DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a first office action on the merits. All currently pending claims have been considered below. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The present specification as-filed appears to use the same paragraph numbering as in the present case's pre-grant publication, US 2026/0125962. That said, in the event of any differences, all citations to the present specification are made with respect to the pre-grant publication.
Claim Objections
Claims 17-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: In each of claims 17-20, the phrase "a locking assembly" should read "the locking assembly" as "a locking assembly" is already recited in clause (d) of parent claim 14.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Independent claim 1 recites "a pair of shouldered engagements... that are configured to maintain tension..." The examiner initially cites present figures 2A-2C & ¶s 32-37:
¶ 32: "Thus, in the initial un-tensioned state of the wellhead housing 40 shown in FIG. 2A, the recess 64 may be radially opposed (at least partially) by the radially inner surface 30c of the receptacle 30." Figure 2A shows "shouldered engagement 50" being engaged / coupled, but the specification notes there is no tension in the wellhead at this point. This is similarly stated in the final sentence of ¶ 33.
¶ 34: "As shown in the sequence from FIG. 2A to 2B, axial tension (relative to axis 35) may be applied..." (emphasis added).
¶ 35: "The second shouldered engagement 68 may be configured to maintain the tension in the wellhead housing 40 and thus the pre-load on the first shouldered engagement 50..." (emphasis added)
¶ 36: "...one or more linear actuators 70 may be configured to bear against the lower end 30b of the receptacle 30 and the wellhead housing 40 to tension the wellhead housing 40..."
¶ 37: "...the linear actuator(s) 70 may be extended to axially bear against the lower end 30b of receptacle 30 and the reaction plate 80 relative to axis 35 and therefore to tension the wellhead housing 40" (emphasis added).
The specification teaches that the "second shouldered engagement 68 may be configured to maintain the tension" as emphasized in ¶ 35 above. And while this does comport with the basic phrasing of claim 1, the examiner views the limitation as indefinite because it is unclear how or if this structurally limits the claim when the "linear actuators" that create the tension are conspicuously not recited in the claim. In other words there is no structure that creates tension in claim 1, but the claim limitation implicitly requires tension to have meaning. Put another way, the claim implies the creation of tension via "linear actuators 70" but does not actually recite them.
Assuming arguendo that the claim does not require linear actuators nor their creation of tension, the examiner still views the limitation as indefinite because in such a case it is unclear how or if (A) this "configured to maintain tension" limitation operates in a claim that does not require tension, and (B) how or if this "configuration" structurally limits the "shouldered engagements". In other words, if Applicant is attempting to eschew reciting the tensioning elements while simultaneously requiring "maintaining tension", the examiner respectfully asserts that the structural limitations of the claim and the "configuration[s]" therein are unclear and muddied, rather than plain & clear. Indeed, it is Applicant's disclosure that asserts the tensioning is desirable, and "avoid[ing] the use of a heavy top load" (¶ 24).
The examiner respectfully asserts that this lack of clarity is further illustrated by dependent claim 2, which recites "the pair of shouldered engagements are configured to place a portion of the receptacle in compression", which again implies the existence of "linear actuators 70" to "place" 30 in compression.
The examiner also respectfully notes that Applicant expressly disclaims any limiting nature of the specification on the claims in ¶s 97 & 100 and it would be improper to import limitations into the claims from the specification through arguments rather than by limitation (MPEP 2111.01, subsection II). Claims 2-7 depend from claim 1.
Claim 2 recites "the pair of shouldered engagements are configured to place a portion of the receptacle in compression". The examiner holds this to be indefinite as similarly described for claim 1 above, respectfully not repeated again in full here. Claim 2 implies the existence of "linear actuators 70" to "place" 30 in compression but does not clearly recite them, thus making it unclear what is structurally required by claim 2.
Independent claim 8 is directed to a "wellhead system" and requires "a locking assembly... such that a portion of the wellhead housing extending axially between the outer landing shoulder and the lower end of the receptacle is axially tensioned relative to the central axis".
The examiner views this as indefinite as generally described for claim 1 above, respectfully not repeated in full here. The claim does not recite linear actuators necessary to create the tension but rather implies them through a functional recitation. Further, the "locking assembly" can not be said to be a 112(f) invocation that requires said actuators because the linear actuators are not "engaged between an outer surface of the wellhead housing and the receptacle" as claimed.
In Applicant's attempt to word the claims as broadly as possible, and to eschew reciting linear actuators while still attempting to require the tension they create, Applicant has submitted claims that do not clearly define the metes and bounds of their invention. Applicant appears to regard the tension, and the maintaining of the tension, as being crucial to the invention (title, abstract, ¶s 16, 17, 24, 96) but has worded the claims so as to apparently not actually require any tension, nor the creation thereof, at all. The claims imply the linear actuators through functional recitations but do not actually recite them.
Claims 9-13 depend from claim 8.
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) 1-5, 7-11, 13, 14, & 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 4,872,708 (Abreo). The examiner will address independent claims 1 & 8 first so that similar dependent claims may be addressed together.
Independent claim 1. Abreo discloses a wellhead system (fig 1) comprising:
a receptacle (20, fig 1) having a central axis (clearly conveyed by fig 1, not individually numbered);
a wellhead housing (12, fig 1) that is axially inserted into the receptacle relative to the central axis (fig 1); and
a pair of shouldered engagements (First: "outer downwardly facing shoulder 16 which is adapted to engage upwardly facing seat 18" - col 2:4-6. Second: "This upward movement causes split lock ring 62 to be moved upwardly by its engagement with shoulder 40 and such movement causes it to be cammed outwardly by surface 64 on the lower end of body 14 into tight engagement within running groove 74 on the interior of wellhead housing 20" - col 2:57-62) coupled between the receptacle and the wellhead housing (figs 1 & 2) that are configured to maintain tension in the wellhead housing axially between the pair of shouldered engagements relative to the central axis ("Once lock ring 62 is set, further rotation creates a tension in sleeve 28 which preloads the joint to ensure tight engagement of shoulder 16 and seal rings 24 with seat 18 on the interior upper end of wellhead housing 20" - col 2:62-66. Sleeve 28 is a sub-feature within element 12).
The examiner notes that element 20 is a "wellhead housing" and element 12 is a "tieback connector". However, at the level of generality currently claimed, the combination can clearly reasonably be called "a wellhead system" and the differences between the nomenclature of the prior art and the nomenclature of the present case does not automatically equate to differences in structure or function.
Independent claim 8. Abreo discloses a wellhead system (figs 1 & 2) comprising:
a receptacle (20) including: a central axis (clearly shown in figs 1 & 2 but not individually numbered); an upper end (ibid); a lower end axially spaced from the upper end along the central axis (not expressly shown but inherently present as PHOSITA would readily appreciate. Element 20 is not an infinite feature without end); and an inner landing shoulder defined in the receptacle ("upwardly facing seat 18 on wellhead housing 20"), between the upper end and the lower end (fig 1);
a wellhead housing (12) including: an outer landing shoulder ("outer downwardly facing shoulder 16"), where the wellhead housing is axially inserted into the receptacle so that the outer landing shoulder is engaged with the inner landing shoulder of the receptacle (figs 1 & 2); and
a locking assembly ("split lock ring 62") engaged between an outer surface of the wellhead housing and the receptacle (fig 2) such that a portion of the wellhead housing extending axially between the outer landing shoulder and the lower end of the receptacle is axially tensioned relative to the central axis ("Once lock ring 62 is set, further rotation creates a tension in sleeve 28 which preloads the joint to ensure tight engagement of shoulder 16 and seal rings 24 with seat 18 on the interior upper end of wellhead housing 20" - col 2:62-66. Sleeve 28 is a sub-feature within element 12).
2. The wellhead system of claim 1, wherein the pair of shouldered engagements are configured to place a portion of the receptacle in compression along the central axis (tension in sleeve 28 will naturally create compression in 20 as tension in 28 compresses between 16 & 62), and wherein the receptacle (20) is coupled to a foundation that is configured to be landed on the sea floor ("a platform has its support structure mounted on ocean floor around the subsea wellhead" - col 1:64-66. Assuming arguendo that the "support structure mounted on [the] ocean floor around the subsea wellhead" is not inherently coupled directly to element 20, they are still indirectly coupled via the intervening elements).
3. The wellhead system of claim 1, wherein a first shouldered engagement of the pair of shouldered engagements (First: "outer downwardly facing shoulder 16 which is adapted to engage upwardly facing seat 18" - col 2:4-6) is defined by an engagement between an outer landing shoulder on the wellhead housing (16) and an inner landing shoulder on the receptacle (18);
wherein a second shouldered engagement of the pair of shouldered engagements (Second: "This upward movement causes split lock ring 62 to be moved upwardly by its engagement with shoulder 40 and such movement causes it to be cammed outwardly by surface 64 on the lower end of body 14 into tight engagement within running groove 74 on the interior of wellhead housing 20" - col 2:57-62) is defined by a locking assembly (the above described mechanism and the elements to achieve the necessary actuation) engaged between the wellhead housing and the receptacle (fig 2), axially between the first shouldered engagement and a lower end of the receptacle (62 & 74 engage below the above defined "first shouldered engagement" and the unshown, but inherently present, lower end of 20, as clearly conveyed by fig 2.
4 & 10. The wellhead system of claim 3 / claim 8, wherein the locking assembly comprises a snap ring ("split lock ring 62") that is expanded (transition between figs 1 & 2) into a pair of recesses defined on an outer surface of the wellhead housing (unnumbered but 62 is clearly shown in a recesses in 12 defined generally between "upwardly facing shoulder 40" and the lower end of sleeve 14, both of which are sub-features of element 12) and an inner surface of the receptacle (74 is on 20: fig 1).
5 & 11. The wellhead system of claim 3 / claim 8, wherein the locking assembly comprises a locking dog ("split lock ring 62") that is coupled to the receptacle (62 is indirectly coupled to 20 in both figs 1 & 2, at the level of generality currently claimed) and inserted into a recess defined on an outer surface of the wellhead housing (unnumbered but 62 is clearly shown in a recesses in 12 defined generally between "upwardly facing shoulder 40" and the lower end of sleeve 14, both of which are sub-features of element 12: fig 2).
7 & 13. The wellhead system of claim 3 / claim 8, wherein the locking assembly comprises a locking ring ("actuator ring 30") that is threadably engaged with an outer surface of the wellhead housing ("threads 52 on the interior of actuator ring 30 engage" "threads 50" which are on the exterior of "sleeve 28". 28 is a sub-feature of element 12: fig 1) and engaged with the receptacle (30 is engaged with the receptacle in both figs 1 & 2).
9. The wellhead system of claim 8, wherein the locking assembly (62) is engaged between the outer surface of the wellhead housing and the receptacle (fig 2) so that a portion of the receptacle is axially compressed along central axis (tension in sleeve 28 will naturally create compression in 20 as tension in 28 compresses between 16 & 62);
wherein the locking assembly defines at least one shouldered engagement ("This upward movement causes split lock ring 62 to be moved upwardly by its engagement with shoulder 40 and such movement causes it to be cammed outwardly by surface 64 on the lower end of body 14 into tight engagement within running groove 74 on the interior of wellhead housing 20" - col 2:57-62) that is positioned axially between the outer landing shoulder and the lower end of the receptacle relative to the central axis (fig 2 as similarly discussed for claim 3 above);
wherein the receptacle is coupled to a foundation that is configured to be landed on the sea floor ("a platform has its support structure mounted on ocean floor around the subsea wellhead" - col 1:64-66. Assuming arguendo that the "support structure mounted on [the] ocean floor around the subsea wellhead" is not inherently coupled directly to element 20, they are still indirectly coupled via the intervening elements).
Independent claim 14. Abreo discloses a method comprising:
(a) inserting a wellhead housing (12) into a receptacle (20) of a wellhead system (fig 1);
(b) engaging an outer landing shoulder on the wellhead housing with an inner landing shoulder of the receptacle ("Tieback connector 12 includes body 14 which is generally tubular in shape and has outer downwardly facing shoulder 16 which is adapted to engage upwardly facing seat 18 on wellhead housing 20" - col 2:3-6);
(c) tensioning the wellhead housing below the outer landing shoulder after (b) ("Once lock ring 62 is set, further rotation creates a tension in sleeve 28 which preloads the joint to ensure tight engagement of shoulder 16 and seal rings 24 with seat 18 on the interior upper end of wellhead housing 20" - col 2:62-66. Sleeve 28 is a sub-feature within element 12); and
(d) maintaining a tension of the wellhead with a locking assembly (ibid).
17. The method of claim 14, wherein (d) further comprises engaging a locking assembly (62) with the wellhead housing (fig 2) axially below the outer landing shoulder (fig 2);
wherein the locking assembly comprises a snap ring ("split lock ring 62"), and (d) further comprises expanding the snap ring into a pair of recesses defined on an outer surface of the wellhead housing (unnumbered but 62 is clearly shown in a recesses in 12 defined generally between "upwardly facing shoulder 40" and the lower end of sleeve 14, both of which are sub-features of element 12) and an inner surface of the receptacle (74 on the interior of 20).
18. The method of claim 14, wherein (d) further comprises engaging a locking assembly (62) with the wellhead housing axially below the outer landing shoulder (fig 2);
wherein the locking assembly comprises a locking dog ("split lock ring 62") that is coupled to the receptacle (62 is indirectly coupled to 20 in both figs 1 & 2, at the level of generality currently claimed), and wherein (d) further comprises radially extending the locking dog (transition between figs 1 & 2) into a recess defined on an outer surface of the wellhead housing (unnumbered but 62 is clearly shown in a recesses in 12 defined generally between "upwardly facing shoulder 40" and the lower end of sleeve 14, both of which are sub-features of element 12: fig 2).
20. The method of claim 14, wherein (d) further comprises engaging a locking assembly (62 & 30) with the wellhead housing axially below the outer landing shoulder (figs 1 & 2);
wherein the locking assembly comprises a locking ring ("actuator ring 30"), and wherein (d) further comprises threadably advancing (via threads 50 & 52; transition between figs 1 & 2) the locking ring along an outer surface of the wellhead housing ("threads 52 on the interior of actuator ring 30 engage" "threads 50" which are on the exterior of "sleeve 28". 28 is a sub-feature of element 12: fig 1) to engage with the receptacle (fig 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 12, 15, 16, and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 6, 12, & 19 require a ratchet assembly as the locking assembly which is not taught nor suggested by the prior art identified by the examiner.
Claim 15 requires linear actuator engaged with a reaction plate coupled to an outer surface of the wellhead housing and below the receptacle, which is not taught nor suggested by the prior art identified by the examiner.
Claim 16 requires the steps of lowering the wellhead system to the sea floor after steps (a)-(c). The steps of 1-c of prior art of Abreo are performed after the tool is lowered to the sea floor. The same is similarly true of US 2019/0128084 (¶s 195 & 196).
US 4,697,828 teaches a wellhead system (title, abstract) comprising:
a receptacle having a central axis ("48 generally illustrates a suspension member for supporting annular body 26 of FIG. 2" - first full ¶ of col 5);
a wellhead housing ("26 generally refers to an annular body such as a subsea wellhead body" - col 4:56-58) that is axially inserted into the receptacle relative to the central axis (fig 5); and
a pair of shouldered engagements ("As illustrated in FIG. 5, wellhead body 26 is initially supported by suspension joint 52 by landing support shoulder 38 of wellhead body 26 onto support shoulder 58 of suspension joint 52... [C]amming shoulder 114 of locking ring 96 transfers an upward tensile force into offset camming shoulder 62 of suspension joint 52" - col 6:8-15) coupled between the receptacle and the wellhead housing (figs 5 & 6). However, the reference fails the limitation of "[the shouldered engagements] are configured to maintain tension in the wellhead housing axially between the pair of shouldered engagements relative to the central axis ("the offset between the camming shoulder of the locking ring and the camming shoulder of the suspension member causes a tensile preload force to be transferred to the suspension member and a compressive preload force to be transferred to the annular body" - col 3:28-36. I.E. tension in the receptacle and compression in the wellhead housing).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Blake Michener whose telephone number is (571)270-5736. The examiner can normally be reached Approximately 9:00am to 6:00pm CT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tara Schimpf can be reached at 571.270.7741. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BLAKE MICHENER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
