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 .
Priority
The claim to priority as a 371 filing of PCT/CA2021/050489, filed on April 12, 2021, which claims benefit to 63/008,015, filed on April 10, 2020 is acknowledged in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on October 11, 2022 has been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 12 and 25-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by Oqab et al. (US Pub. 2021/0270210) (new cited).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Oqab et al. discloses an engine for producing thrust having a system (100) for inductive heating of dispersed metallic particle (Par. 18, “The engine 100 includes a fuel supply 104 configured to supply the fuel 108, a chamber 112, an induction heating assembly 110 (also referred to herein as simply assembly 110) for energizing the fuel 10”’ Par. 21, “Generally, the fuel 108 is able to be heated inductively. For example, the fuel may be an electrically conducting fuel, such as a reactive metal compound. More particularly, the fuel may be a micro/nano-thermite including an oxidizer and a reducing agent (e.g. a metal and a metal oxide)”), the system comprising: a particle-laden flow including a carrier phase comprising a carrier fluid and a dispersed phase comprising the dispersed metallic particles (Par. 21, “Generally, the fuel 108 is able to be heated inductively. For example, the fuel may be an electrically conducting fuel, such as a reactive metal compound. More particularly, the fuel may be a micro/nano-thermite including an oxidizer and a reducing agent (e.g. a metal and a metal oxide)”); Par. 42, “The engine 500 includes the fuel supply 104, the induction heating assembly 110”); an inductive heating subsystem for inductively heating the dispersed metallic particles, the inductive heating subsystem comprising a magnetic field generator for generating a magnetic field for heating the dispersed metallic particles via at least one of hysteresis and Joule heating mechanisms (Par. 31, “The power supplying circuit 116 may be an electronic oscillator or other suitably circuitry for passing a high frequency alternating current through the coil 114 to induce a magnetic field 115”; Par. 33, “The induction heating assembly 110 may further induce magnetic hysteresis in the fuel 108. Hysteresis loss is caused by the magnetization and demagnetization of the fuel 108 to produce heat. When magnetic force is applied, the molecules of the fuel 108 are aligned in a first direction. When the magnetic force is reversed, the fuel 108 opposes the reversal of magnetism, resulting in hysteresis loss, and hence heating the fuel 108. In some implementations, induction heating assembly 110 may employ both magnetic hysteresis and induction heating via eddy currents to energize the fuel 108”); and a control unit for controlling an operating parameter of the inductive heating subsystem to control a flow parameter of the particle-laden flow, the flow parameter being any one or more of an induction heating timescale, a particle thermal timescale, a heat diffusion in the carrier phase, and a particle clustering of the dispersed metallic particles (Par. 31, “The power supplying circuit 116 may be an electronic oscillator or other suitably circuitry for passing a high frequency alternating current through the coil 114 to induce a magnetic field 115. In some implementations, the power supplying circuit 116 is further configured to vary the current passing through the coil 114, thereby varying the magnetic field. In other implementations, the coil 114 may be configured to move relative to the chamber 112 to vary the magnetic field”; Since the magnetic field could be controlled by the power supply circuit, this implies that the power supplying circuit is configured to control the induction heating timescale; Par. 50, “In particular, the processor may determine, based on the desired heating, combustion and/or propulsion profiles, the secondary fluids to be mixed with the fuel 108”, this control of the fluid mixing implies a control of quantity of metallic particles).
Regarding claim 2, Oqab et al. discloses the magnetic field generator includes an electromagnetic coil (114) for generating a high frequency external alternating magnetic field (115) (Fig. 1; Par. 31, “The coil 114 therefore forms a solenoid with the chamber 112 in its center. The power supplying circuit 116 may be an electronic oscillator or other suitably circuitry for passing a high frequency alternating current through the coil 114 to induce a magnetic field 115”).
Regarding claim 6, Oqab et al. discloses the operating parameter is an alternating current magnetic field frequency (Par. 31, “The coil 114 therefore forms a solenoid with the chamber 112 in its center. The power supplying circuit 116 may be an electronic oscillator or other suitably circuitry for passing a high frequency alternating current through the coil 114 to induce a magnetic field 115”).
Regarding claim 25, Oqab et al. discloses using the particle-laden flow as a fuel, selecting the dispersed metallic particles based on the dispersed metallic particles having a Curie temperature above a reaction ignition point of the particle-laden flow, and wherein the inductively heating the dispersed metallic particles includes inductively heating and igniting the dispersed metallic particles in a turbulent flow field (Par. 31, 33, 40 and 58).
Regarding claim 26, Oqab et al. discloses wherein controlling the flow configuration includes controlling carrier fluid and dispersed metallic particle characteristics at an ignition point of the particle-laden flow for an efficient combustion (Par. 21, 23, 39, 45-46, 50, 52-53, 57 and 59).
Regarding claim 27, Oqab et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter (Par. 23) includes reducing inhomogeneities in either the disperse phase or the carrier phase to improve combustion behaviour of the particle-laden flow (Par. 21, 23, 39, 45-46, 50, 52-53, 57 and 59).
Regarding claim 28, Oqab et al. discloses using the particle-laden flow as a fuel (108), and wherein controlling the flow configuration includes optimizing the flow configuration at an ignition point of the fuel to obtain a homogeneous heat release and distribution (Par. 23).
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(s) 4, 13 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oqab et al. (US Pub. 2021/0270210).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Oqab et al. discloses the flow parameter is controlled (Par. 23) according to an induction heating model, the induction heating model including model parameters including the induction timescale, an initial temperature of the dispersed metallic particles (Par. 21, 31 and 33), and a Curie temperature of the disperse metallic particles, wherein the initial temperature and the Curie temperature are known and the induction heating timescale is a user-defined model parameter (Par. 40 and 50). Oqab et al. does not explicitly disclose the flow parameter is control according to an induction heating model represent by the equation (see claims 4 and 13). However, Oqab et al. discloses the Curie temperature, the induction heating parameter (Par. 40 and 58). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Oqab et al., the flow parameter is control according to an induction heating model represent by the equation, for the purpose of precisely temperature control to induce a reaction is achieved using the Curie temperature of materials in the fuel.
Regarding claim 19, Oqab et al. discloses varying the inductive heating of the dispersed metallic particles by adjusting a parameter of the magnetic field, the parameter being an alternating current magnetic field frequency, an alternating current magnetic field magnitude, a magnetic coil size, or a magnetic coil geometry (Fig. 1; Par. 31-33).
Claim(s) 7, 14, 17, 20-24 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oqab et al. (US Pub. 2021/0270210) in view of Miyamoto et al. (US Pub. 2003/0185995) (new cited).
Regarding claim 7, Oqab et al. discloses substantially all features of the claimed invention as set forth above including the operating parameter is a frequency of the magnetic field, and wherein the control unit (via power supply circuit 116) configured to vary the current passing through the coil (114), thereby varying the magnetic field to vary the induction heating timescale to produce a more homogeneous thermal distribution of the carrier fluid (Par. 31-33) except the control unit adjusts the frequency to decrease the induction heating timescale to produce a more homogeneous thermal distribution of the carrier fluid. Myamoto et al. discloses the control unit adjusts the frequency to vary the induction heating (Fig. 8-10; Par. 29, 63, 65 and 88-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Oqab et al., the control unit adjusts the frequency to decrease the induction heating timescale to produce a more homogeneous thermal distribution of the carrier fluid, as taught by Myamoto et al., for the purpose of controlling the induction heating to heat the particles.
Regarding claim 14, Miyamoto et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter includes adjusting the flow parameter according to an induction model (Fig. 13) (Fig. 13, Par. 59 and 71-72, “allows speed of the material for thermal spraying to be adjusted between speed "V1" exhibiting low speed and speed "V2" exhibiting high speed. Therefore, the present embodiment is advantageous in enlarging an adjustable range of temperature and speed for the material for thermal spraying, and in obtaining the thermal sprayed layer having the desired characteristics”) according to an induction model, wherein the induction heating timescale is a model parameter of the induction model and wherein the induction heating timescale is the only model parameter that is user-defined. (Fig. 9; Par. 57).
Regarding claim 17, Miyamoto et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter (Par. 59 and 71-72) includes imparting by a frequency of magnetic field a decrease in induction heating timescale and the particle thermal timescale to produce a more homogeneous thermal distribution of the carrier fluid (Fig. 8-9 and 13; Par. 55, 59, 63 and 66).
Regarding claim 20, Miyamoto et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter (Par. 59 and 71-72) includes the particle thermal timescale for the dispersed phase to impede heat transfer from the disperse phase to the carrier phase (Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 21, Miyamoto et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter (Par. 59 and 71-72) includes decreasing the particle thermal timescale to increase a heat transfer rate for rapidly transferring heat from the dispersed phase to the carrier phase to produce a more homogeneous fluid temperature distribution (Fig. 10-13).
Regarding claim 22, Miyamoto et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter (Par. 59 and 71-72) includes decreasing the particle thermal response time to increase heat transfer from the dispersed phase to the carrier phase to make the particle-laden flow more thermally homogeneous (Fig. 8-13).
Regarding claim 23, Miyamoto et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter (Par. 59 and 71-72) includes increasing the particle thermal timescale to reduce heat transfer to the carrier phase (Fig. 8-13; Par. 29).
Regarding claim 24, Miyamoto et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter (Par. 59 and 71-72) includes increasing the particle thermal response time to reduce an amount of heat transferred from the dispersed metallic particle to the carrier fluid (Fig. 8-13; Par. 29).
Regarding claim 29, Miyamoto et al. discloses wherein adjusting the flow parameter (Par. 59 and 71-72) includes decreasing the induction heating timescale to decrease the particle clustering and increase a heating rate (Fig. 8-13; Par. 29).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7828. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9AM - 9PM.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571)272-5567. 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.
/HUNG D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 10/31/2025
HUNG D. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3761