Ex Parte Tabary et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Apr 26, 2012

11574172 (B.P.A.I. Apr. 26, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
11/574,172 09/28/2007 Rene Tabary 612.47237X00 1366
20457 7590 04/27/2012
ANTONELLI, TERRY, STOUT & KRAUS, LLP
1300 NORTH SEVENTEENTH STREET
SUITE 1800
ARLINGTON, VA 22209-3873
EXAMINER
LI, AIQUN
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1763
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
04/27/2012 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________

Ex parte RENE TABARY,
Guy Chauveteau, Paul Mallo, Olivier Braun, Eric Vilain, and
Alain Zaitoun
________________

Appeal 2011-007419
Application 11/574,172
Technology Center 1700
________________

Before ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON, TERRY J. OWENS, and
MARK NAGUMO, Administrative Patent Judges.

NAGUMO, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2011-007419
Application 11/574,172

2
A. Introduction1, 2
Rene Tabary, Guy Chauveteau, Paul Mallo, Olivier Braun, Eric
Vilain, and Alain Zaitoun (“Tabary”) timely appeal under
35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the final rejection3 of claims 1-15, which are all of
the pending claims. We have jurisdiction. 35 U.S.C. § 6. We REVERSE.
The subject matter on appeal relates to processes of treating porous
formations such as oil well fields.
Representative Claim 1 reads:
1. A method of treating formations, wherein the following
stages are carried out:
-preparing a liquid composition comprising microgels
by mixing in a solvent, under stirring, an amount
representing 0.01 % to 60 % by mass of said
composition of: either
an inverse latex comprising
an oil phase,
an aqueous phase,
at least one water-in-oil (W/O) type emulsifier,
at least one oil-in-water (O/W) type emulsifier,

1 Application 11/574,172, Method of Treating Underground Formations or
Cavities by Microgels, entered 28 September 2007, as the national stage of
an international application filed 22 August 2005, claiming the benefit of an
application filed in France on 25 August 2004. The specification is cited as
“Spec.” The real party in interest is listed as IFP Energies Nouvelles
(formerly Institut Français du Pétrole). (Appeal Brief, filed 10 December
2010 (“Br.”), 1.)
2 Heard 19 April 2012. The Official Transcript, which was not available
when this Opinion was entered, will be made of record.
3 Office action mailed 10 March 2010.
Appeal 2011-007419
Application 11/574,172

3
20 % to 60 % by weight of a crosslinked anionic
polyelectrolyte based on either
at least one strong acid function monomer
copolymerized with at least one neutral
monomer crosslinked with a crosslinking
agent in a molar proportion expressed in
relation to the monomers used
of 0.002 % to 0.5 %,
or a weak acid function monomer
copolymerized with at least one neutral
monomer crosslinked with a crosslinking
agent in a molar proportion expressed in
relation to the monomers used
of 0.002 % to 0.5 %,
or
a powdered polymer obtained by azeotropic
distillation, atomization or precipitation of said
inverse latex,
injecting said composition into the porous and
permeable formation.
(Claims App., Br. 10; indentation, paragraphing, and emphasis added.)
The Examiner has maintained the following ground of rejection:4
Claims 1-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of
the combined teachings of Bott,5 Chauveteau, 6 Mallo,7 and
Espin.8

4 Examiner’s Answer mailed 28 January 2011 (“Ans.”).
5 Lawrence L. Bott, Inverted Mixed Latex for Water Flooding, U.S.
Patent 3,780,806 (1973).
6 Guy Chauveteau et al., Method for Preparing Microgels of Controlled
Size, U.S. Patent 6,579,909 B1 (2003)
7 Paul Mallo et al., U.S. Patent 6,197,287 B1 (2001).
8 Douglas Espin et al., U.S. Patent 6,513,592 B2 (2003).
Appeal 2011-007419
Application 11/574,172

4
B. Discussion
Findings of fact throughout this Opinion are supported by a
preponderance of the evidence of record.
The claimed process involves preparing a microgel and injecting the
microgel into a porous and permeable formation such as an oil well field.
The microgel is said to be adsorbed to the surfaces of the porous formation
over a short distance, and to swell in the presence of water, thereby blocking
ready passage (e.g., in-flow) of water. (Spec. 8, ll. 20-24.) In the presence
of a hydrocarbon (i.e., oil or gas) phase, however, the molecules are said to
be “crushed” against the walls of the pores and to not hinder the mobility of
the oil or gas. (Id. at ll. 12-24.)
As Tabary argues (Br. 4-6), Bott teaches an improved water flooding
process in which a stable liquid dispersion of an anionic polymer and a
cationic polymer is injected into the input well penetrating a subterranean
formation. (Bott, col. 1, ll. 4-6.) Once in the formation, the stable liquid
dispersion inverts, due to the presence of a large amount of water,
whereupon the anionic and cationic polymers react to produce a gel-like
structure that permeates throughout the subterranean formation.
(Id. at col. 1, l. 63 to col. 2, l. 9.) As a result, according to Bott, the amount
of water needed to be sent through the formation to push out the desired oil
will be reduced. Bott does not teach injection of a microgel.
Tabary argues further that while Chauveteau does teach the injection
of a microgel into rock formations, the polyacrylamide compositions are not
latex polymers, and the cross-linking occurs under shearing conditions in a
Appeal 2011-007419
Application 11/574,172

5
porous medium. Tabary argues that the polymeric dispersions described by
Bott and by Chauveteau are so different that a person having ordinary skill
in the art would have had no reason to apply the cross-linking taught by
Chauveteau to the anionic polymers taught by Bott. (Br. 5-6.)
The Examiner has not directed our attention to credible evidence to
support the conclusion (Ans. 5, 3d para.) that a person having ordinary skill
in the art would have considered the teachings of Chauveteau to be
sufficiently related to those of Bott to suggest that the anionic polymers
described by Bott would be advantageously cross-linked. The remaining
references do not cure this deficiency. Accordingly, we REVERSE the
rejection of record.
C. Order
We REVERSE the rejection of claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
in view of the combined teachings of Bott, Chauveteau, Mallo, and Espin.
REVERSED
bar