DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1–2 and 4 are under examination.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/30/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments overcome the indefiniteness rejections, which are withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments do not overcome the rejection of claim 1 in view of Aburomia, as detailed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks dated 12/30/2025, have been fully considered but they are unpersuasive.
Applicant states (page 7) that in Aburomia, the line to 26 and line to RPV is not connected to the line 44. Examiner disagrees. Looking at Figure 4 of Aburomia, the line to 26 and line 44 both come from condenser 48. Therefore, these lines are connected to each other via their shared condenser 48. Accordingly, this argument is unpersuasive.
Applicant’s remaining arguments are moot because they are directed towards limitations newly incorporated into the claims, which are accordingly addressed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 9 and 10 are 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.
Claim 9 recites “the pumping flow pipeline is configured to replenish the water stored in the condensate storage tank to the passive condensation tank.” This language does not make sense. It does not follow to replenish water from a first tank to a second tank. Put another way, it is unclear which tank is replenishing the water from which other tank.
Claims 9 and 10 recite “the water.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims.
Any claim not specifically addressed in this section that depends from a rejected claim is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for its dependency upon an above–rejected claim and for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 102 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aburomia (US 5,426,681).
Regarding claim 1, Aburomia discloses a system (Figs. 1 and 4) for utilizing unused heat-exchange water of a passive auxiliary feedwater system, the system comprising: a steam generator (2) configured to generate steam by heat from a nuclear reactor; a passive condensation tank (36) configured to store heat-exchange water; a condenser (48, Fig. 4) arranged inside the passive condensation tank and spaced apart from a bottom part of the passive condensation tank; a steam supply pipeline (line with valve 50) arranged between the steam generator and an inlet of the condenser and configured to branch the steam off to the condenser when an operation of the nuclear reactor is stopped; a condensate water recovery pipeline (line to 26, Fig. 4) arranged between an outlet of the condenser and the steam generator to recover condensate water from the condenser (48) and supply to the steam generator (“to rpv,” Fig. 4), wherein one end (top end of pipeline leaving bottom of 48 and going into 26, Fig. 4) of the condensate water recovery pipeline is connected to the outlet of the condenser (48); and a residual water discharge pipeline (441 in Fig. 4) arranged between the passive condensation tank (36) and the steam generator (2), wherein one end (upper end) of the residual water discharge pipeline (44) is connected to a lower part of a passive condensation tank (see Fig. 4) and the other end (lower end) of the residual water discharge pipeline (44) is connected to the condensate water recovery pipeline (26) (as shown in Fig. 4, lines 44 and the unlabeled line going from 48 to 26 are connected to each other via 48) such that the heat exchange water stored in the passive condensation tank (36) is configured to be supplied to the steam generator (2) through the condensate water recovery pipeline (line to 26, Fig. 4) (as already cited in the previous clause, water from 36 goes to 26 and then to the steam generator 2 as shown in Fig. 4 as “to rpv”), wherein the heat exchange water supplied to the steam generator is used as a cooling water for the nuclear reactor when an accident occurs in the nuclear reactor (this is an intended use-type limitation2 that is not limiting as long as the apparatus is capable of performing the intended use: in this case, Aburomia’s apparatus is capable of using the above-cited water supplied to steam generator 2 as cooling water for the nuclear reactor when an accident occurs).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 103 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aburomia in view of Faugeras (US 3,352,645).
Regarding claim 2, Aburomia anticipates all the elements of the parent claim, and Aburomia additionally discloses (Fig. 4) wherein the one end (upper end) of the residual water discharge pipeline (44) is connected to a lowest point of the passive condensation tank (36) (the upper end of pipeline 44 contacts and penetrates the lowest portion of tank 36).
Aburomia does not explicitly disclose the claimed shape of the condenser.
Faugeras does. Faugeras is also in the art area of nuclear reactors and, like Aburomia, teaches a condenser tank (6) that condenses vapor into condensed water, separating out non-condensables, and Faugeras further teaches wherein a bottom wall of a passive condensation tank (6) is downwardly inclined such that one side (right side) of the bottom wall has a lower level than that of the other side (left side) of the bottom wall. The ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to utilize the angled shape of Faugeras’ condenser tank for Aburomia’s condenser tank (36, Fig. 4) in order to better separate out the non-condensables (Faugeras, col. 2, ll. 35-37), to control particulate buildup within the condenser (Faugeras, col. 3, ll. 42-43), and to assist with passive, gravity-induced draining, as is known in the art.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aburomia in view of Moon (KR20140047452A), further in view of Ryu (KR101851268B13).
Regarding claim 4, Aburomia anticipates all the elements of the parent claim but does not explicitly disclose the claimed sensor and valve.
Moon is in the same art area of cooling arrangements for nuclear reactors (abstract) and teaches a passive condensation tank (130) that is provided with an automatic valve (V14 or V15 or V16 or V17) installed on a water discharge pipeline (114) from a condenser (120/130). It is well-known in the art that the reactor operator opens and closes the above valves remotely, taking into consideration a normal or an abnormal operating state of the reactor. It is also known in the art that check valves are “automatic” per se, per their intrinsic functionality.
The ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to use Moon’s automatic valve as taught by Moon in order to, as is known in the art, allow decay (residual) heat to dissipate following a reactor accident or shutdown.
This combination does not explicitly teach the claimed water level measuring sensor.
Ryu does. Ryu is also in the art area of cooling tanks for industrial plants and teaches (Fig. 2) a water tank (32) with a sensor (40) that is a water level measuring sensor to measure a level of heat-exchange water within the tank (32).
The skilled artisan would have been motivated to utilize the water level sensor of Ryu in the tank of modified Aburomia in order to ensure the water level inside the tank did not become too high (in which case the system may trigger the water supply pump 35) or too low (the system triggers the drain pump 36), as explained by Ryu on page 5.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aburomia in view of Kang (KR 20130099560 A4).
Regarding claim 9, Aburomia anticipates all the elements of the parent claim but does not explicitly disclose the extra pipe connected between a storage tank and the residual water discharge pipeline.
KR560 does. KR560 is in the same art area of water supply in emergencies for nuclear reactors and teaches (Figs. 1-2) an extra flow pipeline (line leaving the right side of pump 50 and going into the base of tank 50) connected between a condensate storage tank (40) and a residual water discharge pipeline (line with valves V3 and V5), wherein the extra flow pipeline (line leaving the right side of pump 50 and going into the base of tank 50) is configured to supply water stored in the condensate storage tank (40) to the steam generator (10) (this occurs as follows: 40 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 50 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 10 [or 40 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 50 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 20]); and a pumping flow pipeline (line with valve V6) connected between a passive condensation tank (30) and the extra flow pipeline (line leaving the right side of pump 50 and going into the base of tank 50), wherein the pumping flow pipeline (line with valve V6) is configured to replenish the water stored in the condensate storage tank (40) to the passive condensation tank (30) (water flows to replenish tank 40 as follow: 30 [Wingdings font/0xE0] V6 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 40).
The ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to, before the effective filling date of the invention, incorporate the extra lines of KR560 in to the apparatus of modified Aburomia in order to provide a redundant or backup cooling water supply to the reactor/steam generator in case of emergencies. It is extremely well known in the nuclear reactor art to provide multiple cooling tanks with associated lines and valves in case a primary, secondary, or tertiary cooling system fails.
Regarding claim 10, modified Aburomia teaches all the elements of the parent claim and further discloses an auxiliary charging pump (50) on the extra flow pipeline (line leaving the right side of pump 50 and going into the base of tank 50) for pumping the water in the condensate storage tank (40) to the steam generator (10) or the passive condensation tank (30) (this occurs as follows: 40 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 50 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 10 [or 40 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 50 [Wingdings font/0xE0] 20]). The skilled artisan would have been motivated to utilize this arrangement prior to the effective filing date of the invention for the same reasons as described above in response to claim 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LILY C GARNER whose telephone number is (571)272-9587. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 CT.
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.
Please be aware that, as of October 1, 2025, the PTO has implemented a policy of one interview per round of examination. Additional interviews require managerial approval.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jack Keith can be reached at (571) 272-6878. 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.
LILY CRABTREE GARNER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3646
/LILY C GARNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
1 The Aburomia patent has several incorrect or unclear reference numerals — 44 is not mentioned in the description, but its relative equivalent is shown in Fig. 1 as #40.
2 See MPEP § 2111–2115. MPEP § 2114(II) states:
A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.
[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.”
Additionally, case law dictates that “Claims directed to apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than functions.” In re Danly, 120 USPQ 528, 531.
3 See the 16-page foreign reference in the file 05/21/2025.
4 see the 7-page foreign reference in the file 11/05/2025.