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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 2/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4, 14 and 29-33 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive since Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), alone, does not adequately disclose the amended (added) features of:
(1) “wherein the modifying is based on a state of completion of the one or more instructions.”, that now appear in independent claims 1, 29 and 30;
(2) “and re-allocating, by the managing application, pumping tasks among the one or more frac units.”, that now appear in dependent claim 14; and
(3) the features that now appear in newly added dependent claims 31-33.
Therefore, the rejection formed under 35 U.S.C. 102 using Oehring et al. has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new ground(s) of rejection are made in view of Oehring et al. (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995) for at least amended claims 1-2, 4 and 29-30, as well as for newly added dependent claims 31 and 32; and new ground(s) of rejection are made in view of Oehring et al. (‘910), in view of Pettus (‘995), in further view of MU et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0040830 A1 (‘830) for at least amended dependent claim 14; and new ground(s) of rejection are made in view of Oehring et al. (‘910), in view of Pettus (‘995), in further view of Moore et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0125906 A1 (‘906) for at least newly added dependent claim 33.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 (NEW)
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 1-2, 4, 6, 9, 11, 22-23 and 26-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995).
As per claim 1, ‘910 discloses a method of fracturing (e.g., See ‘910; [0007], which discloses an automated hydraulic fracturing method), comprising:
using a managing application executing on a computer to control the method of fracturing, wherein the managing application directs a pumping stage of a pumping sequence based on sensor data from one or more frac units or a wellbore (e.g., See ‘910; [0005], which discloses a computer controller frac system using sensors on pumps, blenders, and wellhead to run the job; also see [0007], which discloses a controller using sensor data and automated instructions to operate pumps and other frac equipment); and
modifying one or more instructions of the managing application in response to the sensor data indicating a current state of the pumping stage (e.g., See ‘910; [0007], which discloses a controller using sensor data and automated instructions to operate pumps and other frac equipment; also see [0036], which discloses automated instructions adjusting flow, pressure, power and speed of frac components while pumping).
However, ‘910 does not specifically disclose the modifying is based on a state of completion of the one or more instructions.
‘995 discloses this feature by disclosing, in [0069] and [0074], that the system changes recipe instructions when execution reaches a current step or transition point.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to incorporate the teachings of ‘995 into ‘910 for the purpose of allowing the controller to update instructions when execution reaches a completion point, thereby improving stage progression and avoiding changes at the wrong time for smoother automated control.
As per claim 29, ‘910 discloses a method of fracturing (e.g., See ‘910; [0007]), comprising:
using a managing application executing on a computer to control the method of fracturing, wherein the managing application has instructions to direct a pumping stage of a pumping sequence based on sensor data from one or more frac units or a wellbore (e.g., See ‘910; [0006], which discloses an automated control system using sensors and control devices on frac components; also see [0007], which discloses a controller using sensor data and automated instructions to operate pumps and other frac equipment);
receiving, by the managing application, sensor data from the one or more frac units and the wellbore, wherein the sensor data is indicative of a current state of the pumping stage of the pumping sequence (e.g., See ‘910; [0037], which discloses that many frac components, including a wellhead, have sensors and controllers; also see [0039], which discloses receiving data from system components before evaluating conditions and determining control operations);
determining, by the managing application, the current state of the pumping stage of the pumping sequence (e.g., See ‘910; [0039], which discloses system conditions determined based on received operational data);
comparing, by the managing application, the current state of the pumping stage to a pumping sequence target (e.g., See ‘910; [0038], which discloses detecting when parameters are outside acceptable thresholds and stopping or adjusting equipment when they are); and
modifying one or more instructions of the managing application in response to the current state of the pumping stage failing to satisfy pumping sequence target (e.g., See ‘910; [0007], which discloses automatically generating control instructions based on current sensor readings during the fracturing; also see [0038], which discloses automatically adjusting the system functions when measurements are outside a desired range).
However, ‘910 does not specifically disclose the modifying is based on a state of completion of the one or more instructions.
‘995 discloses this feature by disclosing, in [0069] and [0074], that the system changes recipe instructions when execution reaches a current step or transition point.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to incorporate the teachings of ‘995 into ‘910 for the purpose of allowing the controller to update instructions when execution reaches a completion point, thereby improving stage progression and avoiding changes at the wrong time for smoother automated control.
As per claim 30, ‘910 discloses a method of fracturing (e.g., See ‘910; [0007]), comprising:
using a managing application executing on a computer to control the method of fracturing, wherein the managing application directs a pumping stage of a pumping sequence based on sensor data from one or more frac units or a wellbore (e.g., See ‘910; [0006], which discloses an automated control system using sensors and control devices to run frac equipment; also see [0007], which discloses a controller using sensor data and automated instructions to operate pumps and other frac equipment);
modifying one or more instructions of the managing application in response to the sensor data indicating current state of the pumping stage (e.g., See ‘910; [0007], which discloses a controller using sensor data and automated instructions to operate pumps and other frac equipment; also see [0039], which discloses system conditions determined based on received operational data);
modifying the one or more instructions of the managing application to interrupt pumping stage in real time (e.g., See ‘910; [0028], which discloses real-time monitoring of equipment to adjust and stop operation based on live, continuous sensor data); and
modifying the one or more instructions of the managing application to re-allocate the one or more frac units in real time (e.g., See ‘910; [0028], which discloses that the real-time system can direct and manage all components for efficient operation; also see [0037], which discloses multiple pumps having their pump rates automatically adjusted).
However, ‘910 does not specifically disclose the modifying is based on a state of completion of the one or more instructions.
‘995 discloses this feature by disclosing, in [0069] and [0074], that the system changes recipe instructions when execution reaches a current step or transition point.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to incorporate the teachings of ‘995 into ‘910 for the purpose of allowing the controller to update instructions when execution reaches a completion point, thereby improving stage progression and avoiding changes at the wrong time for smoother automated control.
As per claim 2, ‘910’s combined system (‘910 in view of ‘995) further discloses that the fracturing comprises an algorithm to calculate pumping equipment settings, and wherein the pumping equipment settings comprise flow rate and pressure (e.g., See ‘910; [0005], [0007] and [0036], which disclose using sensor based automated instructions to calculate and adjust flow rate and pressure settings).
As per claim 4, ‘910’s combined system further discloses that the managing application automatically directs the pumping stage, and wherein the modifying is performed automatically (e.g., See ‘910; [0007] and [0038], which disclose automatically controlling pumping operations and automatically changing operations based on sensor data).
As per claim 6, ‘910’s combined system further discloses that the managing application executes multiple closed loop sequences that control operation of the one or more frac units (e.g., See ‘910; [0039], which discloses receiving data, determining a system condition, and controlling the system based on that determined condition).
As per claim 9, ‘910’s combined system further discloses that the one or more frac units comprises a frac pump, a manifold, a mixing blender, a proppant storage unit, a hydration blender, a water supply unit, a chemical unit, or a combination thereof (e.g., See ‘910; [0018], [0020], [0022] and [0026], which disclose frac equipment including pumps, manifold, blender, fluid source and additive source).
As per claim 11, ‘910’s combined system further discloses that the one or more frac units comprise electrically powered frac pumps (e.g., See ‘910; [0018] and [0025], which disclose a frac pump being driven by an electric motor powered through electrical equipment).
As per claim 22, ‘910’s combined system further discloses controlling, by the managing application, a fracturing fleet in accordance with the pumping sequence to place a fracturing fluid in a treatment well (e.g., See ‘910; [0007] and [0018], which disclose controlling a frac fleet to pump fracturing fluid into the well during the treatment).
As per claim 23, ‘910’s combined system further discloses controlling, by the managing application, a frac unit in accordance with the pumping sequence to place a fracturing fluid in a treatment well (e.g., See ‘910; [0007] and [0021], which disclose controlling a pump unit to deliver fracturing fluid into the well during the frac operations).
As per claim 26, ‘910’s combined system further discloses executing automatically, by the managing application, to slow a pump rate of a frac fluid and to power down a frac pump (e.g., See ‘910; [0036] and [0038], which disclose automatically slowing pumping functions and stopping equipment operation when conditions require it).
As per claim 27, ‘910’s combined system further discloses placing automatically, by the managing application, the one or more frac units in a standby or off condition (e.g. See ‘910; [0038], which discloses the system automatically shutting down frac unit functions when detected conditions show a problem).
As per claim 28, ‘910’s combined system further discloses comparing, by the managing application, the current state of the pumping stage to a pumping sequence target (e.g., See ‘910; [0038] and [0039], which disclose the system determining the current condition from sensor data and controlling the system based on that determined condition).
As per claim 31, ‘910s combined system further discloses that the one or more instructions are part of a sub-stage script associated with the pumping stage, and wherein the modifying of the one or more instructions results in modifying execution of the sub-stage script during the pumping stage (e.g., See ‘995; [0055] and [0074], which is interpreted to correspond to the system updating a running recipe or unit procedure at a transition and resuming execution from the same state).
As per claim 32, ‘910s combined system further discloses that the modifying of the one or more instructions comprises transitioning from executing a first set of instructions associated with a first sub-stage script to executing a second set of instructions associated with a second sub-stage script, in response to the sensor data indicating a transition from a first sub-stage of the pumping stage to a second sub-stage of the pumping stage (e.g., See ‘995; [0055] and [0069], which is interpreted to correspond to the system switching from one recipe step or unit procedure version to another when the current execution state reaches a transition point).
Claims 8, 21 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995), as applied to claim 1, from above, in further view of Tang et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0273346 A1 (‘346).
As per claim 8, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose that the pumping sequence comprises pump rates, fluid volume, and slurry density.
‘346 discloses these missing features by disclosing, in [0028] and [0032], the planning and measuring of flow rates and fluid properties for the slurry during the treatment.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘346 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application account for flow rate, fluid volume, and slurry properties during pumping, thereby improving overall treatment control so that the stage can more closely follow the planned design.
As per claim 21, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose determining, by the managing application, if a target volume of a frac fluid has been pumped and/or if a target amount of a proppant has been placed into a perforation and associated fracture being propped.
‘346 discloses these missing features by disclosing, in [0021], [0028] and [0032], using planned slurry targets and measured flow data to track the pumped fluid and sand.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘346 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application compare planned fluid and sand amounts to actual pumped amounts, thereby improving stage tracking so that the system can confirm whether target placement has been achieved.
As per claim 24, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose generating, by the managing application, a report comprising a comparison between a model target and actual target for the pumping stage.
‘346 discloses these missing features by disclosing, in [0002], comparing measured stage data to a reference pattern to evaluate actual performance versus expected performance.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘346 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application to compare expected stage behavior to measured stage behavior data, thereby improving performance evaluation so that problems can be identified and later stages can be adjusted more efficiently and effectively.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995), as applied to claim 1, from above, in further view of Zhang et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0090478 A1 (‘478).
As per claim 10, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose that the one or more frac units comprise dual fuel powered frac pumps.
‘478 discloses the missing features by disclosing, in [0014], that a frac pump is driven by an engine that runs on natural gas or diesel fuel.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘478 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application to control dual fuel frac pumps, thereby improving fuel flexibility since that the job can operate with plural fuel sources.
Claims 12-13 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995), as applied to claim 1, from above, in further view of Pitcher et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0352968 A1 (‘968).
As per claim 12, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose that the managing application further directs the pumping stage for two or more wellbores simultaneously.
‘968 discloses these missing features by disclosing, in [0027], pumping fac fluid into two or more wells at the same time.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘968 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application to run a pumping stage for multiple wells at once, thereby improving overall efficiency so that more wells can be treated in less time.
As per claim 13, ‘910’s combined system, in view of ‘968 further discloses that the one or more instructions of the managing application further comprise instructions for directing the pumping stage for each of the two or more wellbores based on sensor data received from the two or more wellbores (e.g., See ‘968; [0005], which discloses using a controller and measured parameters to control the flow of multiple wells).
As per claim 19, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose that the managing application, a sequence of pump stages with stage targets from an automated pumping sequence for a simultaneous treatment.
‘968 discloses these missing features by disclosing, in [0019], that wells are divided into fracturing stages and that the zones are fractured in sequence.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘968 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application to use staged treatment sequences across multiple wells, thereby improving coordination so that each zone can be treated in an orderly progression.
As per claim 20, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose modifying, by the managing application, the pumping sequence for a first well, a second well, or both based on the sensor data received from one or more wells.
‘968 discloses these missing features by disclosing, in [0037], using measured flow data to adjust how much fluid goes into each zone.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘968 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application to change pumping for different wells based on real time measurements, thereby improving control so that fluids can be directed where the fluids are most needed during the frac operations.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995), as applied to claim 1, from above, in further view of Thomeer et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0203507 A1 (‘507).
As per claim 7, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose that the managing application identifies the one or more frac units using RFID tags, GPS trackers, IOT devices, EDGE devices, scanning bar codes, or manual entry of equipment.
‘507 discloses the missing features by disclosing, in [0037] and [0047], that the system identifies wellsite equipment using RFID tags, GPS, and barcoded equipment identifications.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘507 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application to identify individual frac units using equipment identifiers, thereby improving equipment tracking so that the correct units can be monitored and controlling during the frac operation.
Claims 14, 16, 18 and 25 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995), as applied to claim 1, from above, in further view of MU et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0040830 A1 (‘830).
As per claim 14, ‘910’s combined system (‘910 in view of ‘995) does not specifically disclose utilizing an exception to interrupt or modify the pumping stage in real time, and re-allocating, by the managing application, pumping tasks among the one or more frac units.
That is, although ‘910 discloses, in [0038], the triggering of real time changes for exceptions, ‘910 does not disclose the re-allocation features as claimed.
‘830 discloses these features by disclosing, in [0067] and [0072], automatically adding pumps and redistributing pumping rates among the active pumps.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘830 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application to re-allocate pumping tasks among available frac units so the pumping stage can maintain the intended pump rate with less interruptions and less need for manual adjustments.
As per claim 16, ‘910’s combined system further discloses re-distributing, by the managing application, an amount of frac fluid pumped by the one or more frac units (e.g., See ‘830; [0072], which discloses redistributing the remaining pumping rate among active pumps, thereby changing how much fluid each pump handles).
As per claim 18, ‘910’s combined system further discloses alerting, by the managing application, an operator when an exception occurs (e.g., See ‘910; [0038], which discloses automatically generating alerts when a performance problem or exception is detected).
As per claim 25, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose executing automatically, by the managing application, a frac job from start to finish with substantially no manual intervention.
‘910 discloses, in [0007], the automation of the frac process, and ‘830 discloses, in [0062] and [0064], automatically running pump startup, scheduling, rate control and shutdown.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘830 et al. into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of allowing the managing application to run the pump fleet from startup through shutdown with less hands-on operator control, thereby improving overall job consistency and reducing the need for manual intervention.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995), in view of MU et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0040830 A1 (‘830), as applied to claim 14, from above, in further view of Tang et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0273346 A1 (‘346).
As per claim 17, ‘910’s combined system, in view of ‘830 does not specifically disclose changing, by the managing application, a target set-point due to the sensor data indicating that a screen-out is likely to occur.
‘346 discloses the missing features (e.g., See ‘346; [0046], which discloses predicting a screen-out from pressure data and automatically changing a pump rate or sand concentration).
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘346 into ‘910’s combined system, in view of ‘830, for the purpose of allowing the managing application to predict a likely screen-out and change a target setpoint before it occurs, thereby improving overall stage control and reducing pumping problems.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oehring et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0112910 A1 (‘910), in view of Pettus, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0150995 (‘995), as applied to claim 1, from above, in further view of Moore et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0125906 A1 (‘906).
As per claim 33, ‘910’s combined system does not specifically disclose that the one or more instructions comprise a sequence of instructions, and wherein the modifying of the one or more instructions comprises stopping automatic execution of the sequence of instructions and executing an exception script in response to an exception being produced, and continuing automatic execution of the sequence of instructions in response to the exception being cleared.
‘906 discloses the missing features by disclosing, in [0066] and [0067], that the system pauses the running batch recipe, executes an auxiliary recipe, and restarts the batch recipe after the auxiliary recipe has finished.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to incorporate the teachings of ‘906 into ‘910’s combined system for the purpose of letting the controller pause the main script, handle exceptions separately, and safely resume normal operation, thereby reducing downtime and keeping the operations on track.
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 RONALD D HARTMAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3684. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 4:30 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, Mohammad Ali can be reached at (571) 272-4105. 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.
/RONALD D HARTMAN JR/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119 April 2, 2026
/RDH/