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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed September 29, 2025, have been entered. Accordingly, claims 1-3,5-7 and 9-18 are currently pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cieslukowski (US 5231838 A: previously cited) in view of Varrassi (US-10006697-B2: previously cited).
In re Claim 1, Cieslukowski discloses a cryogenic fluid fueling system (col 1 lines 7-12: “This invention relates, generally, to liquid natural gas (LNG) delivery systems and, more specifically, to a no loss fueling station for LNG particularly suited for use with natural gas powered motor vehicles”), comprising:
a first container (Fig 1 cooling tank 16, col 3 line 51) comprising a first inner vessel (annotated Fig A) and a first outer shell (annotated Fig A) wherein the first inner vessel defines a first interior (annotated Fig A) configured to contain a first cryogenic liquid (Fig 1 liquid nitrogen 20, col 3 line 51-52) with a first headspace (Fig 1 gas head 18, col 4 line 52) being positioned above the first cryogenic liquid (see Fig 1);
a pressure building heat exchanger fluidically connected to the first container (Fig 1 combination of heat exchange reservoir 47 and cooling coil 48, col 4 lines 11-16: “Tank 16 is also provided with a second cooling loop 38 which carries LN.sub.2 to and from heat exchanger reservoir 47. Reservoir 47 surrounds cooling coil 48 located in low quantity use line 39. As LN2 is circulated through cooling loop 38 it will sub-cool any LNG being delivered through use line 39 …”, since loop 38 sub-cools an LNG stream, it will absorb heat and would serve as a pressure building heat exchanger and increase the pressure in tank 16),
a vapor line (38) connected between an outlet of the pressure building heat exchanger (outlet of 47) and a portion of the first inner vessel defining the first headspace of the first container (top left portion of 18);
the pressure building heat exchanger being configured to vaporize a portion of the first cryogenic liquid, such that pressure within the first container is raised as vaporized cryogen moves from the pressure building heat exchanger through the vapor line (38) and directly into the first headspace (col 4 lines 11-17: “As LN.sub.2 is circulated through cooling loop 38 it will sub-cool any LNG being delivered through use line 39 “ –as LNG is sub-cooled, LN will correspondingly vaporize and move to 18, see arrows of line 38 in Fig 1);
a second container (Fig 1 insulated pressure building tank 9, col 2 line 30) comprising a second inner vessel (annotated Fig A) and a second outer shell (annotated Fig A) wherein the second inner vessel defines a second interior (annotated Fig A) configured to contain a second cryogenic liquid (Fig 1 LNG 13, col 2 line 43) with a second headspace (Fig 1 gas head 15, col 2 lines 43-44) being positioned above the second cryogenic liquid (see Fig 1);
a condensing coil (Fig 1 vaporizer coil 59, col 3 line 60) positioned within the second headspace (Fig 1 gas head 15) of the second container (Fig 1 insulated pressure building tank 9), the condensing coil (Fig 1 vaporizer coil 59) fluidically connected to the first interior of the first container such that a portion of the first cryogenic liquid is propelled into the condensing coil and is warmed to provide a first cryogenic vapor (Fig 1, col 3 lines 63-66: “As the LN.sub.2 passes through coil 59, heat is transferred to the LN.sub.2 such that the head gas 15 is cooled and condenses. The LN.sub.2 becomes warmer and eventually vaporizes”).
Cieslukowski does not disclose said pressure building heat exchanger positioned within a second container and configured to be submerged within a second cryogenic liquid within the second container and so that the second cryogenic liquid in the second container is cooled as the portion of the first cryogenic liquid is vaporized in the pressure building heat exchanger.
Varrassi teaches another cryogenic fluid fueling system with a heat exchanger (Varrassi Fig 2 heat exchanger 10, col 3 line 55) positioned within a second container (Varrassi Fig 2 first tank 2, col 3 lines 22-23) and configured to be submerged within a second cryogenic liquid within the second container (Varrassi col 3 lines 55-58: “the two exchangers 9, 10 housed inside the first tank 2 are respectively situated in the upper and lower part of the first tank 2 so as respectively to cool the gaseous and liquid parts of the fuel”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Cieslukowski with said pressure building heat exchanger positioned within the second container and configured to be submerged within the second cryogenic liquid within the second container, as taught by Varrassi, since the claimed elements (a heat exchanger and a second container) are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements (such that the heat exchanger is positioned within the second container) as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art, see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Such combination of elements would provide the predictable result of not requiring a secondary reservoir for heat exchange, which simplifies the system and improves heat exchange efficiency since piping from the second container to an external exchanger is not required.
As a result of the modification, the second cryogenic liquid in the second container (Varrassi Fig 2 first tank 2, Col 3:22-23) is cooled as the portion of the first cryogenic liquid is vaporized in the pressure building heat exchanger (Cieslukowski Col 4:11-16).
In re Claim 2, Cieslukowski does not disclose wherein the first outer shell and the second outer shell are formed by a single unitary outer shell.
Varrassi teaches another cryogenic fluid fueling system wherein a first outer shell and a second outer are formed by a single unitary outer shell (Varrassi common external shell 12, col 5 lines 4-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Cieslukowski with wherein the first outer shell and the second outer shell are formed by a single unitary outer shell, as taught by Varrassi, since the claimed elements (first outer shell and second outer shell) are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements (such that a unitary shell is formed) as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art, see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Such combination of elements would provide the predictable result of requiring less inlets on the shells as the flow lines between tanks are internal as seen in Varrassi (see Varrassi Fig 1 or Fig 2).
In re Claim 3, Cieslukowski does not disclose wherein an insulation space defined between the unitary outer shell and the first and second inner vessels is at least partially evacuated of air.
However, it is old and well-known for cryogenic tanks to be surrounded by an insulation space, therefore it is well-known where an insulation space is defined between a unitary outer shell and first and second inner vessels (Varrassi Fig 1 space between 12 and tanks 2/3) and is at least partially evacuated of air (Varrassi col 5 lines 1-5: “the shells delimiting the storage volumes of the first 2 and second 3 tanks may be housed in a common external shell 12 under vacuum”), as evidenced by Varrassi (To summarize Varrassi teaches that there is space between the two tanks as seen in Fig 1 and teaches that the outer shell is under a vacuum. Thus, Varrassi teaches the two tanks are spaced apart and teaches that the outer shell is evacuated with a vacuum, thus evacuated of air, which creates insulation space between the tanks).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Cieslukowski with wherein an insulation space defined between the unitary outer shell and the first and second inner vessels is at least partially evacuated of air, as taught by Varrassi, as doing so would improve the system of Cieslukowski by both preventing heat losses from the cryogenic fluids to the environment but also preventing heat transfer between the two tanks unless desired.
In re Claim 5, Cieslukowski further discloses wherein the first cryogenic liquid is liquid nitrogen (Cieslukowski Fig 1 liquid nitrogen 20, col 3 lines 50-52) and the second cryogenic liquid is liquefied natural gas (Cieslukowski Fig 1 LNG 13, col 2 lines 43-44).
In re Claim 6, Cieslukowski further discloses wherein the first cryogenic liquid is liquid nitrogen (Fig 1 liquid nitrogen 20, col 3 lines 50-52).
In re Claim 7, Cieslukowski further discloses wherein the second cryogenic liquid is liquified natural gas (Fig 1 LNG 13, col 2 lines 43-44).
In re Claim 9, Cieslukowski further discloses a vent valve in fluid communication with the outlet of the condensing coil (Fig 1 pressure regulator 21, col 4 lines 8-10: “Any LN.sub.2 vaporized in coil 59 is returned to tank 16 via line 64” and col 4 lines 21-29: “Because the heat transfer occurring at coils 48 and 59 will result in the development of nitrogen gas and a concomitant increase in pressure in tank 16, periodically it is necessary to vent the gas in tank 16. Regulator 21 is set such that when the pressure in the tank rises above a predetermined value, the regulator will allow the nitrogen gas to vent to the atmosphere.”).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cieslukowski in view of Varrassi, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Villarreal (U US-20120090335-A1: previously cited).
In re Claim 10, Cieslukowski does not disclose wherein a pump is positioned within the second interior.
Villarreal teaches a pump positioned within an interior of a vessel (Villarreal Fig 4 submerged pump 8, par 0028).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Cieslukowski with wherein a pump is positioned within the second interior, as taught by Villarreal, since the claimed elements (a pump and a second interior) are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements (such that the pump is positioned within the second interior) as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art, see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Such combination of elements would provide the predictable result of being able to pump the fluid, guaranteeing that there is no pump leakage, and that the liquid in the vessel can lubricate the pump bearings (see Villarreal par 0007).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cieslukowski in view of Varrassi, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Thor (US-20190331298-A1: previously cited).
In re claim 11, Cieslukowski does not disclose a heater fluidically connected to an outlet of the condensing coil, such that at least a portion of a first cryogenic vapor is heated by the heater, wherein the system is configured to direct the heated portion of the first cryogenic vapor out of the system.
Thor teaches a heater (Thor Fig 4a-e heat exchanger 246, par 0051) fluidically connected to an outlet of a condensing coil (Thor heat exchanger coil 238, par 0050), such that at least a portion of a first cryogenic vapor is heated by the heater (Thor par 0057: “The warmed hydrogen exiting coil 238 travels through ambient heat exchanger 246, where it is warmed to near ambient temperature”), wherein the system is configured to direct the heated portion of the first cryogenic vapor out of the system (Thor par 0058: “The warm fluid exiting the coil 238 travels through heat exchanger 246, is warmed, and then is vented to atmosphere through vent circuit 288, where valve 290 has been opened”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Cieslukowski with a heater fluidically connected to an outlet of the condensing coil, such that at least a portion of a first cryogenic vapor is heated by the heater, wherein the system is configured to direct the heated portion of the first cryogenic vapor out of the system, as taught by Thor, as doing so would improve the system of Cieslukowski by preventing the condensation of gas that my occur as it travels through pipes.
Claim(s) 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cieslukowski (US 5231838 A: previously cited) in view of Varrassi (US-10006697-B2: previously cited).
In re Claim 12, Cieslukowski discloses a cryogenic fluid fueling system (col 1 lines 7-12: “This invention relates, generally, to liquid natural gas (LNG) delivery systems and, more specifically, to a no loss fueling station for LNG particularly suited for use with natural gas powered motor vehicles”), comprising:
a first container (Fig 1 cooling tank 16, col 3 line 51) comprising a first inner vessel (annotated Fig A) and a first outer shell (annotated Fig A) wherein the first inner vessel defines a first interior (annotated Fig A) configured to contain a first cryogenic liquid (Fig 1 liquid nitrogen 20, col 3 line 51-52) with a first headspace (Fig 1 gas head 18, col 4 line 52) being positioned above the first cryogenic liquid (see Fig 1);
a second container (Fig 1 insulated pressure building tank 9, col 2 line 30) comprising a second inner vessel (annotated Fig A) and a second outer shell (annotated Fig A)
wherein the second inner vessel defines a second interior (annotated Fig A) configured to contain a second cryogenic liquid (Fig 1 LNG 13, col 2 line 43) with a second headspace (Fig 1 gas head 15, col 2 lines 43-44) being positioned above the second cryogenic liquid(see Fig 1);
a pressure building heat exchanger fluidically associated with the first container (Fig 1 combination of heat exchange reservoir 47 and cooling coil 48, col 4 lines 11-16: “Tank 16 is also provided with a second cooling loop 38 which carries LN.sub.2 to and from heat exchanger reservoir 47. Reservoir 47 surrounds cooling coil 48 located in low quantity use line 39. As LN2 is circulated through cooling loop 38 it will sub-cool any LNG being delivered through use line 39 …”, since loop 38 sub-cools an LNG stream, it will absorb heat and would serve as a pressure building heat exchanger and increase the pressure in tank 16) by a vapor line (38) connected between an outlet of the pressure building heat exchanger (outlet of 47) and a portion of the first inner vessel defining the first headspace of the first container (top left portion of 18);
the pressure building heat exchanger being configured whereby the second cryogenic liquid (LNG) is used as a heating source to vaporize a portion of the first cryogenic liquid (See Col 4:11-16), such that pressure within the first container is raised as vaporized cryogen moves from the pressure building heat exchanger into through the vapor line (38) directly into the first headspace (col 4 lines 11-17: “As LN.sub.2 is circulated through cooling loop 38 it will sub-cool any LNG being delivered through use line 39 “ –as LNG is sub-cooled, LN will correspondingly vaporize and move to 18, see arrows of line 38 in Fig 1); a condensing coil (Fig 1 vaporizer coil 59, col 3 line 60) positioned within the second headspace (Fig 1 gas head 15) of the second container (Fig 1 insulated pressure building tank 9), the condensing coil (Fig 1 vaporizer coil 59) fluidically connecting to the first interior of the first container such that a portion of the first cryogenic liquid is propelled into the condensing coil and is warmed to provide a first cryogenic vapor (Fig 1, col 3 lines 63-66: “As the LN.sub.2 passes through coil 59, heat is transferred to the LN.sub.2 such that the head gas 15 is cooled and condenses. The LN.sub.2 becomes warmer and eventually vaporizes”).
Cieslukowski does not disclose the pressure building heat exchanger positioned within the second container and the pressure building heat exchanger being configured to be submerged within the second cryogenic liquid in the second container.
Varrassi teaches another cryogenic fluid fueling system wherein a heat exchanger (Varrassi Fig 2 heat exchanger 10, col 3 lines 55) is positioned within a second container (Varrassi Fig 2 first tank 2, col 3 lines 22-23) and being configured to be submerged within a second cryogenic liquid in the second container (see Varrassi Fig 2 showing 10 positioned and submerged in fluid of tank 2 and configured to cool the liquid part of the fuel by using cooling fluid from a second tank 3 that is distributed between the exchangers 9 or 10 which may comprise a coil, see col 3 lines 49-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Cieslukowski with wherein the position of the pressure building heat exchanger (Cieslukowski Fig 1 combination of heat exchange reservoir 47 and cooling coil 48) is moved to be within the second container and being configured to be submerged within the second cryogenic liquid in the second container, as taught by Varrassi, as doing so would improve the system of Cieslukowski such that a secondary reservoir for heat exchange is not required, which simplifies the system and improves heat exchange efficiency since piping from the second container to an external exchanger is not required. The modification would result in the first cryogenic liquid being provided through the coil as taught by Varrassi (Varrassi Fig 1 heat exchanger 10, col 3 lines 49-64).
In re Claim 13, Modified Cieslukowski further discloses wherein the pressure building heat exchanger is a coil (Varrassi Fig 2 heat exchanger 10, col 3 lines 49-54: “a portion 9, 10 in a heat-exchange relationship with the inside of the first tank 2 so as to give up frigories from the fluid of the second cryogenic tank 3 to the first tank 2. These heat-exchange portions 9 comprise for example a coil, a condenser or any other suitable type of exchanger”).
In re Claim 14, Cieslukowski does not disclose wherein the first outer shell and the second outer shell are formed by a single unitary outer shell.
Varrassi teaches another cryogenic fluid fueling system wherein a first outer shell and a second outer shell are formed by a single unitary outer shell (Varrassi common external shell 12, col 5 lines 4-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Cieslukowski with wherein the first outer shell and the second outer shell are formed by a single unitary outer shell, as taught by Varrassi, a since the claimed elements (first outer shell and second outer shell) are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements (such that they form a unitary outer shell) as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art, see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Such combination of elements would provide the predictable result of requiring less inlets on the shells as the flow lines between tanks are internal as seen in Varrassi (see Varrassi Fig 1 or Fig 2). .
In re Claim 15, Cieslukowski further discloses wherein the first cryogenic liquid is liquid nitrogen (Cieslukowski Fig 1 liquid nitrogen 20, col 3 lines 50-52) and the second cryogenic liquid is liquefied natural gas (Cieslukowski Fig 1 LNG 13, col 2 lines 43-44).
In re Claim 16, Cieslukowski further discloses wherein the first cryogenic liquid is liquid nitrogen (Cieslukowski Fig 1 liquid nitrogen 20, col 3 lines 50-52).
In re Claim 17, Cieslukowski further discloses wherein the second cryogenic liquid is liquified natural gas (Cieslukowski Fig 1 LNG 13, col 2 lines 43-44).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cieslukowski in view of Varrassi, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Villarreal (US-20120090335-A1: previously cited).
In re Claim 18, Cieslukowski does not disclose wherein a pump is positioned in the second interior.
Villarreal teaches wherein a pump positioned in an interior of a vessel (Villarreal Fig 4 submerged pump 8, par 0028).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Cieslukowski with wherein a pump is positioned in the second interior, as taught by Villarreal, since the claimed elements (a pump and a second interior) are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements (such that the pump is positioned in the second interior) as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art, see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Such combination of elements would provide the predictable result of guaranteeing that there is no leakage and the liquid in the vessel can lubricate the pump bearings (see Villarreal par 0007).
.
PNG
media_image1.png
495
712
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
The Remarks of September 29, 2025, have been fully considered but are not persuasive for the reasons below.
Applicant argues
On Page 6 ¶1-Page 7¶1 of the Remarks, that the examiner has not shown that claims 1 and 12 are obvious over Cieslukowski in view of Varrassi because there is allegedly no basis in the prior art for a vapor line connected between an outlet of the pressure building heat exchanger and a portion of the first inner vessel defining the first headspace of the first container required by the claims. Applicant appears to suggest that one of ordinary skill in the art would not recognize from the teaching of Cieslukowski/Varrassi that a vapor line connected between an outlet of the pressure building heat exchanger and a portion of the first inner vessel defining the first headspace of the first container. This is not persuasive.
First, contrary to Applicant' s assertion that Cieslukowski/Varrassi combination fails to teach a vapor line connected between an outlet of the pressure building heat exchanger and a portion of the first inner vessel defining the first headspace of the first container, Cieslukowski does in fact teach a vapor line connected between an outlet of the pressure building heat exchanger and a portion of the first inner vessel defining the first headspace of the first container (See Col 4:11-16). Specifically, by the vapor line between the heat exchanger outlet and portion of the first headspace of the first container of Cieslukowski, Cieslukowski/Varrassi teaches that the second cryogenic liquid in the second container is cooled as the portion of the first cryogenic liquid is vaporized in the pressure building heat exchanger. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that the second cryogenic liquid (LNG) to be cooled when the first cryogenic liquid (nitrogen) is vaporized.
Second, it should be noted that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In light of the above, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the findings of fact outlined in the rationale and motivation for the 103 rejection based on Cieslukowski and Varrassi satisfy the requirements to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IBRAHIM M ADENIJI whose telephone number is (571)272-5939. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 PM.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/IBRAHIM A. MICHAEL ADENIJI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JOEL M ATTEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights