DETAILED ACTION
In response to remarks filed on 8 September 2026
Status of Claims
Claims 1-14 are pending;
Claims 1-14 were previously presented;
Claims 1-14 are rejected herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 8 September 2026 have been fully considered and they are not persuasive. With regards to the outer container, the feature as claimed requires the outer container to be rigid and have a flexible portion. First, the outer container of Suzuki is made of a solid (i.e. rigid) material. Additionally, the reinforcements 12 and 13 which are part of the outer container of Suzuki impart rigidness and structural integrity. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim limitation is met considering the term “rigid” is broad and can be interpreted as solid, firm, hard, etc. Regarding the cross-section limitation, the limitation is relative to the point of view of an observer. The cross-section interpreted as the transversal cross-section is the same for both claims 3 and 4. Claim 4 uses “substantially” which provides enough broadness that an almost rectangular shape -which is also polygonal- can read on the limitation. Examiner would be willing to allow the case if limitations describing the structural features making up the rod and sphere in Figures 5 and 6 are added to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-9 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki (Japan Patent Publication No. S60-57593).
As to Claim 1, Suzuki discloses a storage tank comprising:
An outer container (4) having a first closable opening (9); and
An inner container (3) disposed within said outer container (4) and having a second closable opening (5); wherein said outer container and inner container are sealed with respect to each other (The bags are airtight and watertight), wherein said inner container (3) is adapted to be filled and/or emptied with a liquid through said second closable opening (5), and wherein a space between the outer container and the inner container is adapted to be filled with liquid through the first closable opening (9);
Wherein the outer container (4) is rigid (via 12, 13) and comprises at least one flexible portion (Pleated side wall of 4 that expands and contract -i.e. flex-) configured to flex so as to expand and contract in response to pressure and/or temperature variations to which the storage tank is subjected; and
Wherein the at least one flexible portion (Pleated sidewall of 4 that expands and contract) defines at least part of a wall of the outer container (4); and
Wherein the storage tank further comprises first (24) and second valves (22/23) for controlling the flow of liquid through the first and second closable openings, respectively.
As to Claim 2, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Suzuki also discloses wherein said at least one flexible portion (Pleated sidewall of 4) comprises a first surface which is linked to an adjacent surface (Conical top of 4) of the outer container by a smooth rounded or chamfered transition portion of the outer container.
As to Claim 3, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Suzuki also discloses wherein the outer container (4) comprises a closed body having a transversal polygonal cross-section (In the cross section shown in Figure 1, the container has five sides), said at least one flexible portion (Pleated sidewall of 4) being formed by at least one side wall and/or end wall of said body (Figure 1).
As to Claim 4, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 3 (Refer to Claim 3 discussion). Suzuki also discloses wherein said body of the outer container (4) comprises a substantially rectangular transversal cross-section (Figure 1. “Substantially” is broad enough to read on the prior art and three of the sides follow a rectangular pattern).
As to Claim 5, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Suzuki also discloses wherein the outer container (4) comprises a closed cylindrical body having a circular transversal cross-section (10 is described as rings. Therefore, the transversal cross-section viewed from the top is circular), said at least one flexible portion (Pleated sidewall of 4) being formed by at least one end wall of said body.
As to Claim 6, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Suzuki also discloses wherein the outer container (4) is made of a polymer material or a homogenous material (4).
As to Claim 7, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). Suzuki also discloses wherein the inner container (3) is made of an elastomer (The material has elasticity which allows the inner container to expand and contract).
As to Claim 8, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). However, Suzuki also discloses further comprising a hollow rigid member (6, 7) connected to the second closable opening (5) and extending inside the inner container (3), the hollow rigid member (6, 7) being configured for use in emptying and filling the inner container (3).
As to Claim 9, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 8 (Refer to Claim 8 discussion). Suzuki also discloses wherein said hollow rigid member (6, 7) comprises a rod (6) and an end body (7) at a distal end relative to said second closable opening (5), said end body having rounded side walls (Element 7 has two semicircular sides and therefore there are rounded sidewalls) projecting on either side of said rod (6).
As to Claim 14, Suzuki discloses teaches a method (The claimed method steps are capable of being performed in view of the structure disclosed by Suzuki) of operating the storage tank according to Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion), said method comprising at a topside facility, filling the inner container (3) with a liquid and filling the space between the inner container (3) and the outer container (4) with a liquid; closing the first and second closable openings (via 22/23 and 24); transporting the storage tank to a subsea location with the closable openings closed; at the subsea location, connecting the second closeable opening (5) of the inner container (3) to a subsea installation and opening the first closable opening (6) of the outer container (4) to the surrounding seawater; emptying liquid from the inner container (3) and allowing seawater into the space between the outer container (4) and the inner container (3) to thereby compensate for volume changes of the inner container (3); and disconnecting the inner container (3) from the subsea installation and closing the first and second closable openings (via 22/23 and 24) before the storage tank is lifted from the subsea location and transported back to a topside facility for refilling (The claimed method steps are capable of being performed in view of the structure disclosed by Suzuki).
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.
Claims 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (Japan Patent Publication No. S60-57593) in view of Thompson (U.S. Patent No. 2,412,434).
As to Claim 10, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 9 (Refer to Claim 9 discussion). However, Suzuki is silent about wherein said rod comprises through bores, wherein said rounded walls of said end body surround a part of the rod in which the through bores are formed, and wherein said rounded walls are spaced one from the other. Thompson discloses a rod (7) comprising through bores (12), wherein said rounded walls (9) of said end body surround a part of the rod (7) in which the through bores are formed (The end of rod 7 contains also bores 12), and wherein said rounded walls are spaced one from the other (Left side wall is half of 9 and a right sidewall is the other half of 9. Each half is spaced from the other to form a void/space within 9). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the rod with through bores, wherein said rounded walls of said end body surround a part of the rod in which the through bores are formed, and wherein said rounded walls are spaced one from the other. The motivation would have been to provide further means to collect or discharge fluid.
As to Claim 11, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 8 (Refer to Claim 8 discussion). However, Suzuki is silent about further comprising at least one channel having a plurality of apertures along its length, said at least one channel being disposed against the hollow rigid member and/or an inner face of a wall of the outer container. Thompson discloses at least one channel (Thompson: 5) having a plurality of apertures along its length (Thompson: One aperture at one end of 5 near 4 and the other opening at the opposite end of 5 near 7), said at least one channel being disposed against the hollow rigid member (Thompson: 7) and/or an inner face of a wall of the outer container. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide at least one channel having a plurality of apertures along its length, said at least one channel being disposed against the hollow rigid member and/or an inner face of a wall of the outer container. The motivation would have been to provide further means to collect or discharge fluid.
Claims 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (Japan Patent Publication No. S60-57593) in view of Chitwood et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0325927).
As to Claim 12, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). However, Suzuki is silent about further comprising monitoring means connected to the inner container and/or the outer container and being configured to monitor volume variations inside the storage tank. Chitwood discloses monitoring means connected to the inner container and/or the outer container and being configured to monitor volume variations inside the storage tank (Paragraph 0021). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary sill in the art to provide monitoring means connected to the inner container and/or the outer container and being configured to monitor volume variations inside the storage tank. The motivation would have been to monitor the status of the system.
As to Claim 13, Suzuki discloses the invention of Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 discussion). However, Suzuki is silent about a transport system comprising a cage and a plurality of storage tanks, said storage tanks being disposed within said cage, and said cage comprising a suspension element configured to enable the suspension of the cage from a lifting machine. Chitwood discloses a cage (100) with storage tanks (120, 130) disposed within, said cage comprising a suspension element configured to enable the suspension of the cage from a lifting machine (Paragraph 0092: “Additionally, according to one or more embodiments disclosed herein, during deployment operations, the storage tank may be lowered (or ballasted) to bring the object just below the surface such that the attached buoyancy maintains a net positive buoyancy. Two or more vessels may then pay out a predetermined amount of weighted cable, or category cable, to overcome the attached buoyancy and submerge the storage tank. In this manner the package may be deployed close to the seafloor by the vessels. Finally, the equipment package will be landed on the seafloor by either removing or de-ballasting the attached buoyancy of the object, or by adding weight to the equipment package sufficient to counteract any positive buoyancy”). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a transport system comprising a cage and a plurality of storage tanks, said storage tanks being disposed within said cage, and said cage comprising a suspension element configured to enable the suspension of the cage from a lifting machine. The motivation would have been to lower the system into position.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 10:00AM to 6:00PM 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, AMBER ANDERSON can be reached at (571) 270-5281. 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.
/EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
