DETAILED ACITON
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 amendment filed July 30th, 2025 has been entered. Claim 7 remains pending in the application. However, the amendment has raised other issues detailed below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 7, line 14: “emergency shutdown system” does not draw any corresponding structure from the specification. See 112(a) and 112(b) rejections below.
Claim 7, line 22: “control device” does not draw any corresponding structure from the specification. See 112(a) and 112(b) rejections below.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Line 14 of claim 7 recites, “emergency shutdown system” which is interpreted herein under 112(f), however the specification does not provide any structure to define the but lacks corresponding structure in the specification. The Examiner was unable to identify any description in the specification that could reasonably be considered to define the structure for the “emergency shutdown system”.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Line 22 of claim 7 recites, “control device” which is interpreted herein under 112(f), however the specification does not provide any structure to define the but lacks corresponding structure in the specification. The Examiner was unable to identify any description in the specification that could reasonably be considered to define the structure for the “control device”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim limitation “emergency shutdown system” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. No corresponding structure is described in the specification to define the emergency shutdown system. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret any device capable of actuating the emergency shutoff device to be the emergency shutdown system. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim limitation “control device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. No corresponding structure is described in the specification to define the control device. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the control device to be a controller and equivalents thereof. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The term “substantially” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The degree to which the emergency shutoff signal is transmitted by the emergency shutdown system to the emergency shutoff devices and the control device simultaneously is rendered indefinite by the use of the term substantially. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will simply interpret the claim to require the emergency shutoff devices and the control device to be operated in conjunction.
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pasquier et al. (US Patent No. 11,828,421), hereinafter Pasquier in view of Vega Perez et al. (US 20160258578), hereinafter Vega Perez, Park et al. (KR 100781868), hereinafter Park, and Sakakibara et al. (JP 2019132291), hereinafter Sakakibara.
Regarding claim 7, Pasquier discloses a fluid transfer method by a system for transferring a fluid that is liquefied by cooling (Fig. 2, Fig. 6; Col. 7, lines 28-31, FIG. 6 is a schematic cutaway view of a tank of an LNG carrier ship comprising a system for managing the filling levels of tanks and a terminal for loading/unloading this tank), the system including:
a storage tank configured to store the fluid (Fig. 6, liquefied gas storage tanks 80);
a transfer line connecting the storage tank and an LNG carrier to transfer the fluid to the LNG carrier (Fig. 6, insulated flexible pipes 79, orientable moveable arm 74, loading and unloading station 75, submarine pipe 76, connecting pipes 81; Col. 13, lines 60-62, The loading and unloading station 75 allows the LNG carrier 70 to be loaded and unloaded from or to the land-based facility 77);
a loading arm provided on the transfer line (Fig. 6, orientable moveable arm 74).
However, Pasquier does not disclose an emergency shutoff device provided in the loading arm and configured to shut off the transfer line, the emergency shutoff device including a first emergency shutoff valve connected downstream of the loading arm, a second emergency shutoff valve connected to an LNG carrier-side pipe, and an emergency release coupler interposed therebetween;
an emergency shutdown system configured to actuate the emergency shutoff device;
the fluid transfer method comprising:
transmitting, by the emergency shutdown system, an emergency shutoff signal to the emergency shutoff device;
closing, by the emergency shutoff device in response to receiving the emergency shutoff signal, the first emergency shutoff valve and the second emergency shutoff valve corresponding to the transfer line.
Vega Perez teaches an emergency shutoff device provided in the loading arm and configured to shut off the transfer line, the emergency shutoff device including a first emergency shutoff valve connected downstream of the loading arm, a second emergency shutoff valve connected to an LNG carrier-side pipe, and an emergency release coupler interposed therebetween (Fig. 1, arm-side isolation valve 70, spool-side isolation valve 60, passive coupling part 40, actuated coupling part 20; Pg. 4, paragraph 43, The spool-side isolation valve 60 may be operated by means of a spool-side isolation valve actuator 61. The arm-side isolation valve 70 may be operated by means of an arm-side isolation valve actuator 71. Closure of the isolation valves may be triggered by an over-reach sensor, which determines the distance the loading arm has to span between the floating gas processing unit and the other structure);
an emergency shutdown system configured to actuate the emergency shutoff device (Fig. 1, emergency disconnect power assembly 50, switching system 400; Pg. 4, paragraph 43, The spool-side isolation valve 60 may be operated by means of a spool-side isolation valve actuator 61. The arm-side isolation valve 70 may be operated by means of an arm-side isolation valve actuator 71. Closure of the isolation valves may be triggered by an over-reach sensor, which determines the distance the loading arm has to span between the floating gas processing unit and the other structure; Pg. 11, paragraph 116, Control of at least the emergency disconnection coupler and the spool-side and arm-side isolation valves and the blow down valves is preferably done from the floating gas processing unit. All input/output signals related to emergency disconnections are communicated directly from the floating gas processing plant without passing through the standard loading arm control package);
the fluid transfer method comprising:
transmitting, by the emergency shutdown system, an emergency shutoff signal to the emergency shutoff device (Pg. 4, paragraph 43, The spool-side isolation valve 60 may be operated by means of a spool-side isolation valve actuator 61. The arm-side isolation valve 70 may be operated by means of an arm-side isolation valve actuator 71. Closure of the isolation valves may be triggered by an over-reach sensor, which determines the distance the loading arm has to span between the floating gas processing unit and the other structure; Pg. 11, paragraph 116, Control of at least the emergency disconnection coupler and the spool-side and arm-side isolation valves and the blow down valves is preferably done from the floating gas processing unit. All input/output signals related to emergency disconnections are communicated directly from the floating gas processing plant without passing through the standard loading arm control package);
closing, by the emergency shutoff device in response to receiving the emergency shutoff signal, the first emergency shutoff valve and the second emergency shutoff valve corresponding to the transfer line (Pg. 4, paragraph 43, The spool-side isolation valve 60 may be operated by means of a spool-side isolation valve actuator 61. The arm-side isolation valve 70 may be operated by means of an arm-side isolation valve actuator 71. Closure of the isolation valves may be triggered by an over-reach sensor, which determines the distance the loading arm has to span between the floating gas processing unit and the other structure; Pg. 11, paragraph 116, Control of at least the emergency disconnection coupler and the spool-side and arm-side isolation valves and the blow down valves is preferably done from the floating gas processing unit. All input/output signals related to emergency disconnections are communicated directly from the floating gas processing plant without passing through the standard loading arm control package).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Pasquier of claim 7 to include an emergency shut off device and emergency shutoff system as taught by Vega Perez. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to preventing loss of containment in order to limit financial loss and environmental damage during an emergency (Pg. 3, paragraph 33).
Pasquier as modified does not disclose a bypass line connecting a branch portion provided upstream of the loading arm in the transfer line and the storage tank; and
a bypass valve provided in the bypass line, the bypass valve configured to be in a closed state during transfer of the fluid,
a control device configured to control opening of the bypass valve;
the fluid transfer method comprising:
transmitting, by the emergency shutdown system, an emergency shutoff signal to emergency shutoff device and the control device substantially simultaneously;
opening, by the control device in response to receiving the emergency shutoff signal, the bypass valve from a closed state to an open state.
Park teaches a bypass line connecting a branch portion provided upstream of the loading arm in the transfer line and the storage tank (Fig. 2, bypass unit 40, bypass flow path 42, bypass flow path 44 bypass flow path 42 is show provide upstream of connecting portion 20 which corresponds to the loading arm of Pasquier as modified and connects to cargo hold 2a; Pg. 7-8, paragraph 41, According to an embodiment of the present invention, the bypass unit 40, the first bypass flow path for recovering the blocked NG into the cargo hold 2a (see Fig. 1) or suction drum 12 which is the LNG / NG storage space 42 and a second bypass flow path 44 for evacuating the blocked NG to the atmosphere); and
a bypass valve provided in the bypass line, the bypass valve configured to be in a closed state during transfer of the fluid (Fig 2, bypass valve 46, bypass valve 47; Pg. 8, paraph 45, Next, the NG in the blocked NG pipe is bypassed to the outside and recovered into the stone drum 12 (see FIG. 1) or the cargo hold 2a (see FIG. 1), which is an LNG / NG storage space (S102). At this time, the bypass of the NG is made by manual opening of the valves 45 and 46, the valve 47 is kept in a closed state),
a control device configured to control opening of the bypass valve (Fig. 3, automatic control unit 70; Pg. 7-8, paragraph 41, In addition, the valves 45, 46, and 47 may be automatically turned on/off by the automatic control unit 70 described below);
the fluid transfer method comprising:
transmitting, by the emergency shutdown system, an emergency shutoff signal to emergency shutoff device and the control device substantially simultaneously (Pg. 8, paragraph 44-48, After the regasification, the NG piping between the pipe connecting device 20 and the LNG regasifying device 10 is blocked by the first, second and third shut-off valves 31, 32, and 33 (S101). Next, the NG in the blocked NG pipe is bypassed to the outside and recovered into the stone drum 12 (see FIG. 1) or the cargo hold 2a (see FIG. 1), which is an LNG / NG storage space (S102). At this time, the bypass of the NG is made by manual opening of the valves 45 and 46, the valve 47 is kept in a closed state. Then, inside the blocked NG pipe, that is, inside the first riser 22 is inactivated (S103). The valve 67 or 68 of FIG. 2 is manually opened for this deactivation, whereby the nitrogen gas in the nitrogen source 62 is blown into the NG piping. At this time, the bypass passages 42 and 44 of the bypass unit 40 described above are kept closed. Next, the pipe connecting device 20 is separated from the regasification device 10 (S104). Accordingly, the buoy 21 of the pipe connecting device 20 is kept floating again at sea while being connected to the second riser 23. Through the stop operation procedure after the end of regasification described above, it is possible to safely disconnect the pipe connecting device 20 from the regasifying device 10 without leakage of NG and residual NG in the pipe; Pg. 8-9, paragraph 55, 1, 2, 3 and 6, the regasification operation of the marine LNG regasification system is made (S301), while the regasification operation is performed, the regasification system, that is, the regasification of the ship Emergency situations that may be present in the device 10 and the pipe connection device 20 are continuously monitored by the sensing unit 80 shown in FIG. 2 (S302). The automatic control unit 70 determines whether an EBD (Emergency Buoy Disconnection) emergency signal is required from the sensing unit 80 that requires automatic shutoff of the pipe and separation of the pipe connecting device (or separation of the buoy) (S303)). If there is an EBD emergency signal, the automatic control unit 70 stops the operation of the high pressure pump 13 (S304) and closes the first, second and third shut-off valves 31, 32 and 33 to connect the pipes. Blocking the NG pipe of the device 20 (S305). At this time, the operation stop step (S304) of the high pressure pump 13 and the NG pipe blocking step (S305) of the pipe connection device may be performed at the same time, but using a sensor to control the operation stop of the timer or the high pressure pump, After the operation stop step (S304) of (13), it is preferable that the NG pipe blocking step (S305) of the pipe connecting device is made. After the NG pipe is blocked, NG in the blocked NG pipe is exhausted to the atmosphere (S305). Finally, when all of the NG in the blocked NG pipe is exhausted into the atmosphere, the pipe connecting device 20 including the exhausted NG pipe is separated from the regasification device 10. Separation of the pipe connecting device 20 and the regasification device 10 can be made in a variety of ways, for example, the buoy 21 and the pipe connecting device 20 is coupled to the turret (2a) of the vessel connected thereto In the case of including the first riser 22, when the coupling between the buoy 21 and the turret 2a is released through the unlocking of the locking portion 27 shown in FIG. The pipe connection of the first riser 22 can be made in a manner that is separated; Further, the closing of the shut off valve 33 of Park is functionally equivalent to closing the emergency shut off device of Pasquier as modified herein; Further, the teachings of Park at least imply that the bypass valves and the valves and lock which connect the hull to the seabed terminal, which are both controlled by the automatic control unit 70, are to be operated substantially simultaneously as it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01); As best understood, see 112(b) rejections above);
closing, by the emergency shutoff device in response to receiving the emergency shutoff signal, the first emergency shutoff valve and the second emergency shutoff valve corresponding to the transfer line (Pg. 8, paragraph 44 and 47-48, After the regasification, the NG piping between the pipe connecting device 20 and the LNG regasifying device 10 is blocked by the first, second and third shut-off valves 31, 32, and 33 (S101)… Next, the pipe connecting device 20 is separated from the regasification device 10 (S104). Accordingly, the buoy 21 of the pipe connecting device 20 is kept floating again at sea while being connected to the second riser 23. Through the stop operation procedure after the end of regasification described above, it is possible to safely disconnect the pipe connecting device 20 from the regasifying device 10 without leakage of NG and residual NG in the pipe; Pg. 8-9, paragraph 55, 1, 2, 3 and 6, the regasification operation of the marine LNG regasification system is made (S301), while the regasification operation is performed, the regasification system, that is, the regasification of the ship Emergency situations that may be present in the device 10 and the pipe connection device 20 are continuously monitored by the sensing unit 80 shown in FIG. 2 (S302). The automatic control unit 70 determines whether an EBD (Emergency Buoy Disconnection) emergency signal is required from the sensing unit 80 that requires automatic shutoff of the pipe and separation of the pipe connecting device (or separation of the buoy) (S303)). If there is an EBD emergency signal, the automatic control unit 70 stops the operation of the high pressure pump 13 (S304) and closes the first, second and third shut-off valves 31, 32 and 33 to connect the pipes. Blocking the NG pipe of the device 20 (S305)); and
opening, by the control device in direct response to receiving the same emergency shutoff signal, the bypass valve from a closed state to an open state (Pg. 8, paragraph 45-46, Next, the NG in the blocked NG pipe is bypassed to the outside and recovered into the stone drum 12 (see FIG. 1) or the cargo hold 2a (see FIG. 1), which is an LNG / NG storage space (S102). At this time, the bypass of the NG is made by manual opening of the valves 45 and 46, the valve 47 is kept in a closed state. Then, inside the blocked NG pipe, that is, inside the first riser 22 is inactivated (S103). The valve 67 or 68 of FIG. 2 is manually opened for this deactivation, whereby the nitrogen gas in the nitrogen source 62 is blown into the NG piping. At this time, the bypass passages 42 and 44 of the bypass unit 40 described above are kept closed; Pg. 8-9, paragraph 55, After the operation stop step (S304) of (13), it is preferable that the NG pipe blocking step (S305) of the pipe connecting device is made. After the NG pipe is blocked, NG in the blocked NG pipe is exhausted to the atmosphere (S305). Finally, when all of the NG in the blocked NG pipe is exhausted into the atmosphere, the pipe connecting device 20 including the exhausted NG pipe is separated from the regasification device 10; Pg. 7-8, paragraph 41, In addition, the NG blocked between the first and second shut-off valves 31 and 32 is the first by the bypass valves 45, 46 and 47 provided in the bypass flow paths 42 and 44. It is recovered to the LNG / NG storage space through the bypass flow path 42 or exhausted to the atmosphere through the second bypass flow path 44; Further, the teachings of exhausting the NG to the atmosphere in emergency situations is at least an implicit disclosure of opening bypass valves 45 and 47 to allow flow through the second bypass flow path 44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Pasquier as modified to include a bypass line, a bypass valve, and a control device and modify the method to of Pasquier as modified include the step or limitation of transmitting, by the emergency shutdown system, an emergency shutoff signal to emergency shutoff device and the control device substantially simultaneously, closing, by the emergency shutoff device in response to receiving the emergency shutoff signal, the first emergency shutoff valve and the second emergency shutoff valve corresponding to the transfer line, and opening, by the control device in response to receiving the emergency shutoff signal, the bypass valve from a closed state to an open state as taught by Park. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to mitigate risks associated with emergencies that arise in LNG regasification (Park, Pg. 9-10, paragraph 60).
Pasquier as modified does not disclose the storage tank including a fluid reception pipe configured to receive the fluid from the outside and a BOG pipe configured to discharge a boil-off gas of the fluid generated in the storage tank to the outside, and
the bypass line being connected to at least one of the fluid reception pipe or the BOG pipe.
Sakakibara teaches the storage tank including a fluid reception pipe configured to receive the fluid from the outside and a BOG pipe configured to discharge a boil-off gas of the fluid generated in the storage tank to the outside (Fig. 3, receiving pipe 59, BOG extraction pipe 67; Further, receiving pipe 59 and BOG extraction pipe 67 of Sakakibara have the same structure as the claimed fluid reception pipe and BOG pipe and are capable of functioning in the manner claimed), and
the bypass line being connected to the fluid reception pipe (Fig. 3 of Sakakibara depicts LNG return pipe 7, which corresponds to the bypass pipe of Pasquier as modified, to be connected to receiving pipe 59 via line 65)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention
to modify the storage tank of the system of Pasquier as modified to include a fluid reception pipe and a
BOG pipe and connect the bypass line to the fluid reception pipe as taught by Sakakibara. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to allow for the suppression of evaporative gasses in the LNG tank (Sakakibara, Pg. 3, paragraph 1).
Pasquier as modified does not disclose wherein the system further includes a plurality of the storage tanks, a plurality of the transfer lines being connected to one another and the plurality of storage tanks, a plurality of loading parts provided on the plurality of transfer lines, a plurality of emergency shutoff devices respectively provided in the plurality of loading arms, a plurality of the bypass lines connected to the plurality of storage tanks, and a plurality of bypass valves respectively provided in the plurality of bypass lines.
However, regarding wherein the system further includes a plurality of the storage tanks, a plurality of the transfer lines being connected to one another and the plurality of storage tanks, a plurality of loading parts provided on the plurality of transfer lines, a plurality of emergency shutoff devices respectively provided in the plurality of loading arms, a plurality of the bypass lines connected to the plurality of storage tanks, and a plurality of bypass valves respectively provided in the plurality of bypass lines, “the courts have held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960): (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.)” MPEP § 2144.04-VI-B.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Pasquier as modified to include a plurality of the storage tanks, a plurality of the transfer lines being connected to one another and the plurality of storage tanks, a plurality of loading parts provided on the plurality of transfer lines, a plurality of emergency shutoff devices respectively provided in the plurality of loading arms, a plurality of the bypass lines connected to the plurality of storage tanks, and a plurality of bypass valves respectively provided in the plurality of bypass lines. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to allow for increased system capacity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 30th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on Pg. 5 of the response, “Claim 7 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. More specifically, the Office opined that the terms "emergency shutdown system" and "control device" lack adequate written description support. However, as noted above, amended claim 7 is supported by the original disclosure. In particular, at least paragraphs [0038] to [0044] of the specification describe the respective functions and roles of the emergency shutdown system and the control device. The emergency shutdown system is described as being configured to transmit a shutdown signal under specific conditions, and the control device is configured to open the bypass valve in response to that signal. These elements are sufficiently described in view of their functionality. Furthermore, both the emergency shutdown system and the control device refer to well-known types of control equipment in the field of LNG or fluid transfer systems. Given their established technical roles, these components would be readily understood by a person skilled in the art without the need for a detailed structural description.” However, this argument is not persuasive as the terms “emergency shutdown system” and “control device” both recite functions, “emergency shutdown” and “control”, respectively, followed by a nonce term “system” and “device”, respectively, without any modifying structure in the claims or corresponding structure from the specification to define the emergency shutdown system or the control device. Further, the sections identified by the Applicant as supplying stuffiness structure from the specification are sections which further define function of the “emergency shutdown system” and “control device”, but do not define the structure of the components. See MPEP 2181.
Applicant argues on Pg. 5-6 of the response, “Claim 7 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The Office appears to have taken the position that the terms "emergency shutdown system" and "control device" render the claim indefinite. Claim 7, as amended, satisfies the definiteness requirement. The terms at issue are used consistently within their ordinary and customary meanings in the relevant technical field. The emergency shutdown system and control device are clearly described as control-related elements for actuating and responding to emergency signals, respectively. Their roles in the claimed method are functionally and logically defined, particularly in relation to signal transmission and valve operation. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the scope of the claimed invention with reasonable certainty.” However, this argument is not persuasive as the terms “emergency shutdown system” and “control device” both recite functions, “emergency shutdown” and “control”, respectively, followed by a nonce term “system” and “device”, respectively, without any modifying structure in the claims or corresponding structure from the specification to define the emergency shutdown system or the control device. Further, the sections identified by the Applicant as supplying stuffiness structure from the specification are sections which further define function of the “emergency shutdown system” and “control device”, but do not define the structure of the components. See MPEP 2181.
Applicant argues on Pg. 6 of the response, “The cited references do not teach or suggest the coordinated control feature that is now recited in amended claim 7. Specifically, amended claim 7 requires that the emergency shutdown system transmits a shutdown signal to both the emergency shutoff device and the control device substantially simultaneously, and that the bypass valve is opened by the control device in direct response to the same signal. This configuration ensures that the valves operate in a coordinated manner during an emergency shutdown. None of the cited references discloses or suggests such a synchronized control structure. For example, while Vega Perez describes an ESD system in general, it does not disclose that the same shutdown signal is transmitted to both the emergency shutoff valves and the bypass valve controller. Pasquier, Park, and Sakakibara likewise fail to teach this type of interlocked or simultaneous control logic.” However, this argument is not persuasive as Park teaches controlling its bypass valves to be opened and its emergency shut off valves to be closed at the end of regasification (Pg. 8, paragraph 44-48, After the regasification, the NG piping between the pipe connecting device 20 and the LNG regasifying device 10 is blocked by the first, second and third shut-off valves 31, 32, and 33 (S101). Next, the NG in the blocked NG pipe is bypassed to the outside and recovered into the stone drum 12 (see FIG. 1) or the cargo hold 2a (see FIG. 1), which is an LNG / NG storage space (S102). At this time, the bypass of the NG is made by manual opening of the valves 45 and 46, the valve 47 is kept in a closed state. Then, inside the blocked NG pipe, that is, inside the first riser 22 is inactivated (S103). The valve 67 or 68 of FIG. 2 is manually opened for this deactivation, whereby the nitrogen gas in the nitrogen source 62 is blown into the NG piping. At this time, the bypass passages 42 and 44 of the bypass unit 40 described above are kept closed. Next, the pipe connecting device 20 is separated from the regasification device 10 (S104). Accordingly, the buoy 21 of the pipe connecting device 20 is kept floating again at sea while being connected to the second riser 23. Through the stop operation procedure after the end of regasification described above, it is possible to safely disconnect the pipe connecting device 20 from the regasifying device 10 without leakage of NG and residual NG in the pipe) and further at least implies opening of the bypass valves during the emergency shutdown operation to vent natural gas to the atmosphere while disconnecting the regasification device 10 from the pipe connecting device 20 (Pg. 8-9, paragraph 55, 1, 2, 3 and 6, the regasification operation of the marine LNG regasification system is made (S301), while the regasification operation is performed, the regasification system, that is, the regasification of the ship Emergency situations that may be present in the device 10 and the pipe connection device 20 are continuously monitored by the sensing unit 80 shown in FIG. 2 (S302). The automatic control unit 70 determines whether an EBD (Emergency Buoy Disconnection) emergency signal is required from the sensing unit 80 that requires automatic shutoff of the pipe and separation of the pipe connecting device (or separation of the buoy) (S303)). If there is an EBD emergency signal, the automatic control unit 70 stops the operation of the high pressure pump 13 (S304) and closes the first, second and third shut-off valves 31, 32 and 33 to connect the pipes. Blocking the NG pipe of the device 20 (S305). At this time, the operation stop step (S304) of the high pressure pump 13 and the NG pipe blocking step (S305) of the pipe connection device may be performed at the same time, but using a sensor to control the operation stop of the timer or the high pressure pump, After the operation stop step (S304) of (13), it is preferable that the NG pipe blocking step (S305) of the pipe connecting device is made. After the NG pipe is blocked, NG in the blocked NG pipe is exhausted to the atmosphere (S305). Finally, when all of the NG in the blocked NG pipe is exhausted into the atmosphere, the pipe connecting device 20 including the exhausted NG pipe is separated from the regasification device 10. Separation of the pipe connecting device 20 and the regasification device 10 can be made in a variety of ways, for example, the buoy 21 and the pipe connecting device 20 is coupled to the turret (2a) of the vessel connected thereto In the case of including the first riser 22, when the coupling between the buoy 21 and the turret 2a is released through the unlocking of the locking portion 27 shown in FIG. The pipe connection of the first riser 22 can be made in a manner that is separated; Pg. 7-8, paragraph 41, In addition, the NG blocked between the first and second shut-off valves 31 and 32 is the first by the bypass valves 45, 46 and 47 provided in the bypass flow paths 42 and 44. It is recovered to the LNG / NG storage space through the bypass flow path 42 or exhausted to the atmosphere through the second bypass flow path 44; Further, the teachings of exhausting the NG to the atmosphere in emergency situations is at least an implicit disclosure of opening bypass valves 45 and 47 to allow flow through the second bypass flow path 44). See the rejection of claim 7 above.
The rejection of independent claim 7 is maintained for at least the reasons described herein.
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 DEVON T MOORE whose telephone number is 571-272-6555. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:30-5.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/DEVON MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 August 19th, 2025
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763