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, 3, 8, 10–11, 13, 15, 17, and 21–24 are under examination.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the 102 rejections, which are herein withdrawn. An updated search was performed, and 103 rejections are newly made herein.
Applicant has added new claims 21–24. Examiner has reviewed these claims. Unfortunately, these claims simply describe a conventional boiling water reactor (BWR) control rod drive mechanism (CRDM) reactivity control system, in which valve-controlled hydraulic (fluid) pressure is used and manipulated to insert/withdraw control rods from the bottom of the reactor vessel. Examiner finds nothing in these new claims that is not how conventional BWR hydraulic control units (HCUs) have operated for decades.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks dated 12/11/2025, have been fully considered but are moot because they are directed towards limitations newly added into the claims, which are therefore addressed below.
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.
Claims 1, 8, 10–11, 15, 17, and 21–24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steiner (US 2003/0202625) in view of Sato (US 4,263,580).
Regarding claim 1, Steiner discloses a hydraulic control unit ("HCU") configured to control a control rod drive mechanism ("CRDM") configured to control the nuclear flux produced by a nuclear reactor, the HCU comprising: a plurality of valves (having solenoids 92) configured to attenuate a fluid pressure within the CRDM (58), wherein the attenuation of the fluid pressure is configured to cause a control rod (54) of the CRDM to be inserted or withdrawn from a reactor vessel (10) of the nuclear reactor; and a control circuit comprising: a plurality of relay interfaces (“relays,” ¶ 34), wherein each relay of the plurality of relay interfaces is electrically coupled to a valve of the plurality of valves (¶ 34 and Fig. 3); a controller (76) electrically coupled to the plurality of relay interfaces (within 76, ¶ 34); and a communications circuit (74) communicably coupled to a header controller (72), wherein the communications circuit (74) is configured to transmit and receive signals between the controller (76) and the header controller (¶ 19 and Fig. 2).
Steiner does not explicitly disclose measuring current and voltage within each valve. Sato does. Sato is also in the art area of control circuits for nuclear reactors (RPV 102, Fig. 1) and teaches a control circuit (Fig. 3) for solenoid valves (V1-V4, Fig. 1 having coils L, Fig. 3) that is configured to measure a current within each valve of the plurality of valves and a voltage within each valve of the plurality of valves (the current and voltage of the solenoid coil L [which each solenoid valve V1-V4 has] is measured and compared to reference voltage values, col., 9, ll. 3–18).
A purpose for this teaching is, as described by Sato (col. 9, ll. 34-61), to determine if the solenoid valve is operating correctly or incorrectly: “When the switch SW is closed and the coil is energized, the impedance of the coil when the valve is stuck differs from that when the valve operates correctly, and hence the currents flowing therethrough are different .... whether the valve has operated properly or not is determined by the change of the excitation current in the abnormal state and the normal state.” This information is processed and ultimately the control room “discriminates reliable information and non-reliable information and allows display of only the reliable information” to the operators, col. 14, ll. 6-9.
The combination of the current and voltage measurements of Sato with the control circuit of Steiner would have produced a control circuit for controlling a CRDM in a nuclear reactor, wherein the current/voltage of the circuit’s solenoid valves were monitored to ensure they are operating correctly, i.e., Applicant's claimed invention.
This combination would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as it produces no unexpected results. In view of the prior art teachings of Steiner, a person of ordinary skill would have predicted that combining Sato’s current/voltage monitoring with Steiner's control circuit would have produced Applicant's claimed invention of a nuclear reactor control circuit with self-monitoring capabilities.
The skilled person’s motivation for the combination would have been the expectation of, as described by Sato (col. 9, ll. 34-61), to determine if the solenoid valve is operating correctly or incorrectly: “When the switch SW is closed and the coil is energized, the impedance of the coil when the valve is stuck differs from that when the valve operates correctly, and hence the currents flowing therethrough are different .... whether the valve has operated properly or not is determined by the change of the excitation current in the abnormal state and the normal state.” This information is processed and ultimately the control room “discriminates reliable information and non-reliable information and allows display of only the reliable information” to the operators, col. 14, ll. 6-9.
Regarding claim 8, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim, and Steiner further discloses wherein the control circuit (70) is configured to cause the plurality of valves to attenuate the fluid pressure within the CRDM such that the control rod performs at least one of an insertion sequence, a withdrawal sequence, a continuous insertion sequence, and a continuous withdrawal sequence, or combinations thereof (“A rod drive control system [70] controls a hydraulic control unit (HCU) [78] that causes the control rod drive mechanism to move the control rod, either inserting or withdrawing the rod from the fuel bundle. The HCU includes transponder cards [76] that control the solenoids [92] in the HCU,” ¶ 4).
Regarding claim 10, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim, and Steiner and further discloses wherein each of the insertion sequence, the withdrawal sequence, the continuous insertion sequence, and the continuous withdrawal sequence comprises at least one operation, and wherein the at least one operation of the insertion sequence, the withdrawal sequence, the continuous insertion sequence comprises a predetermined adjustable time determined by the control circuit (“A rod drive control system [70] controls a hydraulic control unit (HCU) [78] that causes the control rod drive mechanism to move the control rod, either inserting or withdrawing the rod from the fuel bundle. The HCU includes transponder cards [76] that control the solenoids [92] in the HCU,” ¶ 4; “short time delay,” ¶ 34).
Regarding claim 11, Steiner discloses a system configured to control a plurality of control rod drive mechanisms ("CRDMs") configured to control the nuclear flux produced by a nuclear reactor, the system comprising: a header controller (72); and a plurality of hydraulic control units ("HCUs"), wherein each HCU of the plurality of HCUs comprises: a plurality of valves (having solenoids 92) configured to attenuate a fluid pressure within a CRDM (58) of the plurality of CRDMs, wherein the attenuation of the fluid pressure is configured to causes a control rod of the CRDM of the plurality of CRDMs to be inserted or withdrawn from a reactor vessel (10) of the nuclear reactor; and a control circuit (72, 74, 76) comprising: a plurality of relay interfaces (“relays,” ¶ 34), wherein each relay of the plurality of relay interfaces is electrically coupled to a valve of the plurality of valves (¶ 34 and Fig. 3); a controller (76) electrically coupled to the plurality of relay interfaces; and a communications circuit (74) communicably coupled to a header controller (72), wherein the communications circuit (74) is configured to transmit and receive signals between the controller (76) and the header controller (¶ 19 and Fig. 2).
Steiner does not explicitly disclose measuring current and voltage within each valve. Sato does. Sato is also in the art area of control circuits for nuclear reactors (RPV 102, Fig. 1) and teaches a control circuit (Fig. 3) for solenoid valves (V1-V4, Fig. 1 having coils L, Fig. 3) that is configured to measure a current within each valve of the plurality of valves and a voltage within each valve of the plurality of valves (the current and voltage of the solenoid coil L [which each solenoid valve V1-V4 has] is measured and compared to reference voltage values, col., 9, ll. 3–18).
A purpose for this teaching is, as described by Sato (col. 9, ll. 34-61), to determine if the solenoid valve is operating correctly or incorrectly: “When the switch SW is closed and the coil is energized, the impedance of the coil when the valve is stuck differs from that when the valve operates correctly, and hence the currents flowing therethrough are different .... whether the valve has operated properly or not is determined by the change of the excitation current in the abnormal state and the normal state.” This information is processed and ultimately the control room “discriminates reliable information and non-reliable information and allows display of only the reliable information” to the operators, col. 14, ll. 6-9.
The combination of the current and voltage measurements of Sato with the control circuit of Steiner would have produced a control circuit for controlling a CRDM in a nuclear reactor, wherein the current/voltage of the circuit’s solenoid valves were monitored to ensure they are operating correctly, i.e., Applicant's claimed invention.
This combination would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as it produces no unexpected results. In view of the prior art teachings of Steiner, a person of ordinary skill would have predicted that combining Sato’s current/voltage monitoring with Steiner's control circuit would have produced Applicant's claimed invention of a nuclear reactor control circuit with self-monitoring capabilities.
The skilled person’s motivation for the combination would have been the expectation of, as described by Sato (col. 9, ll. 34-61), to determine if the solenoid valve is operating correctly or incorrectly: “When the switch SW is closed and the coil is energized, the impedance of the coil when the valve is stuck differs from that when the valve operates correctly, and hence the currents flowing therethrough are different .... whether the valve has operated properly or not is determined by the change of the excitation current in the abnormal state and the normal state.” This information is processed and ultimately the control room “discriminates reliable information and non-reliable information and allows display of only the reliable information” to the operators, col. 14, ll. 6-9.
Regarding claim 15, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim, and Steiner further discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of valves is a solenoid valve (“control valve solenoid 92,” ¶ 22).
Regarding claim 17, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim, and Steiner and further discloses wherein the control circuit (70) is configured to cause the plurality of valves to attenuate the fluid pressure within the CRDM such that the control rod performs at least one of an insertion sequence, a withdrawal sequence, a continuous insertion sequence, and a continuous withdrawal sequence, or combinations thereof (“A rod drive control system [70] controls a hydraulic control unit (HCU) [78] that causes the control rod drive mechanism to move the control rod, either inserting or withdrawing the rod from the fuel bundle. The HCU includes transponder cards [76] that control the solenoids [92] in the HCU,” ¶ 4).
Regarding claim 21, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim, and Sato additionally teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to: determine a parameter (abnormal or normal state of the valve, abstract and col. 9, ll. 46-49) associated with each valve of the plurality of valves based on the current and voltage.
The skilled artisan would have been motivated to, before the effective filing date of the invention, utilize the parameter determination as taught by Sato in order to determine if “a fault in the actuation circuit is indicated,” as explained by Sato in the abstract.
Regarding claim 22, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim, and Sato additionally teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to: generate an operation sequence based on the determined parameter to control a hydraulic force to move the control rod (“a hydraulic control unit for control rods for adjusting the output of a boiling water type nuclear reactor electric power generating plant. The hydraulic control unit includes several solenoid valves per control rod, and the direction of the movement of the control rod is determined by opening or closing a particular one of the solenoid valves so that the power of the nuclear reactor is increased or decreased,” col. 1, ll. 45-60).
The skilled artisan would have been motivated to, before the effective filing date of the invention, utilize the control rod drive mechanism (CRDM) hydraulic control unit (HCU) as described by Sato because this is conventionally how all CRDM HCUs in boiling water reactors (BWRs) have worked for many decades. The purpose and benefit is to control the reactivity of the nuclear power plant, i.e., if the reactivity is too high, control rods may be inserted to absorb neutrons and kill or slow the chain reaction.
Regarding claim 23, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim, and this combination additionally teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to: attenuate the fluid pressure within the CRDM via the plurality of valves, wherein the fluid pressure causes the control rod to perform the operation sequence (“a hydraulic control unit for control rods for adjusting the output of a boiling water type nuclear reactor electric power generating plant. The hydraulic control unit includes several solenoid valves per control rod, and the direction of the movement of the control rod is determined by opening or closing a particular one of the solenoid valves so that the power of the nuclear reactor is increased or decreased,” col. 1, ll. 45-60).
The skilled artisan would have been motivated to, before the effective filing date of the invention, utilize the control rod drive mechanism (CRDM) hydraulic control unit (HCU) as described by Sato for the same reasons given in response to claim 22, above.
Examiner notes that the attenuation of fluid pressure is how hydraulic (=fluid) systems operate.
Regarding claim 24, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim, and Sato additionally teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to open and close the plurality of valves in a variety of sequences to attenuate the fluid pressure applied to a piston to control the insertion and withdrawal of the control rod (“a hydraulic control unit for control rods for adjusting the output of a boiling water type nuclear reactor electric power generating plant. The hydraulic control unit includes several solenoid valves per control rod, and the direction of the movement of the control rod is determined by opening or closing a particular one of the solenoid valves so that the power of the nuclear reactor is increased or decreased,” col. 1, ll. 45-60).
The skilled artisan would have been motivated to, before the effective filing date of the invention, utilize the control rod drive mechanism (CRDM) hydraulic control unit (HCU) as described by Sato for the same reasons given in response to claim 22, above.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over above-modified Steiner in further view of Somani (US 2020/0319658).
Regarding claim 3, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim but does not explicitly state determining resistance of a valve in order to determine a health of the valve based on a material constant.
Somani does. Somani is also in the art area of solenoid control valves and teaches a control circuit configured to determine a resistance associated with solenoid control valves to determine a health of each valve of the plurality of valves, based on a material constant associated with each valve of the plurality of valves, the current within each valve of the plurality of valves, and the voltage within each valve of the plurality of valves (“based on the known coefficient of resistivity of the metal at a given temperature (for example, room temperature) which may be provided by the manufacturer and stored in the information storage, obtained from literature or measured, the change in the resistance of the solenoid may be used determine the temperature of the solenoid. The relationship between voltage, resistance and current may be used to perform this type of calculation,” ¶ 36).
The skilled artisan would have been motivated to, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, perform the temperature determination taught by Somani because, as explained by Somani (¶ 5), “This temperature data can be used to improve adjacent transducer temperature data and adjust the output signal of the transducer.”
Regarding claim 13, modified Steiner teaches all the elements of the parent claim but does not explicitly state determining resistance of a valve in order to determine a health of the valve based on a material constant.
Somani does. Somani is also in the art area of solenoid control valves and teaches a control circuit configured to determine a resistance associated with solenoid control valves to determine a health of each valve of the plurality of valves, based on a material constant associated with each valve of the plurality of valves, the current within each valve of the plurality of valves, and the voltage within each valve of the plurality of valves (“based on the known coefficient of resistivity of the metal at a given temperature (for example, room temperature) which may be provided by the manufacturer and stored in the information storage, obtained from literature or measured, the change in the resistance of the solenoid may be used determine the temperature of the solenoid. The relationship between voltage, resistance and current may be used to perform this type of calculation,” ¶ 36).
The skilled artisan would have been motivated to, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, perform the temperature determination taught by Somani because, as explained by Somani (¶ 5), “This temperature data can be used to improve adjacent transducer temperature data and adjust the output signal of the transducer.”
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 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.
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