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 .
Status of Claims
Currently claims 1-11 and 14-20 are pending, claims 12-13 are cancelled, and claims 1-2, 7, 11, 14, and 17-19 have been amended.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-11, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeung (U.S. 11,109,508) in view of Bishop (U.S. 2018/0328157), Tseng (US 2004/0084193) and Piech (U.S. 2021/0364335).
With respect to claim 1, Yeung discloses a fracturing system, comprising:
a turbine engine (figure 1a, 125);
a fracturing fluid pump (133) powered by the turbine engine via at least one reduction gearbox (127);
an electric or diesel engine (motors 195-196) for powering a hydraulic system for lubricating the turbine engine or the fracturing fluid pump or for powering a cooling system for cooling the turbine engine (as the motors power the cooling system, column 3 rows 25-45) or the fracturing fluid pump; Yeung fails to disclose,
a first fire-control subsystem associated with the turbine engine; and
a second fire-control subsystem associated with the electric motor or diesel engine,
wherein the first fire-control subsystem and the second fire-control subsystem share a fire- control substance storage unit and are otherwise independent; and
wherein the fracturing system further comprises a weighing unit for monitoring a remaining amount of a fire-control substance in the shared fire-control substance storage unit by weighing the shared fire-control substance storage unit.
Bishop, paragraph 0124, discloses using a fire suppressant system with bottles, piping, and outlets to assist in suppressing a fire at one or more targets in a system 100 such as the engine, pumps, or other transmission.
Tseng, discloses an automatic anti-fire apparatus for an engine that suppresses a fire detected in an engine to suppress it utilizing sensors to detect various conditions that would indicate a fire, such a thermometer, smoke flame, or heat, paragraphs 0050-0063.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bishop and Tseng for suppressing fires in an engine and in an overall system such as a gas turbine engine fracking system into the system of Yeung, such a combination would allow the various elements (such as the turbine engine and the motors) to have piping and outlets placed to suppress a fire detected there to prevent further damage from a fire in such areas. The combination is such that there is a singular supply, and the subsystems are the piping, nozzles, and sensors associated with the two distinct areas. That is, turbine engine would have piping and outlets associated with it, and the motor would have piping and outlets associated with it, where each would also have a sensor for detecting a fire at that location. Furthermore, having selectively controllable valves, such that the suppressant moves from the containers/bottles to where the fire is happening.
Piech, figure 1 and paragraph 0051, discloses using a scale to weight a tank of its content to determine the quantity of suppressant.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize weighing a tank as disclosed by Piech into the system of Yeung as modified, to allow for a user to know the quantity of suppressant left inside a tank.
With respect to claim 2, Yeung as modified discloses the first fire-control subsystem comprises:
a first sensor (sensors disclosed by Tseng, being utilized to detect a fire in the engine);
the shared fire-control substance storage unit (the container as disclosed by Bishop);
a first pipeline unit connected to the first fire-control substance storage unit (piping from tank to outlet associated with the turbine engine);
a first flow-control unit disposed in the first pipeline unit for controlling a flow of fire-control substance from the first fire-control substance storage unit (a valve to control said flow when the detection occurs, Bishop paragraph 0124; though not disclosed such valves are known in the art to be electronically actuation to allow the movement of suppressant from the containers/bottles to the outlets, Tseng paragraph abstract, being the control device to actuate the fire extinguishing device); and
a first electronic controller for (the systems controller, Yeung column 12 rows 1-15, where overall controllers are noted used in Tseng, paragraph 0045, where the system has sensors and a control device, as well as a control device with a processor that generates warnings and process the detection signals to determine if there is a fire or not and to actuate the system or not, paragraph 0049): receiving a first signal from the first sensor (Tseng, receiving signal, paragraph 0049); processing the first signal to generate a second signal (said second signal being the signal to actuate the system); and sending the second signal to the first flow-control unit (Tseng, abstract, and paragraph 0048-0050).
With respect to claim 3, Yeung as modified discloses the first sensor is disposed in a cabin enclosing the turbine engine and comprises at least one of: a thermometer (Tseng, paragraph 0054); a flame detector (Tseng, paragraph 0054); or a combustible gas trace detector (Tseng, paragraph 0054).
With respect to claim 4, Yeung as modified discloses the first sensor comprises the thermometer (Tseng, paragraph 0054); and the first electronic controller is further configured to:
compare a temperature reading of the thermometer to a predefined threshold temperature value (Tseng paragraph 0045-0050);
generate the second signal to the first flow-control unit to open the first pipeline unit to allow the fire-control substance to flow to the cabin for the turbine engine when the temperature reading is above the predefined threshold temperature value (as understood in the combination, the fire extinguishing device of Tseng, being the system described in Bishop, the activating the system being allowing the canisters to dispends the substance to the cabin of the turbine engine); and
generate the second signal to the first flow-control unit to close the first pipeline unit to disallow the fire-control substance to flow to the cabin for the turbine engine when the temperature reading is below the predefined threshold temperature value (as closing a valve/deactivating a system once the sensed conditions are gone is well known in the art, allowing for suppressant material to not be completely used up and only used as needed).
With respect to claim 5, Yeung as modified discloses the first sensor comprises the flame detector (Tseng: paragraph 0054); and the first electronic controller is further configured to: generate the second signal to the first flow-control unit to open the first pipeline unit to allow the fire-control substance to flow to the cabin for the turbine engine when the first signal indicates that a flame has been detected (as disclosed in the above combination, where the signal generated from the detector sends a signal to the controller, the controller determines there is a fire, and tells the system to activate the suppression system for a nozzle in the turbine engine cabin); and
generate the second signal to the first flow-control unit to close the first pipeline unit to disallow the fire-control substance to flow to the cabin for the turbine engine when the first signal indicates that flame has not been detected (as closing a valve/deactivating a system once the sensed conditions are gone is well known in the art, allowing for suppressant material to not be completely used up and only used as needed).
With respect to claim 6, Yeung as modified discloses the first sensor comprises the combustible gas trace detector (Tseng, paragraph 0054, being a smoke detector); and the first electronic controller is further configured to: generate the second signal to the first flow-control unit to open the first pipeline unit to allow the fire-control substance to flow to the cabin for the turbine engine when the first signal indicates that a combustible gas trace level is above a predefined trace value detected (as disclosed in the above combination, where the signal generated from the detector sends a signal to the controller, the controller determines there is a fire, and tells the system to activate the suppression system for a nozzle in the turbine engine cabin, a smoke detector working where a level of detectable gas goes above a value to then trigger same smoke detector); and generate the second signal to the first flow-control unit to close the first pipeline unit to disallow the fire-control substance to flow to the cabin for the turbine engine when the first signal indicates that a combustible gas trace level is below the predefined trace value (as closing a valve/deactivating a system once the sensed conditions are gone is well known in the art, allowing for suppressant material to not be completely used up and only used as needed).
With respect to claim 7, Yeung as modified discloses the first pipeline unit (Bishop, being the pipeline that goes from the bottles to the engine (being the engine cabin): begins at the first fire-control substance storage unit (a first one of the containers or bottles of Bishop) and end at the cabin for the turbine engine (being in the cabin of the turbine engine to then supply suppressant to the engine); but fails to specifically disclose at least one nozzle at an end at the cabin for the turbine engine.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the at least one nozzle at an end at the cabin for the turbine engine, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04. The placement of the nozzle at the end of the cabin for the turbine engine and facing the turbine engine would allow the nozzle to be directed at and apply the suppressant to the engine as desired in the event of a fire.
With respect to claim 9, Yeung as modified discloses the fire-control substance comprises one of: carbon dioxide gas (Bishop paragraph 0124); a fire-control foam; a fire-control powder; or halogenated alkanes.
With respect to claim 10, Yeung as modified discloses the first electronic controller comprises a programable logic controller or a microcontroller (column 12 rows 1-10, discloses a programmable logic controller).
With respect to claim 11, Yeung as modified discloses the second fire-control subsystem (being the subsystem having the piping and nozzle going towards the motor, and a detector for said motor, as seen in the rejection of claim 1) comprises:
a second sensor (Sensor of Tseng at the engine/motor);
a shared storage unit (Bishop, paragraph 0124 bottles/containers));
a second pipeline unit connected to the second fire-control substance storage unit (piping going from the bottles to the nozzle outlet of the motor); a second flow-control unit disposed in the second pipeline unit for controlling a flow of the fire-control substance from the second fire-control substance storage unit (being the valve/activation device for the second line); but fails to disclose a second electronic controller for: receiving a third signal from the second sensor; processing the third signal to generate a fourth signal; and sending the fourth signal to the second flow-control unit. The combination discloses a controller receiving a signal from the sensor processing the signal and telling the activation device to activate (as shown above by Tseng) but not using a second electronic controller.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a second electronic controller (doing the function as disclosed above being understood using a first controller), since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (a second controller) of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04(VI-B). Such duplication would allow for each of the two subsystems to have their own controllers for processing that subsystems sensor’s signals and determine activation, rather than have one singular controller.
With respect to claim 14, Yeung as modified discloses the fire-control substance monitoring unit which comprises the weighing unit (as disclosed by Piech) and an alarm unit (Piech, paragraph 0059), and wherein the alarm unit is configured to:
set-off an alarm for indicating that the shared fire-control substance storage unit is low in the fire-control substance when the remaining amount of the fire-control substance in the shared fire-control substance storage unit is below a predefined minimum fire-control substance level as monitored by the weighing unit (Piech paragraphs 0058-0059 and .
With respect to claim 15, Yeung discloses further comprises semi-trailer as a platform for hosting other components of the fracturing system (see figure 1a, semi-trailer platform shown).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeung, Bishop, and Tseng as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Galindo (U.S. 2018/0347467).
With respect to claim 8, Yeung discloses the turbine engine comprises an air intake path (intake duct 137); and the at least one nozzle is disposed within the air intake path.
Galindo, figure 1, abstract, paragraph 0025, and paragraph 0035, disclose applying the fire extinguishing material into an air intake, as utilizing such extinguishing agent and cooling into the turbine allows for turbine engine to be cooled and suppressed at the intake location, such applying the suppressant via the air intake being understood to also cool the system.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the nozzle within the air intake path as disclosed by Galindo into the system of Yeung as modified, to improve cooling of the engine as well as the desired application of a fire suppressant material.
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeung, Bishop, and Tseng as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Oechring (U.S. 2020/0109616).
With respect to claim 16, Yeung discloses the semi-trailer comprises a main body portion (shown in figure 1a) but fails to disclose a gooseneck portion raising above the main body portion.
Oechring discloses placing a fracturing pump system on a trailer with a gooseneck, allowing for a roller system on the gooseneck of the trailer to allow electricians to smoothly pull cables onto the gooseneck without damaging the cables; a VFD liquid cooling system on the gooseneck of the electric powered pump trailer; a motor control center on the gooseneck of the trailer with ladders and handrails to allow easy maintenance (paragraph 0014).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to utilize a gooseneck and elements of the system placed on the gooseneck as disclosed by Oechring into the system of Yeung to allow for easier maintenance and access to various systems.
With respect to claim 17, Yeung discloses the turbine engine, the fracturing fluid pump is disposed on the main body portion of the semi-trailer (as shown in figure 1), and the electric motor or diesel engine is disposed on the gooseneck portion of the semi-trailer (as shown by Oechring).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the auxiliary mover (motor) of Yeung on the gooseneck portion of the semi-trailer, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04(VI0C). Please not in the instant application applicant has not disclosed criticality for the claimed limitations.
With respect to claims 18-20, Yeung discloses the shared fire control substance storage unit and the turbine engine, but fails to specifically disclose the first fire-control substance storage unit is disposed on the gooseneck portion of the semi-trailer, or the first fire-control substance storage unit is disposed next to the turbine engine on the main body portion of the semi-trailer.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the first fire-control substance storage unit is disposed on the gooseneck portion of the semi-trailer, or the first fire-control substance storage unit is disposed near the turbine engine on the main body portion of the semi-trailer, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04(VI0C). Please not in the instant application applicant has not disclosed criticality for the claimed limitations.
With respect to claim 20, Yeung as modified the hydraulic system and/or the cooling system are disposed on the gooseneck portion of the semi-trailer (as Oechring discloses such placement, paragraph 0014 and 0084).
Response to Arguments/Amendments
The Amendment filed (10/01/2025) has been entered. Currently claims 1-11 and 14-20 are pending, claims 12-13 are cancelled, and claims 1-2, 7, 11, 14, and 17-19 have been amended.
Applicants’ amendments to the claims have overcome part of the previous rejection set forth in the Office Action dated (04/01/2025).
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicants Arguments, filed 10/01/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 13 and 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Piech as shown above.
Applicant's arguments filed 10/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with respect to the first and second fire-control subsystems being independent minus the shared storage unit. The prior art discloses there being the turbine engine and the motor.
Bishop, paragraph 0124, discloses using containers or bottles as well as a network of fluid conduit that go to sprinklers at one or more target areas of the system. This is taken thus that, you have a shared supply, and then the network has subsections/subsystems that go to different target areas. Tseng then is utilized to show what such a subsection at the engine (or motor) would include, such as a sensor, outlet, and piping going to that area. Applicant makes arguments towards duplication of the system, which the examiner disagrees with. It’s all one system, that merely has two separate branches in the system, one branch (being a subsystem) that goes to one element, having its piping, valves, outlets, and sensors associated with that target area of the system, and a second subsystem going to a different target area. The only duplication being done, is that on the controllers, as there is noted no rational disclosed in the specification of why two different controllers is necessary (rather than one controller utilizing inputs from each target area to then control the fluid flow to that area). The system itself is not being duplicated, its one single system, with two different target areas that each require piping going to that area, their own sensors, and outlets at that area, as well as control of fluid from the containers/bottles to that area (such as a valve). Applicant makes an argument that this would require more piping and control manifolds, but the examiner disagrees, as piping and controls is already needed to control fluid flow to the two separate target areas of the system.
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 JOSEPH A GREENLUND whose telephone number is (571)272-0397. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm EST.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached at 571-270-1814. 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.
/JOSEPH A GREENLUND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752