DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 without traverse of group I (i.e., claims 1-9) in the reply filed on 09/14/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“Roll stabilizing control unit” in claim 9, paragraph [0038], and figure 5.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Turner et al. (US Publication Number 2012/0228028 A1; hereinafter “Turner”).
In regard to claim 1, Turner discloses: A wellbore operation (abstract, paragraphs [0001, 0007-0009, 0018-0042], and figures 1-2) comprises:
rotating a drill string (12/14) in a wellbore (17), the drill string including a rotary steerable system (i.e., comprising system as shown in figure 2) having at least three pads (44 | “[...] although only two friction pad assemblies are shown in FIG. 2, more than two friction assemblies could be incorporated into each damping module” — paragraph [0028]) configured to contact the wellbore wall to steer a direction of drilling (paragraphs [0018-0042]);
measuring a high frequency torsional oscillation (HFTO) amplitude while rotating (at least paragraphs [0032-0035]);
comparing the measured HFTO amplitude with an HFTO threshold (at least paragraphs [0032-0035]); and
simultaneously actuating the at least three pads to mitigate HFTO oscillations when the measured HFTO amplitude exceeds the HFTO threshold (at least paragraphs [0032-0035]).
In regard to claim 2, Turner further discloses: wherein the measuring, the comparing, and the simultaneously actuating is automatically implemented using a processor (33) deployed in the rotary steerable system (at least paragraphs [0032-0035]).
In regard to claim 3, Turner further discloses: wherein the measuring further comprises measuring at least one of a collar rotation speed, a collar tangential acceleration, a bit tangential acceleration, and a bit torque (at least paragraph [0023]).
In regard to claim 4, Turner further discloses: the measuring further comprises measuring an HFTO frequency; and the simultaneously actuating comprises simultaneously actuating the at least three pads to mitigate HFTO oscillations when the measured HFTO amplitude exceeds the HFTO threshold and the measured HFTO frequency is within a predetermined HFTO frequency band (paragraphs [0018-0042]).
In regard to claim 5, Turner further discloses: wherein the simultaneously actuating comprises simultaneously actuating the at least three pads for a period of time that is at least 1.5 times a fundamental stick slip period (Examiner notes that this is intrinsically true due to the fact that the actuation is done simultaneous to the detection of the stick slip period being recognized which corresponds to surpassing the HFTO threshold — paragraphs [0032-0035]).
In regard to claim 6, Turner discloses: wherein the simultaneously actuating reduces a rotation rate of the drill string while said rotating by less than 10 percent (Examiner notes that this is intrinsically true in light of the frictional drag produced — paragraphs [0032-0035]).
In regard to claim 7, Turner further discloses: wherein the simultaneously actuating comprises simultaneously actuating the at least three pads using independently controlled electronic valves (56) in the rotary steerable system (at least paragraphs [0032-0035]).
In regard to claim 8, Turner further discloses: wherein the simultaneously actuating comprises sequentially actuating the at least three pads at a time interval of less than about 0.1 seconds (at least paragraphs [0032-0035, 0035]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner et al. (US Publication Number 2012/0228028 A1; hereinafter “Turner”) in view of Sugiura (US Publication Number 2015/0107903 A1; hereinafter “Sugiura”).
In regard to claim 9, Turner discloses claim 1, as introduced herein.
However, Turner is silent in regard to: the rotary steerable system comprises a roll stabilized control unit; and the simultaneously actuating comprises rotating the roll stabilized control unit in a direction opposite of a direction of the drill string rotation to achieve a differential rotation rate between a rotation rate of the drill string and a rotation rate of the roll stabilized control unit that exceeds 400 rpm. Examiner notes that the claim is presented as a contingent limitation in the parent claim and is not required by under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, see MPEP 2111.04, section “II”, i.e. the step of "simultaneous actuating” is only required "when the measured HFTO amplitude exceeds the HFTO threshold”, as disclosed in the parent claim.
Nonetheless, Sugiura teaches a downhole drilling assembly comprising steering pad(s) (paragraph [0035]), similar to that of Turner. Sugiura teaches that the combination of a “roll stabilizing control unit” and steering pad(s) may be used in drilling assemblies (paragraphs [0028-0035]).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modifying the steering assembly comprising steering pad(s), as taught by Turner, to include for a “roll stabilizing control unit”, as taught by Sugiura, to allow for combining prior art elements according to known methods to “[...] control the steering direction of the directional drilling tool” (paragraph [0019] — Sugiura). See MPEP 2143, section I, subsection A.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references in the PTO-892 relate to dampening drilling assemblies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEEL PATEL whose telephone number is (469)295-9168. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00AM-5:00PM CST.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/NEEL GIRISH PATEL/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights