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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the Species of “bisphenol F resins” required resin and “aromatic amines” required hardener, drawn to claims 1-8 and 10-20 in the reply filed on 18 May 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 9 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Note to Applicant
Applicant may see the note in the Conclusion below at [0037] to overcome all rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 6 and 18 each recite “wherein the resin is present in the resin modified cement slurry in an amount from about 1% to about 20% by weight of the resin modified cement slurry and wherein the hardener is present in the resin modified cement slurry in an amount from about 0.05% to about 5% by weight of the resin modified cement slurry” and depend from claims 1 and 13, which recite “wherein the resin is present in an amount of about 1 wt.% to about 20 wt.%” and “wherein the hardener is present in an amount of about 1 wt.% to about 20 wt.%.”
Notably, claims 6 and 18 merely repeat the 1-20 wt% resin range and change the 1-20 wt% hardener range to 0.05-5 wt%. This thus fails to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends (specifically, the range of 0.05-1 wt% hardener).
Additionally, the 0.5-5 wt% in claims 6 and 18 render the claim scopes Indefinite. For example, it is unclear if this actually only refers to 1-5 wt% or if this substitutes the 1-20 wt% in claims 1 and 13 with 0.05-5 wt% as in claims 6 and 18.
For examination purposes, claims 6 and 18 will be read as though reciting “ wherein the hardener is present in the resin modified cement slurry in an amount from about 1% to about 5% by weight of the resin modified cement slurry” (aligning with claims 1 and 13; also removing the resin range because this merely repeats the same limitation from claims 1 and 13).
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 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.
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 8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Roddy (2011/0187556) in view of Chatterji ‘917 (6,330,917) (both cited by Applicant and in parent).
Regarding independent claim 8, Roddy discloses A method (abstract “placing the wellbore composition in the wellbore”) comprising:
providing a carbon capture underground storage system ([0086] “the compositions and methodologies of this disclosure are employed in an operating environment that generally comprises a wellbore that penetrates a subterranean formation for the purpose of … injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like”), wherein the carbon capture underground storage system comprises:
a wellbore penetrating a subterranean formation comprising a carbon dioxide injection zone (e.g., [0086] “For example, the MEMS may provide information as to a location, flow path/profile, volume, density, temperature, pressure, or a combination thereof of … carbon dioxide placed in a subterranean formation such that effectiveness of the placement may be monitored and evaluated, for example detecting leaks, determining remaining storage capacity in the formation, etc.”); and
a carbonation-resistant barrier (i.e., by virtue of being part of a wellbore for storage of carbon dioxide), wherein the carbonation-resistant barrier comprises a set cement formed from a resin modified cement slurry ([0050] “additives may be included in the cement composition for improving or changing the properties thereof. Examples of such additives include… resins” and [0080] “cementitious sealants (e.g., hydraulic cement), non-cementitious (e.g., polymer, latex or resin systems), or combinations thereof” = hydraulic cement with a resin system) comprising a liquid curable resin ([0206] “Suitable two-component resin materials may include a hardenable resin and a hardening agent”), a hardener ([0206] “Suitable two-component resin materials may include a hardenable resin and a hardening agent”), a hydraulic cement ([0048] “In embodiments, the sealant is cementitious and comprises a hydraulic cement that sets and hardens by reaction with water”), and water ([0049] “The wellbore composition (e.g., sealant) may include a sufficient amount of water to form a pumpable slurry”),
wherein the liquid curable resin comprising at least one resin selected from the group consisting of phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, urethane resins, furan resins, furan and furfuryl alcohol resins, latex resins, phenol formaldehyde resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol F resins, diglycidyl ether bisphenol F resin, cyclohexane dimethanol diglycidyl ether, glycidyl ether resins, polyester resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, polyurethane resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, acrylate resins, polyepoxide resins, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, polyamine resins, and combinations thereof ([0206] “Suitable two-component resin materials may include a hardenable resin and a hardening agent that, when combined, react to form a cured resin matrix material. Suitable hardenable resins that may be used include, but are not limited to, organic resins such as bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin resins, bisphenol F resins, polyepoxide resins, novolak resins, polyester resins, phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, furan resins, urethane resins, glycidyl ether resins, other epoxide resins, and any combinations thereof”) …;
wherein the hardener comprises at least one hardener selected from the group consisting of aromatic amines, aliphatic tertiary amines, cycloaliphatic amines, heterocyclic amines, amido amines, polyamides, polyethyl amines, polyether amines, polyoxyalkylene amines, carboxylic anhydrides, triethylenetetraamine, ethylene diamine, N-cocoalkyltrimethylene, isophorone diamine, N-amino phenyl piperazine, imidazoline, 1,2-diaminocyclohexane, polyether amine, diethyl toluene diamine, 4,4'-diaminodiphenyl methane, methyltetrahydrophthalic anhydride, hexahydrophthalic anhydride, maleic anhydride, polyazelaic polyanhydride, phthalic anhydride, dialkylated phenylenediamines, 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol and combinations thereof ([0206] “Suitable hardening agents that can be used include, but are not limited to, cyclo-aliphatic amines; aromatic amines; aliphatic amines; imidazole; pyrazole; pyrazine; pyrimidine; pyridazine; 1H-indazole; purine; phthalazine; naphthyridine; quinoxaline; quinazoline; phenazine; imidazolidine; cinnoline; imidazoline; 1,3,5-triazine; thiazole; pteridine; indazole; amines; polyamines; amides; polyamides; 2-ethyl-4-methyl imidazole; and any combinations thereof”) …; and
wherein the carbonation-resistant barrier overlaps with at least a portion of the carbon dioxide injection zone in the subterranean formation (e.g., [0086] “For example, the MEMS may provide information as to a location, flow path/profile, volume, density, temperature, pressure, or a combination thereof of … carbon dioxide placed in a subterranean formation such that effectiveness of the placement may be monitored and evaluated, for example detecting leaks, determining remaining storage capacity in the formation, etc.”; the cement must overlap with the CO-2 injection zone in order for the MEMS to detect these properties);
introducing carbon dioxide into the carbon capture underground storage system (e.g., [0196] “the MEMS sensors may be mixed into a sealant composition (e.g. cement slurry) that is placed into the annulus 26 between a wall of the wellbore 18 and the casing 20 in a wellbore associated with carbon dioxide injection, for example a carbon dioxide injection well used to sequester carbon dioxide”); and
flowing the carbon dioxide into the carbon dioxide injection zone (e.g., [0086] “injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like”).
Although not required to render obvious the claim, regarding the elected bisphenol F resin and aromatic amine hardener, as above, Roddy discloses using “combinations thereof” of “cementitious sealants (e.g., hydraulic cement)” and “non-cementitious (e.g., polymer, latex or resin systems)” ([0080]), which presumably includes the “resin systems” later described by Roddy ([0206] “Suitable two-component resin materials may include a hardenable resin and a hardening agent that, when combined, react to form a cured resin matrix material. Suitable hardenable resins that may be used include, but are not limited to, organic resins such as bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin resins, bisphenol F resins, polyepoxide resins, novolak resins, polyester resins, phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, furan resins, urethane resins, glycidyl ether resins, other epoxide resins, and any combinations thereof. Suitable hardening agents that can be used include, but are not limited to, cyclo-aliphatic amines; aromatic amines; aliphatic amines; imidazole; pyrazole; pyrazine; pyrimidine; pyridazine; 1H-indazole; purine; phthalazine; naphthyridine; quinoxaline; quinazoline; phenazine; imidazolidine; cinnoline; imidazoline; 1,3,5-triazine; thiazole; pteridine; indazole; amines; polyamines; amides; polyamides; 2-ethyl-4-methyl imidazole; and any combinations thereof”).
Regarding the specific concentration ranges of the resin and hardener, Roddy fails to specify the suitable amounts of the resin system for the non-cementitious sealant component of the combination system.
Nevertheless, 1-20 wt% of each is a generally typical amount for each in the art. For example, Chatterji ‘917 teaches “improved compositions and methods for sealing pipe in a well bore” comprising hydraulic cement, epoxy resin, and epoxy resin hardening agent (abstract) using epoxy resin that may be “the condensation products of epichlorohydrin and bisphenol A” (Col. 5, lines 15-16) and hardening agent that may be “aromatic amines” (Col. 5, lines 47-48) wherein “The epoxy resin utilized is preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 5% to about 15% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions” (Col. 5, lines 42-45) and “The hardening agent or agents utilized are preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 10% to about 30% by weight of epoxy resin in the compositions (from about 1% to about 3% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions)” (Col. 5, line 66-Col. 6, line 4).
Although silent to the concentration ranges as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include, e.g., 5-15 wt% resin and 1-3 wt% hardener, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide generally typical amounts of each for a hydraulic cement with epoxy resin and hardening agent (thereby including:
“wherein the liquid curable resin comprising at least one resin selected from the group consisting of phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, urethane resins, furan resins, furan and furfuryl alcohol resins, latex resins, phenol formaldehyde resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol F resins, diglycidyl ether bisphenol F resin, cyclohexane dimethanol diglycidyl ether, glycidyl ether resins, polyester resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, polyurethane resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, acrylate resins, polyepoxide resins, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, polyamine resins, and combinations thereof wherein the resin is present in an amount of about 1 wt.% to about 20 wt.%;
wherein the hardener comprises at least one hardener selected from the group consisting of aromatic amines, aliphatic tertiary amines, cycloaliphatic amines, heterocyclic amines, amido amines, polyamides, polyethyl amines, polyether amines, polyoxyalkylene amines, carboxylic anhydrides, triethylenetetraamine, ethylene diamine, N-cocoalkyltrimethylene, isophorone diamine, N-amino phenyl piperazine, imidazoline, 1,2-diaminocyclohexane, polyether amine, diethyl toluene diamine, 4,4'-diaminodiphenyl methane, methyltetrahydrophthalic anhydride, hexahydrophthalic anhydride, maleic anhydride, polyazelaic polyanhydride, phthalic anhydride, dialkylated phenylenediamines, 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol and combinations thereof wherein the hardener is present in an amount of about 1 wt.% to about 20 wt.%.”
Applicant may note that, after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process. See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding claim 10, as in claim 8, Chatterji ‘917 teaches “improved compositions and methods for sealing pipe in a well bore” comprising hydraulic cement, epoxy resin, and epoxy resin hardening agent (abstract) using epoxy resin that may be “the condensation products of epichlorohydrin and bisphenol A” (Col. 5, lines 15-16) and hardening agent that may be “aromatic amines” (Col. 5, lines 47-48) wherein “The epoxy resin utilized is preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 5% to about 15% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions” (Col. 5, lines 42-45) and “The hardening agent or agents utilized are preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 10% to about 30% by weight of epoxy resin in the compositions (from about 1% to about 3% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions)” (Col. 5, line 66-Col. 6, line 4). Resin added in 5-15 wt% and hardening agent in 1-3 wt% would presumably be ~6-18 vol%, assuming a density of ~1 g/mL.
Although silent to the volume range as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include, e.g., 5-15 wt% resin and 1-3 wt% hardener, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide generally typical amounts of each for a hydraulic cement with epoxy resin and hardening agent (thereby including “wherein the resin and the hardener are present in a combined amount of about 5% to about 50% by volume of the resin modified cement slurry”).
Regarding claim 11, Roddy discloses “the compositions and methodologies of this disclosure are employed in an operating environment that generally comprises a wellbore that penetrates a subterranean formation for the purpose of recovering hydrocarbons, storing hydrocarbons, injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like, and the MEMS located downhole (e.g., within the wellbore and/or surrounding formation) may provide information as to a condition and/or location of the composition and/or the subterranean formation. For example, the MEMS may provide information as to a location, flow path/profile, volume, density, temperature, pressure, or a combination thereof of a hydrocarbon (e.g., natural gas stored in a salt dome) or carbon dioxide placed in a subterranean formation such that effectiveness of the placement may be monitored and evaluated, for example detecting leaks, determining remaining storage capacity in the formation, etc.” ([0086]) and “remedial actions may be taken to work-over pre-existing wells, for example to retrofit older wells that may no longer be economically viable for hydrocarbon production, and thereby render such wells suitable for carbon dioxide injection. Such wells would be useful for sequestering carbon dioxide from large scale commercial sources for green house gas reduction purposes” ([0196]). Accordingly, Roddy discloses “wherein the carbon dioxide injection zone comprises at least one zone selected from the group consisting of a porous or permeable formation, a depleted reservoir, a depleted formation, a salt cavern, and combinations thereof.”
Regarding claim 32, Roddy discloses “injection of gases (e.g., carbon dioxide)” ([0086]). Accordingly, Roddy discloses “wherein the carbon dioxide is introduced into the carbon capture underground storage system as a gas, a liquid, a vapor, a supercritical fluid, or a combination thereof.”
Although not required to render obvious the claim, the Office further observes that, under the typical injection conditions into a subterranean formation, it appears the CO2 -would also be injected as a supercritical fluid for certain depths.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Roddy in view of Zebrowski (2011/0013986) (cited by Applicant and in parent), Chatterji ‘917, and Roddy ‘039 (2010/0025039) (cited by Applicant and in parent).
Regarding independent claim 1, Roddy discloses A method (abstract “placing the wellbore composition in the wellbore”) comprising:
introducing a resin modified cement slurry ([0050] “additives may be included in the cement composition for improving or changing the properties thereof. Examples of such additives include… resins” and [0080] “cementitious sealants (e.g., hydraulic cement), non-cementitious (e.g., polymer, latex or resin systems), or combinations thereof” = hydraulic cement with a resin system) into a wellbore penetrating a subterranean formation (e.g., [0196] “the MEMS sensors may be mixed into a sealant composition (e.g. cement slurry) that is placed into the annulus 26 between a wall of the wellbore 18 and the casing 20 in a wellbore associated with carbon dioxide injection, for example a carbon dioxide injection well used to sequester carbon dioxide”), the subterranean formation comprising … a carbon dioxide injection zone ([0086] “the compositions and methodologies of this disclosure are employed in an operating environment that generally comprises a wellbore that penetrates a subterranean formation for the purpose of … injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like… For example, the MEMS may provide information as to a location, flow path/profile, volume, density, temperature, pressure, or a combination thereof of … carbon dioxide placed in a subterranean formation such that effectiveness of the placement may be monitored and evaluated, for example detecting leaks, determining remaining storage capacity in the formation, etc.”), the resin modified cement slurry comprising:
a resin comprising at least one resin selected from the group consisting of phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, urethane resins, furan resins, furan and furfuryl alcohol resins, latex resins, phenol formaldehyde resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol F resins, diglycidyl ether bisphenol F resin, cyclohexane dimethanol diglycidyl ether, glycidyl ether resins, polyester resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, polyurethane resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, acrylate resins, polyepoxide resins, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, polyamine resins, and combinations thereof ([0206] “Suitable two-component resin materials may include a hardenable resin and a hardening agent that, when combined, react to form a cured resin matrix material. Suitable hardenable resins that may be used include, but are not limited to, organic resins such as bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin resins, bisphenol F resins, polyepoxide resins, novolak resins, polyester resins, phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, furan resins, urethane resins, glycidyl ether resins, other epoxide resins, and any combinations thereof”) …;
a hardener, wherein the hardener comprises at least one hardener selected from the group consisting of aromatic amines, aliphatic tertiary amines, cycloaliphatic amines, heterocyclic amines, amido amines, polyamides, polyethyl amines, polyether amines, polyoxyalkylene amines, carboxylic anhydrides, triethylenetetraamine, ethylene diamine, N-cocoalkyltrimethylene, isophorone diamine, N-amino phenyl piperazine, imidazoline, 1,2-diaminocyclohexane, polyether amine, diethyl toluene diamine, 4,4'-diaminodiphenyl methane, methyltetrahydrophthalic anhydride, hexahydrophthalic anhydride, maleic anhydride, polyazelaic polyanhydride, phthalic anhydride, dialkylated phenylenediamines, 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol and combinations thereof ([0206] “Suitable hardening agents that can be used include, but are not limited to, cyclo-aliphatic amines; aromatic amines; aliphatic amines; imidazole; pyrazole; pyrazine; pyrimidine; pyridazine; 1H-indazole; purine; phthalazine; naphthyridine; quinoxaline; quinazoline; phenazine; imidazolidine; cinnoline; imidazoline; 1,3,5-triazine; thiazole; pteridine; indazole; amines; polyamines; amides; polyamides; 2-ethyl-4-methyl imidazole; and any combinations thereof”) …;
a hydraulic cement ([0048] “In embodiments, the sealant is cementitious and comprises a hydraulic cement that sets and hardens by reaction with water”); and
water ([0049] “The wellbore composition (e.g., sealant) may include a sufficient amount of water to form a pumpable slurry”);
… and
setting the resin modified cement slurry to form a set cement wherein the set cement forms a carbonation-resistant barrier in the carbon dioxide injection zone in the subterranean formation (i.e., by virtue of being part of a wellbore for storage of carbon dioxide).
Regarding the caprock, Roddy as above discloses “injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like” ([0086]).
However, Roddy fails to specify wherein there is a caprock in the carbon dioxide injection formation.
Nevertheless, caprocks are a standard part of formations used for carbon dioxide storage, and indeed for most subterranean reservoirs. For example, Zebrowski teaches “enhancing the storage of carbon dioxide underground” (abstract) wherein “The seal or cap rock will have a certain capacity to hold the CO2 within the storage reservoir without leaking” ([0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include a caprock, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to hold the CO2 within the storage reservoir without leaking (thereby including:
“introducing a resin modified cement slurry into a wellbore penetrating a subterranean formation, the subterranean formation comprising a caprock and a carbon dioxide injection zone”).
Regarding the specific concentration ranges of the resin and hardener, Roddy fails to specify the suitable amounts of the resin system for the non-cementitious sealant component of the combination system.
Nevertheless, 1-20 wt% of each is a generally typical amount for each in the art. For example, Chatterji ‘917 teaches “improved compositions and methods for sealing pipe in a well bore” comprising hydraulic cement, epoxy resin, and epoxy resin hardening agent (abstract) using epoxy resin that may be “the condensation products of epichlorohydrin and bisphenol A” (Col. 5, lines 15-16) and hardening agent that may be “aromatic amines” (Col. 5, lines 47-48) wherein “The epoxy resin utilized is preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 5% to about 15% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions” (Col. 5, lines 42-45) and “The hardening agent or agents utilized are preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 10% to about 30% by weight of epoxy resin in the compositions (from about 1% to about 3% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions)” (Col. 5, line 66-Col. 6, line 4).
Although silent to the concentration ranges as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include, e.g., 5-15 wt% resin and 1-3 wt% hardener, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide generally typical amounts of each for a hydraulic cement with epoxy resin and hardening agent (thereby including:
“a resin comprising at least one resin selected from the group consisting of phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, urethane resins, furan resins, furan and furfuryl alcohol resins, latex resins, phenol formaldehyde resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol F resins, diglycidyl ether bisphenol F resin, cyclohexane dimethanol diglycidyl ether, glycidyl ether resins, polyester resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, polyurethane resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, acrylate resins, polyepoxide resins, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, polyamine resins, and combinations thereof and wherein the resin is present in an amount of about 1 wt.% to about 20 wt.%;
a hardener, wherein the hardener comprises at least one hardener selected from the group consisting of aromatic amines, aliphatic tertiary amines, cycloaliphatic amines, heterocyclic amines, amido amines, polyamides, polyethyl amines, polyether amines, polyoxyalkylene amines, carboxylic anhydrides, triethylenetetraamine, ethylene diamine, N-cocoalkyltrimethylene, isophorone diamine, N-amino phenyl piperazine, imidazoline, 1,2-diaminocyclohexane, polyether amine, diethyl toluene diamine, 4,4'-diaminodiphenyl methane, methyltetrahydrophthalic anhydride, hexahydrophthalic anhydride, maleic anhydride, polyazelaic polyanhydride, phthalic anhydride, dialkylated phenylenediamines, 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol and combinations thereof and wherein the hardener is present in an amount of about 1 wt.% to about 20 wt.%.”
Applicant may note that, after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process. See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding the 8-19 ppg density, Roddy discloses “additives may be included in the cement composition for improving or changing the properties thereof. Examples of such additives include … weighting materials, … density-reducing agents” ([0050]).
However, Roddy fails to specify what the suitable density range would be.
Nevertheless, such densities are rather well-known. For example, Roddy ‘039 teaches “The treatment fluid may be selected from the group consisting of a cement composition, a drilling fluid, a spacer fluid, and a lost circulation control composition” (abstract) such as a treatment wherein “Carbon dioxide sequestration activities involve placing CO2 into a reservoir for permanent storage” ([0007]) using additives such as “resins” ([0022]) wherein “Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that embodiments of the cement compositions generally should have a density suitable for a particular application. By way of example, the cement compositions may have a density in the range of from about 4 pounds per gallon ("ppg") to about 20 ppg. In certain embodiments, the cement compositions may have a density in the range of from about 8 ppg to about 17 ppg” ([0014]).
Although silent to the density range as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include a density of e.g. 8-17 ppg, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a composition having a typical density for a particular downhole application (thereby including:
“wherein the resin modified cement slurry has a density in a range of about 8 lbm/gal (958 kg/m^3) to about 19 lbm/gal (2277 kg/m^3)”). See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding claim 2, Roddy discloses “injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like” ([0086]).
However, Roddy fails to specify wherein there is a caprock.
Nevertheless, caprocks are a standard part of formations used for carbon dioxide storage, and indeed for most subterranean reservoirs. For example, Zebrowski teaches “enhancing the storage of carbon dioxide underground” (abstract) wherein “The seal or cap rock will have a certain capacity to hold the CO2 within the storage reservoir without leaking” ([0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include a caprock, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to hold the CO2 within the storage reservoir without leaking (thereby including “wherein the carbonation-resistant barrier overlaps with the carbon dioxide injection zone and at least one zone selected from the group consisting of a zone comprising the caprock, a zone containing a shoe of a previous casing, a zone containing a liner hanger assembly, and combinations thereof”).
Regarding claim 3, Roddy discloses “injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like” ([0086]).
However, Roddy fails to specify the characteristics of such reservoirs for CO2 storage.
Nevertheless, the optimal characteristics of CO2 storage reservoirs is well-known. For example, Zebrowski teaches “enhancing the storage of carbon dioxide underground” (abstract) wherein “Carbon dioxide can be contained in subsurface geological units (formations) by a process known as CO2 sequestration or enhanced hydrocarbon recovery. The CO2 stored underground may originate from carbon emissions or from other naturally occurring sources of CO2. The CO2 is delivered to the storage site via normal transport from pipelines in a liquefied state or can be liquefied on site and is then pumped underground into a geological layer that has adequate porosity and permeability for storing CO2, referred to as a storage reservoir. The storage reservoir acts as a container for storing the CO2 when geological seal layers, e.g., overlying seal, underlying seal, adjacent seal or fault seal, are positioned above and below and adjacent the storage reservoir. The storage reservoir is typically composed of porous rocks with higher porosity and permeability, for example sandstones, carbonates and chalks. The geological seal layer is typically composed of rocks that are less permeable, for example shales, salts of anhydrites, and low porosity limestones of sandstones” ([0003]).
Although silent to the exact porosity or permeability ranges as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include a using reservoirs with “higher porosity and permeability,” with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide such suitable CO2 storage reservoirs as is well-known in the art (thereby including “wherein the subterranean formation comprises a depleted reservoir having at least one characteristic selected from the group consisting of pore pressure gradient less than 9 kPa/m, porosity of 5% or greater, permeability of 0.1 mD or greater, and combinations thereof”). For example, high porosity and permeabilities would of course be preferably higher, such as 5% or greater porosity and 0.1mD or greater permeability. See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding claim 4, Roddy does not require using bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin or epoxy phenol novolac resins. Accordingly, Roddy provides “wherein the resin modified cement slurry is free of bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin and epoxy phenol novolac resin.”
Regarding claims 5 and 6, as in claim 1, Chatterji ‘917 teaches “improved compositions and methods for sealing pipe in a well bore” comprising hydraulic cement, epoxy resin, and epoxy resin hardening agent (abstract) using epoxy resin that may be “the condensation products of epichlorohydrin and bisphenol A” (Col. 5, lines 15-16) and hardening agent that may be “aromatic amines” (Col. 5, lines 47-48) wherein “The epoxy resin utilized is preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 5% to about 15% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions” (Col. 5, lines 42-45) and “The hardening agent or agents utilized are preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 10% to about 30% by weight of epoxy resin in the compositions (from about 1% to about 3% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions)” (Col. 5, line 66-Col. 6, line 4). Resin added in 5-15 wt% and hardening agent in 1-3 wt% would presumably be ~6-18 vol%, assuming a density of ~1 g/mL.
Although silent to the concentration ranges as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include, e.g., 5-15 wt% resin and 1-3 wt% hardener, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide generally typical amounts of each for a hydraulic cement with epoxy resin and hardening agent (thereby including:
(claim 5) wherein the resin and the hardener are present in a combined amount of about 5% to about 50% by volume of the resin modified cement slurry; and/or
(claim 6) [wherein the resin is present in the resin modified cement slurry in an amount from about 1% to about 20% by weight of the resin modified cement slurry and] wherein the hardener is present in the resin modified cement slurry in an amount from about [0.05%] 1% to about 5% by weight of the resin modified cement slurry).
See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding claim 7, Roddy discloses wherein the resin modified cement slurry further comprises at least one supplementary additive selected from the group consisting of supplementary cementitious components, hydraulic binders, micronized solids, inert solid particulates or microparticles, hollow microspheres, elastic beads, weighting agents, lightweight additives, gas-generating additives, mechanical-property-enhancing additives, lost-circulation materials, filtration-control additives, fluid-loss-control additives, defoaming agents, foaming agents, thixotropic additive, dispersants, retarders, accelerators, and combination thereof ([0050] “Examples of such additives include but are not limited to accelerators, set retarders, defoamers, fluid loss agents, weighting materials, dispersants, density-reducing agents, formation conditioning agents, lost circulation materials, thixotropic agents, suspension aids, or combinations thereof. Other mechanical property modifying additives, for example, fibers, polymers, resins, latexes, and the like can be added to further modify the mechanical properties”).
Claims 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Roddy in view of Zebrowski, Chatterji ‘917, Chatterji ‘344 (6,244,344) (cited by Applicant and in parent), and Roddy ‘039.
Regarding independent claim 13, Roddy discloses A method (abstract “placing the wellbore composition in the wellbore”) comprising:
introducing a resin modified cement slurry ([0050] “additives may be included in the cement composition for improving or changing the properties thereof. Examples of such additives include… resins” and [0080] “cementitious sealants (e.g., hydraulic cement), non-cementitious (e.g., polymer, latex or resin systems), or combinations thereof” = hydraulic cement with a resin system) into a wellbore penetrating a subterranean formation (e.g., [0196] “the MEMS sensors may be mixed into a sealant composition (e.g. cement slurry) that is placed into the annulus 26 between a wall of the wellbore 18 and the casing 20 in a wellbore associated with carbon dioxide injection, for example a carbon dioxide injection well used to sequester carbon dioxide”), the subterranean formation comprising … a carbon dioxide injection zone ([0086] “the compositions and methodologies of this disclosure are employed in an operating environment that generally comprises a wellbore that penetrates a subterranean formation for the purpose of … injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like… For example, the MEMS may provide information as to a location, flow path/profile, volume, density, temperature, pressure, or a combination thereof of … carbon dioxide placed in a subterranean formation such that effectiveness of the placement may be monitored and evaluated, for example detecting leaks, determining remaining storage capacity in the formation, etc.”), the resin modified cement slurry comprising:
a resin comprising at least one resin selected from the group consisting of phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, urethane resins, furan resins, furan and furfuryl alcohol resins, latex resins, phenol formaldehyde resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol F resins, diglycidyl ether bisphenol F resin, cyclohexane dimethanol diglycidyl ether, glycidyl ether resins, polyester resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, polyurethane resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, acrylate resins, polyepoxide resins, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, polyamine resins, and combinations thereof ([0206] “Suitable two-component resin materials may include a hardenable resin and a hardening agent that, when combined, react to form a cured resin matrix material. Suitable hardenable resins that may be used include, but are not limited to, organic resins such as bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin resins, bisphenol F resins, polyepoxide resins, novolak resins, polyester resins, phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, furan resins, urethane resins, glycidyl ether resins, other epoxide resins, and any combinations thereof”) …;
a hardener, wherein the hardener comprises at least one hardener selected from the group consisting of aromatic amines, aliphatic tertiary amines, cycloaliphatic amines, heterocyclic amines, amido amines, polyamides, polyethyl amines, polyether amines, polyoxyalkylene amines, carboxylic anhydrides, triethylenetetraamine, ethylene diamine, N-cocoalkyltrimethylene, isophorone diamine, N-amino phenyl piperazine, imidazoline, 1,2-diaminocyclohexane, polyether amine, diethyl toluene diamine, 4,4'-diaminodiphenyl methane, methyltetrahydrophthalic anhydride, hexahydrophthalic anhydride, maleic anhydride, polyazelaic polyanhydride, phthalic anhydride, dialkylated phenylenediamines, 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol and combinations thereof ([0206] “Suitable hardening agents that can be used include, but are not limited to, cyclo-aliphatic amines; aromatic amines; aliphatic amines; imidazole; pyrazole; pyrazine; pyrimidine; pyridazine; 1H-indazole; purine; phthalazine; naphthyridine; quinoxaline; quinazoline; phenazine; imidazolidine; cinnoline; imidazoline; 1,3,5-triazine; thiazole; pteridine; indazole; amines; polyamines; amides; polyamides; 2-ethyl-4-methyl imidazole; and any combinations thereof”) …;
a hydraulic cement ([0048] “In embodiments, the sealant is cementitious and comprises a hydraulic cement that sets and hardens by reaction with water”); and
water ([0049] “The wellbore composition (e.g., sealant) may include a sufficient amount of water to form a pumpable slurry”) …,
…
setting the resin modified cement slurry to form a set cement wherein the set cement forms a carbonation-resistant barrier in the carbon dioxide injection zone in the subterranean formation to form a carbon capture underground storage system (i.e., by virtue of being part of a wellbore for storage of carbon dioxide);
introducing carbon dioxide into the carbon capture underground storage system (e.g., [0196] “the MEMS sensors may be mixed into a sealant composition (e.g. cement slurry) that is placed into the annulus 26 between a wall of the wellbore 18 and the casing 20 in a wellbore associated with carbon dioxide injection, for example a carbon dioxide injection well used to sequester carbon dioxide”); and
flowing the carbon dioxide into the carbon dioxide injection zone (e.g., [0086] “injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like”).
Regarding the caprock, Roddy as above discloses “injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like” ([0086]).
However, Roddy fails to specify wherein there is a caprock in the carbon dioxide injection formation.
Nevertheless, caprocks are a standard part of formations used for carbon dioxide storage, and indeed for most subterranean reservoirs. For example, Zebrowski teaches “enhancing the storage of carbon dioxide underground” (abstract) wherein “The seal or cap rock will have a certain capacity to hold the CO2 within the storage reservoir without leaking” ([0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include a caprock, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to hold the CO2 within the storage reservoir without leaking (thereby including:
“introducing a resin modified cement slurry into a wellbore penetrating a subterranean formation, the subterranean formation comprising a caprock and a carbon dioxide injection zone”).
Regarding the specific concentration ranges of the resin and hardener, Roddy fails to specify the suitable amounts of the resin system for the non-cementitious sealant component of the combination system.
Nevertheless, 1-20 wt% of each is a generally typical amount for each in the art. For example, Chatterji ‘917 teaches “improved compositions and methods for sealing pipe in a well bore” comprising hydraulic cement, epoxy resin, and epoxy resin hardening agent (abstract) using epoxy resin that may be “the condensation products of epichlorohydrin and bisphenol A” (Col. 5, lines 15-16) and hardening agent that may be “aromatic amines” (Col. 5, lines 47-48) wherein “The epoxy resin utilized is preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 5% to about 15% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions” (Col. 5, lines 42-45) and “The hardening agent or agents utilized are preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 10% to about 30% by weight of epoxy resin in the compositions (from about 1% to about 3% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions)” (Col. 5, line 66-Col. 6, line 4).
Although silent to the concentration ranges as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include, e.g., 5-15 wt% resin and 1-3 wt% hardener, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide generally typical amounts of each for a hydraulic cement with epoxy resin and hardening agent (thereby including:
“a resin comprising at least one resin selected from the group consisting of phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, urethane resins, furan resins, furan and furfuryl alcohol resins, latex resins, phenol formaldehyde resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol F resins, diglycidyl ether bisphenol F resin, cyclohexane dimethanol diglycidyl ether, glycidyl ether resins, polyester resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, polyurethane resins and hybrids and copolymers thereof, acrylate resins, polyepoxide resins, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, polyamine resins, and combinations thereof, wherein the resin is present in an amount of about 1 wt.% to about 20 wt.%;
a hardener, wherein the hardener comprises at least one hardener selected from the group consisting of aromatic amines, aliphatic tertiary amines, cycloaliphatic amines, heterocyclic amines, amido amines, polyamides, polyethyl amines, polyether amines, polyoxyalkylene amines, carboxylic anhydrides, triethylenetetraamine, ethylene diamine, N-cocoalkyltrimethylene, isophorone diamine, N-amino phenyl piperazine, imidazoline, 1,2-diaminocyclohexane, polyether amine, diethyl toluene diamine, 4,4'-diaminodiphenyl methane, methyltetrahydrophthalic anhydride, hexahydrophthalic anhydride, maleic anhydride, polyazelaic polyanhydride, phthalic anhydride, dialkylated phenylenediamines, 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol and combinations thereof wherein the hardener is present in an amount of about 1 wt.% to about 20 wt.%;”).
See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding the 33-50 wt% water, Roddy discloses “The wellbore composition (e.g., sealant) may include a sufficient amount of water to form a pumpable slurry” ([0049]).
However, Roddy fails to specify the weight percentage for this.
Nevertheless, such amounts of water are rather ordinary in the art. For example, Chatterji ‘344 teaches “methods and compositions for cementing pipe strings in well bores. The methods of the invention are basically comprised of preparing a cement composition comprised of a hydraulic cement, an epoxy resin, a hardening agent for the epoxy resin and sufficient water to form a pumpable slurry” (abstract) wherein “The water in the cement compositions which is in addition to the water contained in the non-ionic aqueous dispersions of epoxy resin is included in the compositions to make the compositions pumpable. … Generally, water is present in the compositions in an amount in the range of from about 20% to about 45% by weight of the hydraulic cement in the compositions” (Col. 4, lines 36-45).
Although silent to the exact concentration range as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include e.g. 33-45 wt% water, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a sufficient amount of water to form a pumpable slurry within the general conditions taught by Chatterji ‘344 (thereby including:
“water in an amount of 33%, about 50% by weight of the resin modified cement slurry”). See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding the 8-19 ppg density, Roddy discloses “additives may be included in the cement composition for improving or changing the properties thereof. Examples of such additives include … weighting materials, … density-reducing agents” ([0050]).
However, Roddy fails to specify what the suitable density range would be.
Nevertheless, such densities are rather well-known. For example, Roddy ‘039 teaches “The treatment fluid may be selected from the group consisting of a cement composition, a drilling fluid, a spacer fluid, and a lost circulation control composition” (abstract) such as a treatment wherein “Carbon dioxide sequestration activities involve placing CO2 into a reservoir for permanent storage” ([0007]) using additives such as “resins” ([0022]) wherein “Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that embodiments of the cement compositions generally should have a density suitable for a particular application. By way of example, the cement compositions may have a density in the range of from about 4 pounds per gallon ("ppg") to about 20 ppg. In certain embodiments, the cement compositions may have a density in the range of from about 8 ppg to about 17 ppg” ([0014]).
Although silent to the density range as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include a density of e.g. 8-17 ppg, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a composition having a typical density for a particular downhole application (thereby including:
“wherein the resin modified cement slurry has a density in a range of about 8 lbm/gal (958 kg/m^3) to about 19 lbm/gal (2277 kg/m^3)”). See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions
Regarding claim 14, Roddy discloses “injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like” ([0086]).
However, Roddy fails to specify wherein there is a caprock.
Nevertheless, caprocks are a standard part of formations used for carbon dioxide storage, and indeed for most subterranean reservoirs. For example, Zebrowski teaches “enhancing the storage of carbon dioxide underground” (abstract) wherein “The seal or cap rock will have a certain capacity to hold the CO2 within the storage reservoir without leaking” ([0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include a caprock, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to hold the CO2 within the storage reservoir without leaking (thereby including “wherein the carbonation-resistant barrier overlaps with the carbon dioxide injection zone and at least one zone selected from the group consisting of a zone comprising the caprock, a zone containing a shoe of a previous casing, a zone containing a liner hanger assembly, and combinations thereof”).
Regarding claim 15, Roddy discloses “injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like” ([0086]).
However, Roddy fails to specify the characteristics of such reservoirs for CO2 storage.
Nevertheless, the optimal characteristics of CO2 storage reservoirs is well-known. For example, Zebrowski teaches “enhancing the storage of carbon dioxide underground” (abstract) wherein “Carbon dioxide can be contained in subsurface geological units (formations) by a process known as CO2 sequestration or enhanced hydrocarbon recovery. The CO2 stored underground may originate from carbon emissions or from other naturally occurring sources of CO2. The CO2 is delivered to the storage site via normal transport from pipelines in a liquefied state or can be liquefied on site and is then pumped underground into a geological layer that has adequate porosity and permeability for storing CO2, referred to as a storage reservoir. The storage reservoir acts as a container for storing the CO2 when geological seal layers, e.g., overlying seal, underlying seal, adjacent seal or fault seal, are positioned above and below and adjacent the storage reservoir. The storage reservoir is typically composed of porous rocks with higher porosity and permeability, for example sandstones, carbonates and chalks. The geological seal layer is typically composed of rocks that are less permeable, for example shales, salts of anhydrites, and low porosity limestones of sandstones” ([0003]).
Although silent to the exact porosity or permeability ranges as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include a using reservoirs with “higher porosity and permeability,” with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide such suitable CO2 storage reservoirs as is well-known in the art (thereby including “wherein the subterranean formation comprises a depleted reservoir having at least one characteristic selected from the group consisting of pore pressure gradient less than 9 kPa/m, porosity of 5% or greater, permeability of 0.1 mD or greater, and combinations thereof”). For example, high porosity and permeabilities would of course be preferably higher, such as 5% or greater porosity and 0.1mD or greater permeability. See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding claim 16, Roddy does not require using bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin or epoxy phenol novolac resins. Accordingly, Roddy provides “wherein the resin modified cement slurry is free of bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin and epoxy phenol novolac resin.”
Regarding claims 17 and 18, as in claim 21, Chatterji ‘917 teaches “improved compositions and methods for sealing pipe in a well bore” comprising hydraulic cement, epoxy resin, and epoxy resin hardening agent (abstract) using epoxy resin that may be “the condensation products of epichlorohydrin and bisphenol A” (Col. 5, lines 15-16) and hardening agent that may be “aromatic amines” (Col. 5, lines 47-48) wherein “The epoxy resin utilized is preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 5% to about 15% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions” (Col. 5, lines 42-45) and “The hardening agent or agents utilized are preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 10% to about 30% by weight of epoxy resin in the compositions (from about 1% to about 3% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions)” (Col. 5, line 66-Col. 6, line 4). Resin added in 5-15 wt% and hardening agent in 1-3 wt% would presumably be ~6-18 vol%, assuming a density of ~1 g/mL.
Although silent to the concentration ranges as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Roddy to include, e.g., 5-15 wt% resin and 1-3 wt% hardener, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide generally typical amounts of each for a hydraulic cement with epoxy resin and hardening agent (thereby including:
(claim 17) wherein the resin and the hardener are present in a combined amount of about 5% to about 50% by volume of the resin modified cement slurry; and/or
(claim 18) [wherein the resin is present in the resin modified cement slurry in an amount from about 1% to about 20% by weight of the resin modified cement slurry and] wherein the hardener is present in the resin modified cement slurry in an amount from about [0.05%] 1% to about 5% by weight of the resin modified cement slurry).
See also MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions.
Regarding claim 19, Roddy discloses wherein the resin modified cement slurry further comprises at least one supplementary additive selected from the group consisting of supplementary cementitious components, hydraulic binders, micronized solids, inert solid particulates or microparticles, hollow microspheres, elastic beads, weighting agents, lightweight additives, gas-generating additives, mechanical-property-enhancing additives, lost-circulation materials, filtration-control additives, fluid-loss-control additives, defoaming agents, foaming agents, thixotropic additive, dispersants, retarders, accelerators, and combination thereof ([0050] “Examples of such additives include but are not limited to accelerators, set retarders, defoamers, fluid loss agents, weighting materials, dispersants, density-reducing agents, formation conditioning agents, lost circulation materials, thixotropic agents, suspension aids, or combinations thereof. Other mechanical property modifying additives, for example, fibers, polymers, resins, latexes, and the like can be added to further modify the mechanical properties”).
Regarding claim 20, Roddy discloses wherein the carbon dioxide is introduced into the carbon capture underground storage system as a gas, a liquid, a vapor, a supercritical fluid, or a combination thereof ([0086] “injection of gases (e.g., carbon dioxide)”).”
Although not required to render obvious the claim, the Office further observes that, under the typical injection conditions into a subterranean formation, it appears the CO2 -would also be injected as a supercritical fluid for certain depths.
Regarding the types of zones, Roddy discloses “the compositions and methodologies of this disclosure are employed in an operating environment that generally comprises a wellbore that penetrates a subterranean formation for the purpose of recovering hydrocarbons, storing hydrocarbons, injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like, and the MEMS located downhole (e.g., within the wellbore and/or surrounding formation) may provide information as to a condition and/or location of the composition and/or the subterranean formation. For example, the MEMS may provide information as to a location, flow path/profile, volume, density, temperature, pressure, or a combination thereof of a hydrocarbon (e.g., natural gas stored in a salt dome) or carbon dioxide placed in a subterranean formation such that effectiveness of the placement may be monitored and evaluated, for example detecting leaks, determining remaining storage capacity in the formation, etc.” ([0086]) and “remedial actions may be taken to work-over pre-existing wells, for example to retrofit older wells that may no longer be economically viable for hydrocarbon production, and thereby render such wells suitable for carbon dioxide injection. Such wells would be useful for sequestering carbon dioxide from large scale commercial sources for green house gas reduction purposes” ([0196]). Accordingly, Roddy discloses “wherein the carbon dioxide injection zone comprises at least one zone selected from the group consisting of a porous or permeable formation, a depleted reservoir, a depleted formation, a salt cavern, and combinations thereof.”
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 1-8 and 10-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,460,119 (also parent Application 18/603,615) in view of Chatterji ‘917, Jones (2017/0369761) (cited in parent), and Roddy.
Regarding independent claims 1, 8, and 13, these correspond with 12,460,119 claims 6, 1, and 13, except for the 1-20 wt% resin.
Nevertheless, 1-60 wt% resin is a generally typical amount in the art. For example, Chatterji ‘917 teaches “improved compositions and methods for sealing pipe in a well bore” comprising hydraulic cement, epoxy resin, and epoxy resin hardening agent (abstract) using epoxy resin that may be “the condensation products of epichlorohydrin and bisphenol A” (Col. 5, lines 15-16) and hardening agent that may be “aromatic amines” (Col. 5, lines 47-48) wherein “The epoxy resin utilized is preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 5% to about 15% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions” (Col. 5, lines 42-45) and “The hardening agent or agents utilized are preferably included in the cement compositions of this invention in an amount in the range of from about 10% to about 30% by weight of epoxy resin in the compositions (from about 1% to about 3% by weight of hydraulic cement in the compositions)” (Col. 5, line 66-Col. 6, line 4).
Comparatively, Jones similarly teaches “a compatibilized cement composition. The compatibilized cement composition can include a curable resin or cured product thereof, a cement slurry, and a compatibilizer composition” (abstract) with 50-99% vol% cement ([0073]) comprising cement and water ([0091]) and the rest resin with 50-99 wt% epoxy resin in the resin ([0081]) such as diglycidyl ether bisphenol A resin ([0082]) and 1-50 wt% hardener in the resin ([0086]) such as aromatic amine ([0087]). Assuming e.g. 50 vol% cement, this would be ~25-50% epoxy resin and 0.5-25% hardener.
These different concentrations are thus known in the art for uses with cements. Accordingly, although silent to the concentration ranges as instantly claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 12,460,119 claims to include, e.g., 5-15 wt% resin instead of 21-60 wt%, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a somewhat-lower amount of resin within the generally typical amount for a hydraulic cement with epoxy resin and hardening agent.
Regarding claims 2, 3, 5-7, 10-12, 14, 15, and 17-20, these correspond to 12,460,119 claims 7, 8, 10-12, 3-5, 14, 15, and 17-20.
Regarding claims 4 and 16, 12,460,119 independent claims 6 and 13 are directed to “a resin comprising bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins” and thus does not provide “wherein the resin modified cement slurry is free of bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin and epoxy phenol novolac resin.”
Nevertheless, using the other types of epoxide resins as claimed is well-known to be suitable for the same purpose. For example, Roddy teaches “placing the wellbore composition in the wellbore” (abstract) wherein “the compositions and methodologies of this disclosure are employed in an operating environment that generally comprises a wellbore that penetrates a subterranean formation for the purpose of … injection of carbon dioxide, storage of carbon dioxide, disposal of carbon dioxide, and the like… For example, the MEMS may provide information as to a location, flow path/profile, volume, density, temperature, pressure, or a combination thereof of … carbon dioxide placed in a subterranean formation such that effectiveness of the placement may be monitored and evaluated, for example detecting leaks, determining remaining storage capacity in the formation, etc.” ([0086) wherein “Suitable two-component resin materials may include a hardenable resin and a hardening agent that, when combined, react to form a cured resin matrix material. Suitable hardenable resins that may be used include, but are not limited to, organic resins such as bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin resins, bisphenol F resins, polyepoxide resins, novolak resins, polyester resins, phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, furan resins, urethane resins, glycidyl ether resins, other epoxide resins, and any combinations thereof. Suitable hardening agents that can be used include, but are not limited to, cyclo-aliphatic amines; aromatic amines; aliphatic amines; imidazole; pyrazole; pyrazine; pyrimidine; pyridazine; 1H-indazole; purine; phthalazine; naphthyridine; quinoxaline; quinazoline; phenazine; imidazolidine; cinnoline; imidazoline; 1,3,5-triazine; thiazole; pteridine; indazole; amines; polyamines; amides; polyamides; 2-ethyl-4-methyl imidazole; and any combinations thereof,” along with “a hydraulic cement that sets and hardens by reaction with water” ([0048]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 12,460,119 claims to include using alternative resins such as butoxymethyl butyl glycidyl ether resins, bisphenol F resins, polyepoxide resins, polyester resins, phenol-aldehyde resins, urea-aldehyde resins, furan resins, urethane resins, or glycidyl ether resins instead of the bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resins, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide an alternative resin for forming cement to store carbon dioxide in a formation (thereby including “wherein the resin modified cement slurry is free of bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin and epoxy phenol novolac resin”).
Conclusion
As in parent 18/603,615, Applicant may Amend the claims to incorporate e.g., “wherein the combination of resin and hardener within the resin modified cement slurry impedes carbonation by either a hydrophobicity or an ability to repel water” to overcome the Prior Art rejections; file a e-Terminal Disclaimer over U.S. Patent No. 12,460,119 to overcome the Double Patenting rejections; and remedy the 112 Rejections for claims 6 and 18 as suggested above.
As in parent 18/603,615, the Office observes that Applicant has disclosed “Without being limited by theory, it is believed that the combination of resins and hardeners within the resin modified cement slurry form polymeric microstructures throughout the set cement and on outer surfaces of the set cement that impede carbonation. The ability of the set cement to impede carbonation may therefore be attributed to steric interactions between polymeric microstructures formed within the resin modified cement and carbon dioxide and/or carbonic acid. Alternatively, the ability may be attributed more generally to steric interactions between the resin-hardener system and carbon dioxide, or between the reaction products of a resin-hardener system and carbon dioxide. The set cement may be further characterized by either a hydrophobicity or an ability to repel water. By impeding the carbonation, the set cement prevents or reduces acidification of the cement and thus prevents or reduces protonation of both calcium silicate hydrate and calcium hydroxide by carbonic acid in the set cement. Carbonic acid may form as a result of injected or naturally present CO2 gas coming into contact with any of free water in the formation, water entrained in the hydrated cement, or water chemically bonded within the hydrated cement. The hydrated cement may form a part of a barrier, sealant, or plug. This prevention or reduction of protonation of calcium silicate hydrate and calcium hydroxide by carbonic acid thereby prevents or reduces the formation of calcium carbonate and calcium bicarbonate in the cement and results in minimized leaching of water-soluble calcium bicarbonate from the set cement. Overtime, reduced leaching of calcium bicarbonate allows the set cement to retain its low porosity, maintain mechanical properties such as tensile strength, compressive strength, and young’s modulus of elasticity, and remain effective as a barrier, sealant, or plug separating the carbon dioxide injected into the formation and the atmosphere” ([0067]). This “hydrophobicity or ability to repel water” imparted by the resins and hardeners within the resin modified cement slurry which acts to prevent or reduce the protonation of calcium silicate hydrate and calcium hydroxide in the set cement by carbonic acid from the CO2 does not appear to be described by the cited Prior Art.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
The reference to Lewis (12,065,610) is parent Application 17/898,978. However, all claims of this reference are directed to a different embodiment (cycloalkene resin and a transition metal compound catalyst hardener) and thus this reference does not raise Double Patenting considerations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SUE-AKO whose telephone number is (571)272-9455. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM 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, Doug Hutton can be reached at 571-272-24137. 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.
/ANDREW SUE-AKO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674
Prosecution Insights