# "Electronic Case Filing" terminology

**URL:** https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/electronic-case-filing-terminology/72139
**Category:** Grady County, OK
**Created:** [August 30, 2023, 11:24am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/electronic-case-filing-terminology/72139 "2023-08-30T11:24:26Z")
**Posts on this page:** 4
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![David\_Thomson](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@David\_Thomson](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/David_Thomson)
#### Post date: [August 30, 2023, 11:24am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/electronic-case-filing-terminology/72139/1 "2023-08-30T11:24:26Z")

</div>

In August 2022, Continental Resources applied for 2 additional wells in 26 3N 5W (OCC CD2022-003192 was one of them). Marathon and Gulfport filed protests, and the hearing before OCC was continued many times over many months. Two weeks ago the court issued an “Order Dismissing Cause” after appearance by attorneys for all three companies. Does this mean that the Marathon/Gulfport protests to 2022-003192 were dismissed, or that Continental’s application itself is now dismissed?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Charles\_Bepag](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/c57346/32.png) [@Charles\_Bepag](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Charles_Bepag)
#### Post date: [September 2, 2023, 9:31pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/electronic-case-filing-terminology/72139/2 "2023-09-02T21:31:04Z")

</div>

I’m no expert on this, but it appears the application to drill the multi-unit Eula Mae 8-26-35XHS in Sections 26 & 35 was dismissed. Continental has now applied to drill the Eula Mae 8-23-26XHS (CD 2023-002367) along with the second well you reference, Eula Mae 7-23-26XHS (CD 2022-003190), both in Sections 23 & 26. The hearing is scheduled for 9/19/2023.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![David\_Thomson](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@David\_Thomson](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/David_Thomson)
#### Post date: [September 3, 2023, 12:53am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/electronic-case-filing-terminology/72139/3 "2023-09-03T00:53:09Z")

</div>

I think you’re exactly right, Charles; basically it means Continental has scrapped its initial plan for Eula Mae 8 and replaced it with a request to create 8 as a parallel well to the (still under application) Eula Mae 7. Thanks for serving as a “second reader.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![system](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/uploads/db5755/original/3X/6/c/6c7c56608c843272ad6e3662ce9562a5956f173e.png) [@system](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/system)
#### Post date: [November 28, 2023, 11:24am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/electronic-case-filing-terminology/72139/4 "2023-11-28T11:24:49Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed after 90 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
