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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to the amendment and remarks filed on 06/27/2025. In making the below rejections, the examiner has considered and addressed each of the applicants arguments. Claims 13-21 have been canceled and Claims 1-12 and 22-29 are currently pending and being examined.
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-3, 6-11, 25, 26, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujisawa (JP2018135551) in view of Krogsgaard (USPAP 2019/0277448).
In reference to independent claim 1, Fujisawa teaches a method for supplying hydrogen gas for consumption in at least one downstream process (para 0041 discloses “The dispenser 23 is a device that supplies hydrogen gas to a hydrogen-powered device such as a fuel cell automobile. The dispenser 23 has a hose extending from the dispenser 23, a filling nozzle, and a coupler for connecting to a fuel cell automobile or the like, and uses the hydrogen gas sent from the accumulator 22 to the fuel cell To automobiles and others”), said method comprising: producing hydrogen gas by electrolysis of water (with 11 fig 1), at least some electricity for the electrolysis of water being generated from at least one renewable energy source (11a is a solar cell that powers the electrolyzer in fig 1; para 0019 discloses “The water electrolyzer 11 is an apparatus that converts renewable energy such as sunlight, solar heat, hydraulic power, wind power, biomass or geothermal power to electric power and generates hydrogen gas by electrolysis using the converted electric power”); compressing said hydrogen gas in a multistage compression system (31 and 32 fig 2 which collectively is 13 in fig 1, and 21 in fig 1) to produce compressed hydrogen gas, the multistage compression system (13) being positioned between a system that produces the hydrogen gas by electrolysis of water (electrolyzer 11) and the at least one downstream process (23); and feeding at least some of said compressed hydrogen gas output from the multistage compression system (13) to the at least one downstream process (23); feeding some of the compressed hydrogen gas output from the multistage compression system (13) to at least one storage device (12) for storage therein in response to more hydrogen gas being produced by the electrolysis than is required for the at least one downstream process (para 0021 discloses “The accumulator 12 is provided for stably adjusting the amount of hydrogen gas in the product gas tank 14 without enlarging the product gas tank 14. More specifically, the accumulator 12 delivers hydrogen gas to the product gas tank 14 when the hydrogen gas pressure in the product gas tank 14 drops, and when the hydrogen gas amount in the product gas tank 14 becomes excessive, it is delivered from the product gas tank 14 And stored hydrogen gas is stored” the accumulator acts to store hydrogen in times of excess hydrogen production and release it in times excess drain),
the at least one storage device (12) being positioned downstream of the multistage compression system (13) and upstream of the at least one downstream process (23) such that at least a portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (12) undergoes pressure reduction to a reduced pressure (thru pressure reduction valve 103a, fig 1) and; and outputting hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device to (12) feed to the at least one downstream process in response to the hydrogen gas produced by the electrolysis (in 11) being less than the hydrogen gas required for the at least one downstream process (para 0047 discloses “The amount of hydrogen gas stored in the product gas tank 14 can be adjusted by the amount of hydrogen gas stored in the accumulator 12. Therefore, even if the demand for hydrogen gas fluctuates, hydrogen gas can be stably supplied from the product gas tank 14 to the hydrogen supply device 2.” the stated purpose of 12 is to provide gas during times of little production from electrolysis and absorb it during times of excess production), however
Fujisawa does not teach at least a portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device is fed to the at least one downstream process without undergoing further compression via the multistage compression system at the reduced pressure.
Krogsgaard, a similar hydrogen compression system, teaches at least a portion of the hydrogen gas output (output that flows out thru 7 and around compressor 2, fig 1) from the at least one storage device (5c) is fed to the at least one downstream process (8) without undergoing further compression via the multistage compression system at the reduced pressure (fig 1 shows and para 0069 discloses “The flow of hydrogen gas is preferably controlled by the controller 4 from the upstream supply storage 5 via valves 6 and fluid connection 7 downstream to the cooling system 12 and dispenser 3 to finally arrive at the vehicle 8. The flow of hydrogen may be controlled either through or bypassing the compressor 2, in both cases flow from a supply storage 5 to a vehicle 8 is referred to as a refueling.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the bypass path of Krogsgaard to the system of Fujisawa to create a system “reduces the number of start/stops of the compressor and optimise the control of the hydrogen refueling station as such including reducing the power consumption” para 0005, Krogsgaard. To be clear, by adding the bypass, when needed and when oscillation in system operation allows it, hydrogen can bypass the compressor and be used by the downstream process directly.
In reference to dependent claim 2, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, Fujisawa further teaches the method wherein said compressed hydrogen gas is stored (in 12) at a pressure up to a maximum of 100 bar (para 0022 discloses “the upper limit of the pressure of the hydrogen gas stored in the accumulator 12 is 75 MPa” & “The lower limit of the pressure of the hydrogen gas stored in the accumulator 12 is 5 MPa”; applicant discloses a range from 5 MPa-75 MPa (50-750 bar)
The MPEP specifically states “PRIOR ART WHICH TEACHES A RANGE OVERLAPPING, APPROACHING, OR TOUCHING THE CLAIMED RANGE ANTICIPATES IF THE PRIOR ART RANGE DISCLOSES THE CLAIMED RANGE WITH "SUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY"” MPEP 2131.03, II
"[W]hen, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated' if one of them is in the prior art." Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985).).
In reference to dependent claim 3, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, Fujisawa further teaches the method wherein said compressed hydrogen gas is stored (in 12) at a pressure down to a minimum of 1.3 bar (para 0022 discloses “the upper limit of the pressure of the hydrogen gas stored in the accumulator 12 is 75 MPa” & “The lower limit of the pressure of the hydrogen gas stored in the accumulator 12 is 5 MPa”; applicant discloses a range from 5 MPa-75 MPa (50-750 bar)
The MPEP specifically states “PRIOR ART WHICH TEACHES A RANGE OVERLAPPING, APPROACHING, OR TOUCHING THE CLAIMED RANGE ANTICIPATES IF THE PRIOR ART RANGE DISCLOSES THE CLAIMED RANGE WITH "SUFFICIENT SPECIFICITY"” MPEP 2131.03, II
"[W]hen, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated' if one of them is in the prior art." Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985).).
In reference to dependent claim 6, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, Fujisawa further teaches the method wherein said multistage compression system comprises a first section (31 and 32, fig 2) and at least one further section (21) downstream of said first section (seen in fig 2).
In reference to dependent claim 7, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 6, Fujisawa further teaches the method wherein the(12) to feed to the at least one downstream process (23) such that at least a portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device undergoes pressure reduction to the reduced pressure (thru pressure reduction valve 103a) and
is fed to the at least one downstream process at the reduced pressure without undergoing further compression via the multistage compression system (Fujisawa is silent to bypassing a compressor stage to the downstream process, however Krogsgaard, combined above, shows a bypass path 7, fig 1 bypassing the compressor 2 to serve the downstream process 3) in response to the hydrogen gas produced by the electrolysis (11) being less than the hydrogen gas required for the at least one downstream process comprises:
reducing a pressure of a first portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (12) before the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device is fed to the at least one downstream process (para 0020 discloses “A pressure reducing valve 103 a is provided in the flow path 103, and when hydrogen gas pressure on the product gas tank 14 side becomes lower than a predetermined pressure, hydrogen gas is delivered from the accumulator 12 side to the product gas tank 14 side” from 14 gas is fed to 23)
so that the first portion of the hydrogen qas is fed downstream of the multistage compression system so that the first portion of the hydrogen gas bypasses the multistage compression system (Fujisawa is silent to bypassing a compressor stage to the downstream process, however Krogsgaard, combined above shows a bypass path 7, fig 1 bypassing the compressor 2 to serve the downstream process 3).
In reference to dependent claim 8, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 7, Fujisawa further teaches the method comprising: feeding a second portion of the hydrogen gas from the at least one storage device (12) to said multistage compression system (13) for being fed to the at least one downstream process (hydrogen can flow out 103 thru 14 to path 106 and into 13).
In reference to dependent claim 9, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 8, Fujisawa further teaches the method wherein said second portion of the hydrogen gas is reduced pressure (103a reduces pressure of the hydrogen) before the second portion of the hydrogen gas is fed to said multistage compression system (hydrogen gas can be fed through valve 106a to the feed side of the compression system 13 through 106) for being fed to the at least one downstream process (the gas recompressed in 13 is eventually fed to 23).
In reference to dependent claim 10, Fujisawa teaches the method as claimed in Claim 8, Fujisawa further teaches the method reducing a pressure of said second portion of said hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (12) to produce reduced pressure hydrogen gas (thru pressure reduction valve 103a) for feeding an inlet pressure to a first stage of said multistage compression system (thru line 106); and feeding said reduced pressure hydrogen gas to said first stage (para 0035 discloses “The product gas tank 14 [which is directly connected to 12] is connected to the compression mechanism 13 via the flow path 106 and the flow path 104 and can send the stored hydrogen gas to the compression mechanism 13 via the flow path 106 and the flow path 104 There. In other words, the product gas tank 14 is capable of delivering the stored hydrogen gas to the first stage (compressor 31) of the compressor.”).
In reference to dependent claim 11, Fujisawa teaches the method as claimed in Claim 8, Fujisawa further teaches the method reducing a pressure of said second portion of said hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (12) to produce reduced pressure hydrogen gas (thru 103a) for feeding to a second stage of said multistage compression system and/or a first stage of said multistage compression system (feeding thru 104 to 13 can be interpreted to be feeding to the first stage of multi stage compression).
In reference to dependent claim 25, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, Fujisawa further teaches the method wherein the at least a portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device(12) that undergoes pressure reduction to the reduced pressure (thru pressure reduction valve 103a) and
is fed to the at least one downstream process at the reduced pressure without undergoing further compression via the multistage compression system (Fujisawa is silent to bypassing a compressor stage to the downstream process, however Krogsgaard, combined above, shows a bypass path 7, fig 1 bypassing the compressor 2 to serve the downstream process 3) is an entirety of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (once combined if the demand directly from the downstream process happens to match the hydrogen gas output then the final compressor can be bypassed, the limitation is functional in nature and is capable of being met by the combination of Fujisawa and Krogsgaard).
In reference to dependent claim 26, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, Fujisawa further teaches the method comprising reducing a pressure of a second portion of the hydrogen gas (thru pressure reduction valve 103a) output from the at least one storage device (12) for feeding the second portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (12) to a first stage of said multistage compression system (inlet of the multistage compression system 13).
In reference to dependent claim 28, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, Fujisawa further teaches the method wherein the outputting hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device (12) to feed to the at least one downstream process (23) such that at least a portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device undergoes pressure reduction to the reduced pressure (thru pressure reduction valve 103a) and
is fed to the at least one downstream process at the reduced pressure without undergoing further compression via the multistage compression system (Fujisawa is silent to bypassing a compressor stage to the downstream process, however Krogsgaard, combined above, shows a bypass path 7, fig 1 bypassing the compressor 2 to serve the downstream process 3)
in response to the hydrogen gas produced by the electrolysis (at 11) being less than the hydrogen gas required for the at least one downstream process (23) comprises outputting a first portion of hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device (12) to the at least one downstream process (23)
without undergoing further compression via the multistage compression system (by using the bypass added from Krogsgaard)
until a pressure of the at least one storage device (12) falls to a feed pressure of the at least one downstream process (23, this is a limitation wherein the feed comes directly from 12 thru the pressure reduction of 103a and then enters the bypass added by Krogsgaard and goes to the downstream process 23 of Fujisawa as needed and would follow inevitably from the structure as modified).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujisawa (JP2018135551) in view of Krogsgaard (USPAP 2019/0277448) further in view of Witkowski et al (“Comprehensive analysis of hydrogen compression and pipeline transportation from thermodynamics and safety aspects” hereafter Witkowski).
In reference to dependent claim 4, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, however
Fujisawa and Krogsgaard do not teach hydrogen gas is fed to said multistage compression system at a feed pressure from atmospheric pressure to 3 bar, preferably from atmospheric pressure to 1.5 bar.
Witkowski, a similar hydrogen production via a renewable resource, teaches wherein said hydrogen gas is fed to said multistage compression system at a feed pressure from atmospheric pressure to 3 bar (page 2509, section 2 para 2 discloses the electrolyzers outputting hydrogen at 1 atm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the commercial electrolyzers of Witkowski in the system of Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard in order to make a system that has the system of 56%-73% that is commercially available and therefore cheaper and more readily available; page 2509, section 2 para 2, Witkowski.
In reference to dependent claim 5, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, however
Fujisawa and Krogsgaard do not teach wherein said compressed hydrogen gas produced by said multistage compression system has a pressure from 10 bar to 50 bar.
Witkowski, a similar hydrogen production via a renewable resource, teaches compressed hydrogen gas produced by said multistage compression system has a pressure from 10 bar to 50 bar (fig 1 shows the CC compressor able to output a low pressure of 30 bars and with the variable speed of the reciprocating compressor disclosed in page 2511 section 4.1.1 (meaning the speed can be taken to zero while operational), examiner takes the position that 30 is within the operating limits of the disclosed system).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the lower compressor range of Witkowski in the system of Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard in order to decrease hydrogen leakage throughout the system, therefore making the system more efficient.
Claims 22, 27, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujisawa (JP2018135551) in view of Krogsgaard (USPAP 2019/0277448) further in view of Poorman (USPAP 2013/0192701).
In reference to dependent claim 22, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, Fujisawa further teaches the method wherein the outputting hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device (12) to feed to the at least one downstream process (23) such that at least a portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (12) undergoes pressure reduction to the reduced pressure (thru pressure reduction valve 103a) and
is fed to the at least one downstream process at the reduced pressure without undergoing further compression via the multistage compression system (Fujisawa is silent to bypassing a compressor stage to the downstream process, however Krogsgaard, combined above, shows a bypass path 7, fig 1 bypassing the compressor 2 to serve the downstream process 3) in response to the hydrogen gas produced by the electrolysis (in 11) being less than the hydrogen gas required for the at least one downstream process comprises (para 0047 discloses “The amount of hydrogen gas stored in the product gas tank 14 can be adjusted by the amount of hydrogen gas stored in the accumulator 12. Therefore, even if the demand for hydrogen gas fluctuates, hydrogen gas can be stably supplied from the product gas tank 14 to the hydrogen supply device 2.” the stated purpose of 12 is to provide gas during times of little production from electrolysis and absorb it during times of excess production): however
Fujisawa and Krogsgaard do not teach outputting the hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device to the at least one downstream process such that the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device is combined with the compressed hydrogen gas output from the multistage compression system to form a feed of hydrogen for feeding to the at least one downstream process.
Poorman, a similar multistage compressor/storage system for fuel gas, teaches outputting the hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device (106, fig 2b) to the at least one downstream process (108) such that the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (106) is combined with the compressed hydrogen gas output from the multistage compression system (112, 114, 116, and 118) at a location downstream of the multistage compression system (106 injects flow on the downstream side of the multistage compression system) and downstream of the at least one storage device (intersection of 152 and the main line is downstream of 106) to form a feed of hydrogen for feeding to the at least one downstream process (the system shows combining streams from the output of the compressors with the storage device 106).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the interstage insertion path taught in Poorman in the method as taught in Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard to more finely, accurately, and efficiently control the output pressure from the compressor installation. To be clear the modification prevents over compressing or under compressing gas.
In reference to dependent claim 27, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, Fujisawa further teaches the method comprising
reducing a pressure of a second portion of the hydrogen gas (thru pressure reduction valve 103a) output from the at least one storage device (12) for feeding the second portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (12) to a first stage of said multistage compression system (inlet of the multistage compression system 13), reducing a pressure of a third portion of the hydrogen gas (thru pressure reduction valve 103a) output from the at least one storage device (12), however
Fujisawa and Krogsgaard do not teach feeding the third portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device to a second stage of said multistage compression system that is downstream of the first stage, the third portion of the hydrogen gas fed to the second stage of said multistage compression system being at a higher pressure than the second portion of the hydrogen gas fed to the first stage of said multistage compression system.
Poorman, a similar multistage compressor/storage system for fuel gas, teaches outputting the hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device (106, fig 2b) to the at least one downstream process (108) such that the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (106) is combined with the compressed hydrogen gas output from the multistage compression system (112, 114, 116, and 118) to form a feed of hydrogen for feeding to the at least one downstream process (the system shows combining streams from the output of the compressors with the storage device 106), and
feeding the third portion of the hydrogen gas output from the at least one storage device (106, fig 2C) to a second stage (via 154 to 116 and 118, fig 2c) of said multistage compression system (112, 114, 116, and 118, fig 2c shows the gas being fed from the storage tank 106 to the intermediate stage through 154) that is downstream of the first stage (the first stage is 112 and 114 which is upstream from the second stage 116 and 118), the third portion of the hydrogen gas fed to the second stage (116 and 118) of said multistage compression system (112, 114, 116, and 118) being at a higher pressure than the second portion of the hydrogen gas fed to the first stage (112 and 114) of said multistage compression system (the pressure of the second stage 116/118 is higher than 112/114).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the interstage insertion path taught in Poorman in the method as taught in Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard to more finely, accurately, and efficiently control the output pressure from the compressor installation. To be clear the modification prevents over compressing or under compressing gas.
In reference to dependent claim 29, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 28, Fujisawa further teaches the method comprising:
feeding a third portion of the hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device (12) to an initial stage of the multistage compression system (thru 106 into 13) after the pressure of the at least one storage device (12) falls to the feed pressure for the intermediate stage of the multistage compression system (language the combination would inevitably meet once the structural limitations are met), however
Fujisawa and Krogsgaard do not teach feeding a second portion of the hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device to an intermediate stage of the multistage compression system after the pressure of the at least one storage device falls to a feed pressure of the at least one downstream process until the pressure of the at least one storage device falls to a feed pressure for the intermediate stage of the multistage compression system.
Poorman, a similar multistage compressor/storage system for fuel gas, teaches feeding a second portion of the hydrogen gas stored in the at least one storage device (106, fig 2C) to an intermediate stage of the multistage compression system (compression system 112,114, 116, and 118) after the pressure of the at least one storage device falls to a feed pressure of the at least one downstream process (110) until the pressure of the at least one storage device (106) falls to a feed pressure for the intermediate stage of the multistage compression system (language that Poorman is capable of because 106 would only be connected intermediately to the compression falls to the necessary feed pressure, if not the system could be damaged if the incoming pressure is either to low or to high).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the interstage insertion path taught in Poorman in the method as taught in Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard to more finely, accurately, and efficiently control the output pressure from the compressor installation. To be clear the modification prevents over compressing or under compressing gas.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujisawa (JP2018135551) in view of Krogsgaard (USPAP 2019/0277448) further in view of DeWitt (USPAP 2014/0144137).
In reference to dependent claim 12, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 1, however
Fujisawa and Krogsgaard are silent to wherein said electrolysis has a total capacity of at least 1 GW.
Dewitt a similar hydrogen system teaches wherein said electrolysis has a total capacity of at least 1 GW (para 0028 discloses “to operate those commercial electrolysis units to the capacity required to operate the system on a gigawatt-scale”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an electrolysis system of this size Dewitt in the system of Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard for “ storing utility-scale quantities of renewable electric power indefinitely”; DeWitt.
Claims 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujisawa (JP2018135551) in view of Krogsgaard (USPAP 2019/0277448) further in view of Poorman (USPAP 2013/0192701) and further in view of Guillard (USPN 10,634,425).
In reference to dependent claim 23, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard and Poorman teaches the method as claimed in Claim 22, however
Fujisawa, Krogsgaard, and Poorman do not disclose the at least one downstream process comprises: ammonia manufacturing via an ammonia plant.
Guillard, a similar hydrogen gas system, teaches the at least one downstream process comprises: ammonia manufacturing via an ammonia plant (col 5, lines 14-21 discloses “wherein such compressed hydrogen would provide the cold temperature refrigeration; the gas processing unit comprises methanol production plant; the gas processing unit comprises a methanol to propylene production plant; the gas processing unit comprises an ammonia production plant”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard and Poorman with the system of Guillard to make ammonia “in an efficient manner” col 8, line 17.
In reference to dependent claim 24, Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard, Poorman, and Guillard teaches the method as claimed in Claim 23, however
Fujisawa, Krogsgaard, and Poorman do not disclose feeding nitrogen gas output from an air separation unit to the ammonia plant for making ammonia.
Guillard, a similar hydrogen gas system, teaches feeding nitrogen gas output from an air separation unit (col 3, lines 45-52 discloses “In an optional embodiment, the high pressure gas can further include a dry and purified air gas from or derived from an air separation facility, wherein the dried and purified air gas is selected from the group consisting of pressurized air from a main air compressor, pressurized air from a booster air compressor, pressurized nitrogen”) to the ammonia plant for making ammonia (col 5, lines 14-21 discloses “wherein such compressed hydrogen would provide the cold temperature refrigeration; the gas processing unit comprises methanol production plant; the gas processing unit comprises a methanol to propylene production plant; the gas processing unit comprises an ammonia production plant”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the system of Fujisawa in view of Krogsgaard, Poorman, and Guillard with the system of Guillard to make ammonia “in an efficient manner” col 8, line 17.
Response to Arguments
In reference to applicant’s argument that “There also is no rational underpinning for drastic modification of Fujisawa” examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner has laid out a clear motivation, because the modification “reduces the number of start/stops of the compressor and optimize the control of the hydrogen refueling station as such including reducing the power consumption” para 0005, Krogsgaard, see the rejection above.
In reference to applicant’s argument that “there is no motivation or suggestion to modify Fujisawa” again examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner has laid out a clear motivation, because the modification “reduces the number of start/stops of the compressor and optimize the control of the hydrogen refueling station as such including reducing the power consumption” para 0005, Krogsgaard, see the rejection above.
In reference to applicant’s argument that “The suggested modification of Fujisawa based on Krogsgaard ignores Krogsgaard's teaching of how to address a high demand hydrogen situation and proposes a modification contrary to the principle of operation of Krogsgaard as well as Fujisawa” examiner respectively disagrees. Simply that there are differences between two references is insufficient to establish that such references “teach away” from any combination thereof. In re Beattie, 974 F. 2d 1309, 1312-13, 24 USPQ2d 1040, 1042 (Fed Cir. 1992).
In reference to applicant’s argument that “Fujisawa is silent with respect to such a feature” and “Krogsgaard is silent with respect to such a combination of features” in regards to claims 7, 8-11, 22-24, 25, 26, and 27; In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The arguments in bullet 3 are not against the combination of references but against the references individually, which is not persuasive.
In reference to applicant’s argument that “the Office Action utilized an unreasonable construction of these claims by contending that "functional language" in claims 28 or 29 existed and could be ignored. (OA at 11-12). This is wrong. Claims 28 and 29 are method claims and all the claim terms have to be given patentable weight.” Examiner did give them weight; however examiner contends that once the structural limitations are in place certain functional operations are inevitable, examiner apologizes for the poor word choice.
In reference to applicant’s argument that “The other secondary references relied upon in the Office Action fail to support modification of Fujisawa” and the arguments that follow in bullet point 5, amount to arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The arguments in bullet 3 are not against the combination of references but against the references individually, which is not persuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES W. NICHOLS whose telephone number is (571)272-6492. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, off Friday, 7:30-5 EDT.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Essama Omgba can be reached on 571-272-4532. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C. W. N./
Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/WESLEY G HARRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3783