Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 23, 2026
Application No. 19/290,024

METHODOLOGY AND SYSTEM FOR UTILIZING RIG POWER AND MUD PUMP ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Aug 04, 2025
Priority
Mar 17, 2023 — provisional 63/490,956 +1 more
Examiner
LOIKITH, CATHERINE A
Art Unit
3674
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Schlumberger Technology Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 3m
Est. Remaining
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
842 granted / 990 resolved
+33.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
1011
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
45.5%
+5.5% vs TC avg
§102
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§112
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 990 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference characters not mentioned in the description: 1-17. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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, 11, 12, 15 and 16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 12, 13 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,326,061 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of pending claims 1-3, 11, 12, 15 and 16 are already required by patented claims 1, 12, 13 and 16. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 20 is allowed. Claims 4-10, 13, 14, and 17-19 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Aguirre et al. (US 11,174,689 B2) teaches a method comprising mixing and pumping mud and cement fluids into a wellbore by way of a single pump (column 2, lines 10-17; column 3, lines 57-67) and a cleaning system (column 3, lines 50-56). Chong et al. (US 2019/0264517 A1) teaches a pumping system capable of being fed cement or mud from a mixing system and delivering the cement or mud to a wellbore [0045], and further including cleanout features [0067]. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE A LOIKITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7822. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5:30pm. 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. /Catherine Loikith/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 14 October 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 04, 2025
Application Filed
Oct 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12760599
APPARATUS AND A METHOD FOR MONITORING A ROCK DRILLING RIG
1y 6m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12680427
PRODUCTION METHOD WITH A PLUNGER LIFT SYSTEM
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680401
APPROXIMATING SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL SATURATION AND PRESSURE OF A CARBON DIOXIDE INJECTION INTO AN AQUIFER
2y 0m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680417
DOWNHOLE APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR OPERATIONS INVOLVING DELIVERY AND HARDENING OF SETTABLE MATERIALS
1y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12655722
WHIPSTOCK WITH ONE OR MORE HIGH-EXPANSION MEMBERS FOR PASSING THROUGH SMALL RESTRICTIONS
4y 0m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+7.7%)
2y 6m (~1y 3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 990 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month