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein the first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) comprises: [0069]
PNG
media_image3.png
194
614
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 21.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein at least one of the first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) and the second surfactant represented by formula (FX1) independently comprises lauramidopropylamine oxide or myristamidopropylamine oxide. [0069]
Claim 22.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein a ratio of the first surfactant represented by formula (FX1) to the second surfactant represented by formula (FX1) is from about 6:1 to about 3:1. [0057, 0062, 0069]
Claim 23.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein: X of formula (FX1) is a number selected from 9 to 11; y of formula (FX1) is 1; and each of R⁵ and R⁶ of formula (FX1) is hydrogen. [0057, 0062, 0069]
Claim 24.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12, wherein the aqueous phase surfactant solution further comprises one or more additional surfactants selected from the group consisting of cocamidopropyl hydroxysultaine, cocamidopropyl betaine, and combinations thereof. [0057, 0062]
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 25 – 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tellez, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of AL Yousif et al. (US 2020/0399528 A1) (“Al’Yousif” herein).
Claim 25.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12. Tellez however does not explicitly disclose, wherein: the aqueous phase further comprises a brine; and a total dissolved salts content of the brine, excluding surfactant, is from about 5,000 mg/L to about 250,000 mg/L.
Al Yousif teaches the above limitation (See paragraph 0012→ AL Yousif teaches this limitation in that The method may further include combining a tailored water with the surfactants, thereby producing the aqueous liquid, in which the tailored water includes inorganic ions at a concentration of at least 1 g/L.) for the purpose of tailoring water chemistry (formulated low-salinity water) allowing the generation of a stable solution displaying improved foam stability. [0006]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Tellez with the above limitation, as taught by AL Yousif, in order to tailor the water chemistry (formulated low-salinity water) to allow the generation of a stable solution displaying improved foam stability.
Claim 26.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12. Tellez however does not explicitly disclose, wherein: the aqueous phase further comprises a brine; and a total dissolved salts content of the brine, excluding surfactant, is from about 100 ppm to 10,000 ppm. (Same as claim 25)
Claim 27.
Tellez discloses the composition according to claim 12. Tellez however does not explicitly disclose wherein: the aqueous phase further comprises a brine; and a total dissolved salts content of the brine, excluding surfactant, is from about 100,000 ppm to about 400,000 ppm. (Same as claim 25)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lawshe et al. (US 2019/0166829 A1) MOISTURIZING LIQUID COMPOSITION WITH CATIONIC BIOCIDE teaches A liquid cleaning composition including: at least 80 wt. % liquid solvent; a cationic quaternary amine biocide; and a non-cationic moisturizing agent, wherein the composition reduces bacteria by at least 2.0 log 10 when assessed using ASTM E1174 and reduces drying of the stratum corneum compared with a water control between 30 and 180 minutes after application, Dusterhoft et al. (US 2022/0162930 A1) ENHANCED OIL RECOVERY HARVESTING FOR FRACTURED RESERVOIRS teaches A method of producing natural resources from a wellbore penetrating a subterranean formation with a Huff and Puff process comprising: (a) placing a recovery enhancing fluid system into the wellbore during an injection (Huff) period of time wherein placing the recovery enhancing fluid system comprises injecting under pressure; (b) ceasing injection of the recovery enhancing fluid system and allowing the composition to soak in the subterranean formation for a soak period of time; (c) producing fluids from the subterranean formation during a production (Puff) period of time; and (d) optionally repeating steps (a) to (c) for a plurality of Huff, soak, and Puff periods of time, respectively, and Kramov (US 2019/0322920 A1) Effective Pour Point Depressants For Amidoamine Emulsifiers teaches A composition comprising an oleaginous base fluid, an emulsifier and a liquid tertiary amide is disclosed. A wellbore fluid may include an oleaginous continuous phase, a non-oleaginous discontinuous phase and the composition to stabilize the non-oleaginous discontinuous phase within the oleaginous continuous phase. A method comprising adding the composition to a wellbore fluid and emplacing the wellbore fluid mixed with the composition into a wellbore is also provided.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SILVANA C RUNYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5415. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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.
/SILVANA C RUNYAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1616 09/02/2026
Prosecution Insights