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 .
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 4, 9, 14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1, 10, 20 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,486,739. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
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.
Claim 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-18, 20-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. 12,486,739. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the pending claims are essentially the same as the patented claims and any differences are minor, based on shifting of limitations between independent and dependent claims. Any differences that may exist cause the patented claims to be narrower than the pending claims, and therefore the patented claims fully encompass the pending claims and are obviously directed to the same invention.
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.
Claims 1-21 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 1-21 include, or depend from claims that include, the limitation(s): “a flow restrictor operable to receive production fluid having a pressure (P3) and discharge control fluid having a control pressure…” or similar limitations.
It is unclear if the production fluid and control fluids are the same fluid at different pressures or if the production fluid and control fluid are different fluids (e.g. production fluid is oil and control fluid is water; production fluid is reservoir fluid and control fluid hydraulic fluid).
Clarification and/or correction are required. No new matter may be entered. The claims will be read and examined as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-21 is/are, as best understood, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Veit (US 20150021019).
Regarding claim 1, Veit teaches: A fluid flow control system, comprising:
a flow restrictor (Veit at least one of 112/116) operable to receive production fluid having a pressure (P3) (Veit at least one of downhole, formation pressure / annular pressure in 112/116) and discharge control fluid having a control pressure (P2) (Veit annular pressure in 128);
a fluidic diode (Veit at least one of 124, 126) placed between the flow restrictor and a tubing (Veit 102) the fluid flow control system is configured to couple to, wherein the fluidic diode is configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) change the control pressure (P2) to a higher control pressure (P2++) when the fluidic diode encounters lower viscosity fluids and is configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) change the control pressure (P2) to a lower control pressure (P2+) when the fluidic diode encounters higher viscosity fluids; and
an inflow control device (Veit 122) having a production fluid inlet (Veit 154) operable to receive the production fluid having the pressure (P3),
a control inlet (Veit 154) operable to receive control fluid having the higher control pressure (P2++) or the lower control pressure (P2+), and
a production fluid outlet (Veit 158) operable to pass the production fluid having a pressure (P1) to tubing it is configured to couple to, the inflow control device configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) close or open the production fluid outlet based upon pressure values (P3, P2++, P1) or (P3, P2+, P1).
Note: Alternative citations based on different embodiments and/or different interpretations of the same embodiment have been provided to address the different variations and/or alteration of features in the dependent claims.
Regarding claim 2, Veit teaches: The fluid flow control system as recited in Claim 1, wherein the fluidic diode is a vortex fluidic diode (Veit [0019, 0031]).
Regarding claim 3, Veit teaches: The fluid flow control system as recited in Claim 1, wherein the flow restrictor is a fluid nozzle (Veit [0019, 0033]).
Regarding claim 5, Veit teaches: The fluid flow control system as recited in Claim 1, wherein the flow restrictor is a first flow restrictor (Veit 112) and the fluidic diode is a first fluidic diode (Veit one of 124, 126), and further including a second flow restrictor (Veit 116) and a second fluidic diode (Veit other of 124, 126) placed in series with the first flow restrictor and in parallel with the first fluidic diode.
Regarding claim 6, Veit teaches: The fluid flow control system as recited in Claim 1, wherein the flow restrictor and fluidic diode are placed such that (Veit Fig. 2A-3) production fluid encounters the flow restrictor prior to the fluidic diode.
Regarding claim 7, Veit teaches: The fluid flow control system as recited in Claim 1, wherein the fluidic diode includes no moving parts (Veit at least one of 124, 126).
Regarding claim 8, Veit teaches: The fluid flow control system as recited in Claim 1,
wherein the inflow control device is a first inflow control device (Veit one of 122 near 24, Fig. 1), and further including a second inflow control device (Veit one of 122 near another 24, Fig. 1), the second inflow control device having a second production fluid inlet (Veit 122) operable to receive the production fluid having the pressure (P3) (Veit 154),
a second control inlet (Veit 154) operable to receive the control fluid having the higher control pressure (P2++) or the lower control pressure (P2+), and
a second production fluid outlet (Veit 158) operable to pass the production fluid having the pressure (P1) to the tubing it is configured to couple to, the second inflow control device configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) close or open the second production fluid outlet based upon pressure values (P3, P2++, P1) or (P3, P2+, P1).
Regarding claim 10, Veit teaches: The fluid flow control system as recited in Claim 1, wherein the inflow control device is a piloted valve (Veit 122).
Regarding claim 11, Veit teaches: A well system, comprising:
a wellbore (Veit 12) extending through one or more subterranean formations (Veit 20);
tubing (Veit comprising 102) positioned within the wellbore; and
a fluid flow control system (Veit comprising at least 122) positioned between the wellbore and the tubing, the fluid flow control system including:
a flow restrictor (Veit at least one of 112/116) operable to receive production fluid having a pressure (P3) (Veit at least one of downhole, formation pressure / annular pressure in 112/116) and discharge control fluid having a control pressure (P2) (Veit annular pressure in 128);
a fluidic diode (Veit at least one of 124, 126) placed between the flow restrictor and the tubing (Veit 102), wherein the fluidic diode is configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) change the control pressure (P2) to a higher control pressure (P2++) when the fluidic diode encounters lower viscosity fluids and is configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) change the control pressure (P2) to a lower control pressure (P2+) when the fluidic diode encounters higher viscosity fluids; and
an inflow control device (Veit 122) having a production fluid inlet (Veit 154) operable to receive the production fluid having the pressure (P3),
a control inlet (Veit 154) operable to receive control fluid having the higher control pressure (P2++) or the lower control pressure (P2+), and
a production fluid outlet (Veit 158) operable to pass the production fluid having a pressure (P1) to tubing it is configured to couple to, the inflow control device configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) close or open the production fluid outlet based upon pressure values (P3, P2++, P1) or (P3, P2+, P1).
Note: Alternative citations based on different embodiments and/or different interpretations of the same embodiment have been provided to address the different variations and/or alteration of features in the dependent claims.
Regarding claim 12, Veit teaches: The well system as recited in Claim 11, wherein the fluidic diode is a vortex fluidic diode (Veit [0019, 0031]).
Regarding claim 13, Veit teaches: The well system as recited in Claim 11, wherein the flow restrictor is a fluid nozzle (Veit [0019, 0033]).
Regarding claim 15, Veit teaches: The well system as recited in Claim 11, wherein the flow restrictor is a first flow restrictor (Veit 112) and the fluidic diode is a first fluidic diode (Veit one of 124, 126), and further including a second flow restrictor (Veit 116) and a second fluidic diode (Veit other of 124, 126) placed in series with the first flow restrictor and in parallel with the first fluidic diode.
Regarding claim 16, Veit teaches: The well system as recited in Claim 11, wherein the flow restrictor and fluidic diode are placed such that (Veit Fig. 2A-3) production fluid encounters the flow restrictor prior to the fluidic diode.
Regarding claim 17, Veit teaches: The well system as recited in Claim 11, wherein the fluidic diode includes no moving parts (Veit at least one of 124, 126).
Regarding claim 18, Veit teaches: The well system as recited in Claim 11, wherein the inflow control device is a first inflow control device wherein the inflow control device is a first inflow control device (Veit one of 122 near 24, Fig. 1), and further including a second inflow control device (Veit one of 122 near another 24, Fig. 1), the second inflow control device having a second production fluid inlet (Veit 122) operable to receive the production fluid having the pressure (P3) (Veit 154),
a second control inlet (Veit 154) operable to receive the control fluid having the higher control pressure (P2++) or the lower control pressure (P2+), and
a second production fluid outlet (Veit 158) operable to pass the production fluid having the pressure (P1) to the tubing it is configured to couple to, the second inflow control device configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) close or open the second production fluid outlet based upon pressure values (P3, P2++, P1) or (P3, P2+, P1).
Regarding claim 19, Veit teaches: The well system as recited in Claim 11, further including a pressure relief valve positioned between the flow restrictor and the control inlet, the pressure relief valve configured to eliminate a range of pressures between the higher control pressure (P2++) or the lower control pressure (P2+) that would only partially close the inflow control device.
Regarding claim 20, Veit teaches: The well system as recited in Claim 11, wherein the inflow control device is a piloted valve (Veit 122).
Regarding claim 21, Veit teaches: A method, comprising:
positioning (Veit [0024]) a fluid flow control system (Veit comprising at least 122) within a wellbore (Veit 12) extending through one or more subterranean formations (Veit 20), the fluid flow control system located between the wellbore and tubing (Veit comprising 102) positioned in the wellbore, the fluid flow control system including:
a flow restrictor (Veit at least one of 112/116) operable to receive production fluid having a pressure (P3) (Veit at least one of downhole, formation pressure / annular pressure in 112/116) and discharge control fluid having a control pressure (P2) (Veit annular pressure in 128);
a fluidic diode (Veit at least one of 124, 126) placed between the flow restrictor and the tubing (Veit 102), wherein the fluidic diode is configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) change the control pressure (P2) to a higher control pressure (P2++) when the fluidic diode encounters lower viscosity fluids and is configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) change the control pressure (P2) to a lower control pressure (P2+) when the fluidic diode encounters higher viscosity fluids; and
an inflow control device (Veit 122) having a production fluid inlet (Veit 154) operable to receive the production fluid having the pressure (P3),
a control inlet (Veit 154) operable to receive control fluid having the higher control pressure (P2++) or the lower control pressure (P2+), and
a production fluid outlet (Veit 158) operable to pass the production fluid having a pressure (P1) to tubing it is configured to couple to, the inflow control device configured to (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) close or open the production fluid outlet based upon pressure values (P3, P2++, P1) or (P3, P2+, P1); and producing (Veit [0003, 0029]) fluid from the wellbore into the tubing, the lower viscosity fluids closing (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) the inflow control device and the higher viscosity fluids opening (Veit [0031-0033, 0035-0036]) the inflow control device.
Note: Alternative citations based on different embodiments and/or different interpretations of the same embodiment have been provided to address the different variations and/or alteration of features in the dependent claims.
Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure.
Coffin (US 20190120048) teaches a flow control assembly comprising an inflow control device, a plurality of fluidic devices, and fluid sensors.
Richards (US 20180245428) teaches a flow control assembly comprising inflow control devices and/or inflow control valves and tortuous paths including nozzles, tubes, orifices, helical paths, fluid diodes and/or other mechanisms to create a pressure drop and slow the flow of fluids though the ICD.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Carroll whose telephone number is (571)272-4808. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 2:00-10:00 PM EDT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Doug Hutton can be reached at (571) 272-4137. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/David Carroll/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674
Prosecution Insights