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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 5, line one, there is a double comma after “claim 2”. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claim 10 limitations in which the first distance is greater than the second distance must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: FRACTURING PUMP ARRANGEMENT USING A PLURALITY OF PLUNGERS WITH RESPECTIVE INTERNAL FLUID PASSAGES
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “fastening system” in claim 2 and 7; .
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claim 1 and its dependents 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the horizontal axes" in lines 13-14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1, line 3, recites for each of its boreholes to be centered around a horizontal axis. Claim 1 lines 13-14 also recites “the horizontal axes” making this limitation even more unclear. The language in line 2 additionally makes it unclear whether all of the boreholes are to be centered around a single horizontal axis (which might make them all situate in a linear, sequential layout) or that all of the boreholes are to be centered around their own, respective horizontal axis. Examiner will assume the latter interpretation but requests clarification.
In claim 7, recitation is made of a “fastening system”. However, in claim 8, which depends on claim 8, recitation is made of “a plurality of packing nuts”. Are these nuts part of the fastening system, or distinct? Examiner requests clarification.
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, 9, 11-13 and 15-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-27 of U.S. Patent No. 12,454,944 (‘955) in view of Buckley (US2014/0127062A1), Kugelev (US 7,364,412) and Chen (CN104179676A).
Regarding claim 1, ‘944 discloses a pump capable of high-pressures (claims 1, 15, 17, 24) comprising a fluid end having a first borehole formed therein (claims 1, 15, 17, 24), each of the boreholes being centered about a horizontal axis (claims 1, 15, 17, 24), the fluid end comprising a body (claim 1, 15, 17, 24); and a sleeve (1, 15, 17, 24), wherein each sleeve is attached to the body and cooperate with the body to form one of the boreholes (claims 1, 15, 17, 24); a fluid manifold (claim 1, 15, 17, 24); a power end (claim 1, 15, 17, 24), in which the power end comprises a rotatable crankshaft (claims 1, 17) mechanically coupled to a respective pony rod being reciprocated along one of the horizontal axes by rotation of the crankshaft (claims 1, 17/20/21/22, 24/27); an inlet tee having a first, a second, and a third end, in which the first end and the second end are disposed about the horizontal axis (note “inlet component” or “reciprocating element adapter” or “inlet conduit” or “hollow reciprocating element adapter” and its connection with the pony rod, plunger and inlet manifold in claims 1, 15, 17, 24), each inlet tee being connected to a selected one of the pony rods at the first end by a first clamp (claims 1-3, 15, 17, 24); a plurality of plungers, each plunger installed within one of the boreholes and having front and rear ends joined by an internal fluid passage (claims 1, 15, 17, 24); in which each plunger is configured to reciprocate within its respective borehole along the horizontal axis of its respective borehole (claims 1, 15, 17, 24), wherein the rear end of each of the plurality of plungers is connected to a respective inlet tee by a second clamp (claims 1, 15, 20, 22, 24, 27); and an inlet conduit having a first end attached to the fluid manifold and a second end attached to the third end of a an inlet tee (claims 1, 7, 9, 13-15, 17, 23-24, 26).
‘944 is not explicit about a plurality of boreholes, plungers, inlet tees, sleeves, and inlet conduits. However, Buckley teaches a pump arrangement which utilizes a plurality of boreholes (note plurality of boreholes in Fig. 6), plungers (note plurality of plungers in Figs. 4 and 6), inlet tees (note plurality of inlet tees near 25 in Fig. 4 in light of Fig. 6), sleeves (note plurality of sleeves 31 in Fig. 4 in light of Fig. 6), and inlet conduits (note plurality of inlet conduits connected to 25 in Fig. 4 in light of Fig. 6). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a pump with a plurality of boreholes, plungers, inlet tees, sleeves, and inlet conduits in order to transport greater amounts of fluid per unit time.
‘944 is not explicit about a plurality of pony rods. However, Kugelev teaches a pump arrangement which utilizes a plurality of pony rods (Figs. 3-4 note pony rods 15) which will connect a power end with the fluid end. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a pump with a plurality of pony rods to successfully connect a power end to a fluid end with multiple boreholes, allowing the pump to transport greater amounts of fluid per unit time.
‘944 is not explicit about a second end of each inlet conduit moving relative to a first end of the inlet conduit. However, Chen teaches a pump arrangement whose second end (note end of 51 opposite 52/53) of its inlet conduit (51) moves relative to its first end (52/53). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a pump whose inlet conduit has one moveable end in order for the conduit to accommodate a reciprocating plunger without causing the inlet conduit to stretch and break.
Claim 9: ‘944, Buckley, Kugelev and Chen teach the previous limitations. Chen further teaches a borehole that extends a first distance through an entire length of its respective sleeve and a second distance through an entire length of the body (see Fig. 3). Alternatively, Buckley teaches a borehole that extends a first distance through an entire length of its respective sleeve and a second distance through an entire length of the body (see Fig. 4).
Claim 11: ‘944, Buckley, Kugelev and Chen teach the previous limitations. Chen further teaches that the second distance is greater than the first distance (Fig. 3).
Claim 12: ‘944, Buckley, Kugelev and Chen teach the previous limitations. Chen further teaches that the fluid manifold is disposed above each of the plurality of inlet tees (Fig. 3, Examiner choosing the direction of the manifold as the “above” direction).
Claim 13: ‘944, Buckley, Kugelev and Chen teach the previous limitations. Modified ‘944 would further teach that plurality of inlet conduits are flexible (Examiner noting that the plurality of inlet conduits would possess the flexibility taught by Chen).
Claim 15: ‘944, Buckley, Kugelev and Chen teach the previous limitations. Chen further teaches a fluid flow path is defined from the fluid manifold (53), through a selected one of the plurality of inlet conduits (51), through a respective inlet tee (Fig. 6), through a respective plunger (3), to a respective borehole (note borehole in 1 in Fig. 3).
Claim 16: ‘944, Buckley, Kugelev and Chen teach the previous limitations. Buckley further teaches a plurality of suction valves (56), wherein each of the plurality of suction valves is carried by a respective plunger (61).
Claim 17: ‘944, Buckley, Kugelev and Chen teach the previous limitations. Buckley further teaches a plurality of discharge valves (11), wherein each of the plurality of discharge valves is carried within the body (15).
Claim 18: ‘944, Buckley, Kugelev and Chen teach the previous limitations. Buckley further teaches that each of the discharge valves has a greater cross-sectional area than each of the suction valves (see Fig. 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the double patenting rejections and rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN C ZOLLINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-7815. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F 9-4 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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/NATHAN C ZOLLINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746