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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 06/04/2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The incorporation of essential material in the specification by reference to an unpublished U.S. application, foreign application or patent, or to a publication is improper. Applicant is required to amend the disclosure to include the material incorporated by reference, if the material is relied upon to overcome any objection, rejection, or other requirement imposed by the Office. The amendment must be accompanied by a statement executed by the applicant, or a practitioner representing the applicant, stating that the material being inserted is the material previously incorporated by reference and that the amendment contains no new matter. 37 CFR 1.57(g).
The attempt to incorporate subject matter into this application by reference to US. Patent Appl. No. 18/782,974 is ineffective because it is an unpublished application number. It should be replaced by US. Patent No.12,553,316.
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is not a concise explanation of the invention, but it repeats claim limitations. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "such that" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
All the claims dependent of claim 1 are also rejected.
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1- 8, 10-11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purdy et al. (US 2021/0189855 ) “ (Purdy” herein) , Frenier (US 5,0966,618 A) ("Frenier" herein) and further in view of Rallis (US 4,655,852 A) ('Rallis" herein).
Claim 1.
Purdy discloses, as best understood based on the indefiniteness above, a method, comprising:
placing a wireline and a perforating gun in a wellbore, wherein: the wellbore extends through an earth formation and includes a casing extending through the earth formation, the wireline is coupled to the perforation gun, [0012, 0026-0027]
discharging the perforating gun to form perforations through the casing and in the earth formation surrounding the casing proximate the perforating gun; [0029]
flowing a fracturing fluid including one or more proppants through the perforations and into the earth formation to open fractures in the earth formation with the one or more proppants; [0010, 0011, 0032]
introducing a flushing fluid into the wellbore to displace the fracturing fluid; [0011, 0082-0083] and
flowing a corrosion inhibitor composition into the wellbore and through the perforations at least one of before the fracturing fluid, with the fracturing fluid, or with the flushing fluid, [0030, 0033]
Purdy however does not explicitly disclose a portion of the wireline includes zinc and the corrosion inhibitor comprising:
an alkenylphenone; and
a substituted 1-azanapthalene.
Frenier teaches the above limitation (See Col. 2 I.. 11-24; Col. 41. 50+; & Col. 5 I. 1-9, 63+ → Frenier teaches this limitation in that The alkenylphenone has the (1) its following structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
80
266
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein R.sub.1 may be unsubstituted or inertly substituted aryl of 6 to about 10 carbons; and R.sub.2 and R.sub.3 may be the same or different and each be hydrogen, halogen, or an unsubstituted or inertly substituted aliphatic of about 3 to about 12 carbons. The compositions of the present invention comprise an alkenylphenone of the structure (I) and an N-substituted quinoline (1-azanaphthalene). N-substituted quinolines are usually called quinoliniums. Suitable quinoliniums include quinolinium salts of the structure:
PNG
media_image2.png
156
206
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein R.sub.4 is unsubstituted or inertly substituted alkyl of about 4 to about 16
carbons, or unsubstituted or inertly substituted alkylaryl of about 7 to about 20 carbons.
Inert substituents are defined as having no adverse effect on the corrosion inhibition of
the corresponding unsubstituted N-alkyl or N-alkylaryl quinolinium salts. X may be any
compatible anion, preferably a halide such as Cl.sup.- or Br.sup.-. A preferred
quinolinium salt is 1-(.alpha.-naphthylmethyl)-quinolinium chloride. Quinoline may be
replaced by a+ similar or larger fused-ring system, such as isoquinoline (2-
azanaphthalene), acridine (9-azaanthracene), phenanthridine (3,4-benzoquinoline),
beta.-naphthoquinoline (5,6-benzoquinoline), or Lalpha.-naphthoquinoline (7,8-
benzoquinoline). The amount of an alkenylphenone in the composition of the present
invention may vary from about 0.1% to about 2% by weight, based on the weight of the
entire composition. The amount of substituted or unsubstituted quinoline in the
composition may also vary from about 0.1% to about 2% by weight, based on the
weight of the entire composition. If present, the amount of inhibitor aid in the
composition may be up to 10% by weight, based on the weight of the entire composition.) for the purpose of inhibiting the corrosion of iron and steel in the presence of aqueous acid at high temperatures. (Col. 21. 3-5) Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Purdy, with the above limitation, as taught by Ferrier, in order to inhibit the corrosion of iron and steel in the presence of aqueous acid at high temperatures. Rallis teaches the above limitation (See Col.2 I. 64+ & Col. 3 I. 1-4 Rallis teaches this limitation in that the aluminum which is applied to a ferrous tool surface in accordance with the invention can comprise substantially pure aluminum or aluminum alloy consisting of aluminum and alloying additives therefor selected from the group consisting of antimony, beryllium, boron, bismuth, calcium, chromium, cobalt, copper, gallium, germanium, gold, indium, iron, lead, lithium, magnesium, manganese, nickel, silicon, silver, sodium, tin, and zinc and mixtures thereof.) for the purpose of making an article of aluminized strengthened steel in which a combination of metallurgical processes are coordinated in such a manner as to make an inexpensive ferrous tool with high yield strength together with enhanced corrosion resistance for use downhole in oil and gas wells. (Col. 2 I. 3-9)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Purdy with the above limitation, as taught by Rallis, in order to make an article of aluminized strengthened steel in which a combination of metallurgical processes are coordinated in such a manner as to make an inexpensive ferrous tool with high yield strength together with enhanced corrosion resistance for use downhole in oil and gas wells.
Since Purdy teaches the same corrosion composition comprising an akenylphenone and substitute 1-azanapthalene, it would be a protective layer on a surface of the portion of the wireline including zinc such that corrosion of the wireline with the protective layer is less than corrosion of the wireline without the protective layer.
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties”. A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01 (I), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp v Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp v DF Newfield Co, 7 F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY1934).
Claim 2-3.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising flow an acid into the wellbore after forming perforations through the casing and in the earth formation, the acid including the corrosion inhibitor composition wherein the protective layer is impermeable to the acid. [0008, 0033]
Claim 4.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1, wherein discharging the perforating gun includes forming perforations through cement surrounding the casing. [0008, 0030]
Claim 5.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising flowing an acid into the wellbore after forming perforations through the casing and in the earth formation, the acid including the corrosion inhibitor composition. [0030, 0033]
Claim 6.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1, wherein flowing a corrosion inhibitor composition into the wellbore includes flowing the corrosion inhibitor composition into the wellbore while the wireline is in the wellbore. [0030,0033-0034]
Claim 7.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1, wherein flowing a corrosion inhibitor composition into the wellbore includes contacting surface equipment with the corrosion inhibitor composition. [0048]
Claim 8.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising removing the perforating gun from the wellbore prior to flowing the fracturing fluid through the perforations. [0057]
Claim 10.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1, wherein. Purdy however does not explicitly disclose: the alkenylphenone includes the following structure:
PNG
media_image3.png
126
166
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein R₁ is an unsubstituted or an inertly substituted aryl having 6 carbon atoms to 10 carbon atoms, and R₂ and R₃ individually include hydrogen, a halogen, or an inertly substituted aliphatic of 3 carbon atoms to 12 carbon atoms, an unsubstituted or an inertly substituted aryl having 6 carbon atoms to 10 carbon atoms; and
the substituted 1-azanapthalene has the following structure:
PNG
media_image4.png
146
188
media_image4.png
Greyscale
wherein R4 is a substituted alkyl having 4 carbon atoms to 16 carbon atoms, or an unsubstituted or inertly substituted alkylaryl having 7 carbon atoms to 20 carbon atoms, and X is a halide. (Same as claim 1)
Claim 11 and 13.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1. Purdy however does not explicitly disclose, wherein flowing a corrosion inhibitor composition into the wellbore includes flowing a fracturing fluid comprising at least about 3.0 parts by weight of the substituted 1-azanapthalene for every about 1.0 part by weight of the alkenylphenone or from about 2.0 parts by weight to about 5.0 parts by weight of the substituted 1-azanapthalene for every about 1.0 part by weight of the alkenylphenone. (Same as claim 1)
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purdy,
Frenier, Rallis, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Sinclair et al. (US 2005/0194141 A1) (“Sinclair” herein)
Claim 9
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1. Purdy however does not explicitly disclose, wherein flowing a corrosion inhibitor composition into the wellbore and through the perforations with at least one of the fracturing fluid includes flowing the corrosion inhibitor composition into the wellbore with the fracturing fluid.
Sinclair teaches the above limitation (See paragraph 0072→ Sinclair teaches this limitation in that in carrying out a hydraulic fracturing operation, a fracture is first generated by injecting a viscous fluid into the formation at a sufficient rate and pressure to cause the formation to fail in tension. The fracturing fluid may be an oil base, water base, acid, emulsion, foam or other fluid. The fracturing fluid may contain several additives such as viscosity builders, drag reducers, fluid loss additives, corrosion inhibitors, cross linkers and the like, known in the art. Injection of the fluid is typically continued until a fracture of the desired geometry and length is obtained.) for the purpose of hydraulically induced fractures can significantly enhance the permeability of rocks by connecting pores together, and for that reason, fractures are induced mechanically in some reservoirs in order to boost hydrocarbon flow. [0019]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Purdy, with the above limitation, as taught by Sinclair, in order to boost hydrocarbon flow.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Purdy,
Frenier, Rallis, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Xu et al. (US 2020/0024508 A1) (“Xu” herein)
Claim 12.
Purdy discloses the method of claim 1. Purdy however does not explicitly disclose, wherein flowing a corrosion inhibitor composition into the wellbore includes flowing a fracturing fluid comprising a cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide.
Xu teaches the above limitation (See paragraph 0016→ Xu teaches this
limitation in that the treatment fluids used in the methods of the present disclosure may
include one or more surfactants. Examples of cationic surfactants that may be suitable
for use in certain embodiments of the present disclosure include, but are not limited to,
alkyl amines, alkyl amine salts, quaternary ammonium salts such as
trimethyltallowammonium halides (e.g., trimethyltallowammonium chloride, trimethyltallowammonium bromide), amine oxides, alkyltrimethyl amines, triethyl
amines, alkyldimethylbenzylamines, cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, alkyl dimethyl
benzyl-ammonium chloride, trimethylcocoammonium chloride, derivatives thereof, and
combinations thereof.) for the purpose of acting as an anti-agglomerant to mitigate
flocculation of the microproppant particles in the treatment fluids. [0016]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Purdy,
with the above limitation, as taught by Xu, in order to act as an anti-agglomerant to
mitigate flocculation of the microproppant particles in the treatment fluids.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Winkler et al. (US 2022/0003096 A1) DISSOLVABLE SETTING TOOL FOR HYDRAULIC FRACTURING OPERATIONS teaches A system for deploying an untethered dissolvable frac package for use in a hydraulic fracturing operation includes a dissolvable or degradable frac package with a dissolvable or degradable setting tool, Kriebel et al. (US 2021/0010361 A1) MULTIPLE WELLBORE HYDRAULIC FRACTURING THROUGH A SINGLE PUMPING SYSTEM teaches Aspects of the subject technology relate to systems and methods for pumping multiple wellbores to form and stabilize fractures during a fracturing job, and Davis et al. (US 2020/0347286 A1) METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR REDUCING CORROSIVITY OF AQUEOUS FLUIDS teaches Methods and compositions for treating aqueous fluids that may be included in treatment fluids that are used for treating a subterranean formation. In some embodiments, the methods include: providing a treatment fluid including an aqueous fluid and a composition that includes an oxygen scavenger, a pH-adjusting agent, and a corrosion inhibitor, wherein the aqueous fluid is aerated; contacting a metal surface with the treatment fluid; and introducing the treatment fluid into a wellbore penetrating at least a portion of a subterranean formation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SILVANA C RUNYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5415. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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.
/SILVANA C RUNYAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 06/23/2026
Prosecution Insights