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 .
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments have been carefully considered but are moot due to a new grounds of rejection, as explained below.
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.
Claims 24-25, 28, 30-31, 33, 35, 38-41 and 45-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bae et al. (U.S. 20150316208).
In re claim 24, Bae teaches a fuel delivery system (as shown in fig. 1), comprising:
a storage tank (fig. 1; storage tank 1; [0103]);
a heat exchanger (fig. 1; LNG vaporizer 130; [0103]) coupled to the storage tank (via. fuel supply line 110 and LNG pump 120, as indicated in fig. 1),
wherein the heat exchanger is configured to
process liquid methane extracted from the storage tank (as indicated in fig. 1; liquefied gas processing system 100 according to this embodiment includes a fuel supply line 110 configured to provide a path for delivering LNG from a storage tank 1 to a main engine 3 as a propulsion system; [0103]; note: liquid methane is a component of LNG, as indicated in [0193] and as generally known in the art);
a first compressor (fig. 1; pump 120; [0103; 0106]; note: fig. 1 shows two pumps/compressors 120 arranged in parallel) coupled to the heat exchanger (as shown in fig. 1) and configured to
pressurize processed methane received from the heat exchanger (as indicated in fig. 1 and [0103]);
a power unit (fig. 1; main engine 3; [0103]) coupled to the first compressor (as shown in fig. 1),
wherein the power unit is configured to
operate using the pressurized methane provided to the power unit on-demand (fig. 1; the fuel supply line 110 provides a path for delivering LNG, supplied by a delivery pump 2, as fuel from the storage tank 1 of LNGC to the main engine 3, and the LNG pump 120 and the LNG vaporizer 130 are disposed at the fuel supply line 110; [0105]); and
a second compressor (fig. 1; A plurality of LNG pumps 120 may be disposed in parallel as in this embodiment to provide requisite pumping force for delivery of LNG to the fuel supply line 110; [0106]),
wherein the second compressor is arranged in parallel with the first compressor to pressurize methane (as explained above and shown in fig. 1) received from
the heat exchanger or
the storage tank (as explained above and shown in fig. 1).
In re claim 25, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, wherein
the power unit (fig. 1; main engine 3; [0103]) is an engine for a vehicle (ship; [abstract]).
In re claim 28, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, wherein
the processing performed by the heat exchanger (fig. 1; LNG vaporizer 130; [0103]) comprises vaporizing liquid methane (fig. 1; the LNG vaporizer 130 gasifies LNG delivered by the LNG pump 120; [0115]).
In re claim 30, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, wherein
the second compressor is arranged to
deliver methane gas to the power unit on-demand (as shown in fig. 1 and explained above).
In re claim 31, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, further comprising:
an auxiliary power unit (fig. 1; integrated IGG/GCU system 200 is implemented by integrating an inert gas generator (IGG) and a gas combustion unit (GCU); [0112]) coupled to at least one of
the power unit (via. 160, 170, and 110, as shown in fig. 1),
the heat exchanger (via. 160, 170, and 110, as shown in fig. 1), or
one or more of the compressors (via. 160, 170, and 110, as shown in fig. 1).
In re claim 33, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, wherein
an output of the second compressor is coupled to a methane pressure booster (fig. 1; BOG compressor 150; [0110]) via a line (via. BOG line 140; [0110]).
In re claim 35, Bae teaches a method, comprising:
extracting liquid methane from a storage tank (as indicated in fig. 1; liquefied gas processing system 100 according to this embodiment includes a fuel supply line 110 configured to provide a path for delivering LNG from a storage tank 1 to a main engine 3 as a propulsion system; [0103]);
generating pressurized methane on demand (as indicated above, so as to fuel the main engine 3),
wherein generating the pressurized methane comprises
vaporizing the extracted liquid methane to generate gaseous methane (fig. 1; the LNG vaporizer 130 gasifies LNG delivered by the LNG pump 120; [0115]) and
compressing the gaseous methane (fig. 1; BOG compressor 150; [0110]; note: BOG compressor 150 compresses BOG in order to increases its pressure, this would also result in an increase of pressure in the downstream vaporized LNG, since the pressure from the BOG has to be at a higher pressure. Further note: if the pressure is the same, then there would be a no flow condition, and if the pressure is lower, it would result in a back flow to compressor 150, which would likely result in compressor surge and damage to the compressor); and
operating a power unit (fig. 1; main engine 3; [0103]) of a vehicle (ship; [abstract]) using the pressurized methane (The engine receives a supply of the fuel gas; abstract, and as explained above.),
wherein the storage tank (fig. 1; storage tank 1; [0103]) is coupled to
a first compressor (fig. 1; pump 120; [0103; 0106]; note: fig. 1 shows two pumps/compressors 120 arranged in parallel) and
a second compressor (fig. 1; A plurality of LNG pumps 120 may be disposed in parallel as in this embodiment to provide requisite pumping force for delivery of LNG to the fuel supply line 110; [0106]),
the first and second compressor are arranged in parallel (as explained above), and
the first and second compressors are used to generate the pressurized methane (as explained above).
In re claim 38, Bae teaches the method of claim 35, further comprising:
providing methane gas to the power unit on demand using both the first and second compressors (as shown in fig. 1 and explained above; note: there is a lack of intermediate storage tank between the storage tank 1 and main engine 3, indicating on demand usage of fuel).
In re claim 39, Bae teaches the method of claim 35, wherein
liquid methane is extracted from the storage tank (as indicated in fig. 1; liquefied gas processing system 100 according to this embodiment includes a fuel supply line 110 configured to provide a path for delivering LNG from a storage tank 1 to a main engine 3 as a propulsion system; [0103]) and provided to a heat exchanger (LNG vaporizer 130; as indicated in fig. 1 and [0103]).
In re claim 40, Bae teaches the method of claim 39, wherein
the vaporizing comprises
vaporizing the liquid methane with the heat exchanger (fig. 1; the LNG vaporizer 130 gasifies LNG delivered by the LNG pump 120; [0115]).
In re claim 41, Bae teaches the method of claim 35, further comprising:
generating energy with an auxiliary power unit (fig. 1; integrated IGG/GCU system 200 is implemented by integrating an inert gas generator (IGG) and a gas combustion unit (GCU); [0112]) using methane obtained from the storage tank (as shown in fig. 1 and explained above).
In re claim 45, Bae teaches the method of claim 35, further comprising:
receiving a demand for gaseous methane (as shown in fig. 1 and explained above).
In re claim 46, Bae teaches the method of claim 45, wherein
extracting liquid methane from the storage tank is responsive to the demand (as indicated in fig. 1 and as explained above; note: there is a lack of intermediate storage tank between the storage tank 1 and main engine 3, indicating on demand usage of fuel).
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.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (U.S. 20150316208).
In re claim 26, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, but lacks wherein
an input of the second compressor is coupled to the heat exchanger and configured to
receive processed methane from the heat exchanger.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to simply place the heat exchanger/vaporizer 130 upstream of the compressors/ LNG pumps120, as opposed to placing the heat exchanger/vaporizer 130 downstream of the compressors/ LNG pumps120, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device (such as swapping the positions of elements 120 and 130) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
In re claim 44, see claims 24 and 26 above.
Claims 27 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (U.S. 20150316208) in view of Anderson et al. (U.S. 20200025337)
In re claim 27, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, but lacks wherein
an output of the second compressor is coupled to a high-pressure storage device via one or more lines.
Anderson teaches an analogous fuel delivery system for a vehicle, that delivers combustible gaseous fuel to an engine and further teaches
an output of a compressor (fig. 4; high pressure fuel pump10; [0063]) coupled to a high-pressure storage device via. one or more lines (fig. 4; The fuel pump 10 may preferably be a high pressure fuel pump 10 arranged to increase the pressure of the liquefied combustible gas to approximately 300-550 bar; [0063]; the fuel tank arrangement 100 further comprises an additional fuel tank 105 arranged downstream the gas converter arrangement 102 via the second conduit 130. The additional fuel tank 105 is preferably a high pressure fuel tank arranged to contain combustible gas at a pressure level of approximately 100-500 bar; [0067]; Here, as shown in fig. 4, and suggested via. [0063, 0067] there is a high pressure fuel tank serving as a high pressure storage device connected to the output of a high-pressure fuel pump/compressor).
Thus one having an ordinary level in skill in the art would readily recognize that the high-pressure fuel tank of Anderson could readily be connected to the output lines of either the first or the second compressor/pump of Bae, via. one or more lines. It is in this way that the teachings of Bae as modified by Anderson would arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bae, to incorporate the high-pressure fuel storage tank downstream of a compressor/high-pressure pump, as clearly suggested and taught by Anderson, in order to reduce leakage of gases, which may be harmful to the environment, in the event of controlled/uncontrolled leakage ([0010]).
In re claim 36, see claims 27-28 and 35 above.
Claims 29 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (U.S. 20150316208) in view of Gustafson et al. (U.S. 9746132).
In re claim 29, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, and further teaches wherein
the second compressor is arranged to
operate independently from the first compressor to supply methane (as indicated in fig. 1)
However, Bae lacks wherein
the second compressor is arranged to
operate independently from the first compressor to supply methane to a refrigeration circuit of the storage tank.
Gustafson teaches an analogous liquified natural gas delivery system (fig. 2) to supply fuel to an engine (fig. 2; use device 265 (in the form of an engine); [abstract; Col. 7, ln 22-ln 34]) and Gustafson further teaches
a refrigeration circuit of a fuel tank (fig. 2; primary tank 205; [Col. 7, ln 22-ln 34]; note: as shown in fig. 2, and explained in Col. 7, ln 22-34, the fuel tank contains a condensing pathway 275, in contact with the contents of the tank, connected to an engine fuel line and is connected to vaporizer 270. The method of operation the vaporizer 270 and condensing pathway 275 results in the condensing pathway 275 absorbing heat from the tank, thus reducing the temperature of the tank, and serving as a refrigeration circuit).
Thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bae, to incorporate a refrigeration circuit with a fuel storage tank, as clearly suggested and taught by Gustafson, in order to provide, based on a comparison of the hydraulic pressure in the main tank and the increased saturation pressure in the main tank and the overflow tank, a substantially continuous supply of cryogenic liquid from at least one of the main tank and the overflow tank, to the use device ([Col. 3, 18-22]).
In re claim 37, see claims 29 and 35 above.
Claims 32 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (U.S. 20150316208) in view of Gerstler et al. (U.S. 20140174083).
In re claim 32, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 31, and further teaches wherein
the auxiliary power unit is configured to
provide power and heat (integrated IGG/GCU system 200 may consume the BOG continuously generated from the storage tank 1, by burning the BOG within a main body 210 thereof, and if necessary, may also generate combustion gas as inert gas for supply to the storage tank 1; [0117]; note: burning BOG also produces heat) , or wherein
the auxiliary power unit is configured to
provide power and heat to the vehicle's quarters.
Bae lacks explicitly teaching wherein
the auxiliary power unit is configured to
provide power and heat during a start-up of the vehicle, or wherein
the auxiliary power unit is configured to
provide power and heat to the vehicle's quarters
Gerstler teaches an analogous vehicle (fig. 6; aircraft 600; [0080]) having a fuel delivery system (fig. 6; abstract), that uses LNG to fuel an engine (as shown in fig. 6; In the exemplary embodiment of the aircraft 600, the cryogenic fluid used as fuel for the engine 602 and contained by the cryogenic tank 610 on-board the aircraft 600 is LNG; [0080]) wherein
the auxiliary power unit (fig. 6; auxiliary power system 670 is also mounted to the aircraft 600 and operatively connected to the cryogenic tank 610; [0086]) is configured to
provide power and heat during a start-up of the vehicle (claims 7 and 16).
Thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bae, to incorporate configuring the auxiliary power unit to provide power and heat during a start-up of the vehicle, as clearly suggested and taught by Gerstler, in order to provide auxiliary power (e.g., during a mode of operation such as propulsion engines off, idling, taxiing, start-up, emergency, or the like) ([0027]).
Further, one having an ordinary level of skill in the art would also have readily recognized and found it obvious that an auxiliary power unit (such as the integrated IGG/GCU system 200) can be operated during a start-up of the vehicle (note: it is often part of standard operational procedure in large vehicle (i.e. ships, large aircraft, etc.) to first power up an APU, so as to provide enough power to then start the main engines, (one such example is the C-130, where the standard start-up procedure requires, inter alia, starting the APU to provide bleed air for cranking the main engines) as is generally known in the art).
In re claim 42, see claims 32 and 41 above.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (U.S. 20150316208) in view of Lurken et al. (U.S. 20130061608).
In re claim 34, Bae teaches the fuel delivery system of claim 24, but lacks wherein
the storage tank comprises:
an outer vessel;
an inner storage vessel arranged within the outer vessel and adapted to
store liquid methane, wherein
the inner storage vessel is non-cylindrical; and
a support system connecting the inner storage vessel to the outer vessel.
Lurken teaches an analogous fuel delivery system ad further teaches
wherein the storage tank (fig. 4; apparatus 1; [0038]; note: storage tank 2 is located in apparatus 1) comprises:
an outer vessel (the first storage tank 2 and the second storage tank 3 are arranged in a common insulating jacket 14; [0038]; Here, the outer vessel would be the common insulating jacket; note: insulating jacket 14 is not shown in fig. 4, but is necessarily part of apparatus 1, as indicated in [0038], with apparatus 1 and first storage tank 2 and second storage tank 3 being shown in fig. 4);
an inner storage vessel (storage tank 2) arranged within the outer vessel and adapted to store liquid methane (as indicated via. fig. 4 and [0038]); and
a support system connecting the inner storage vessel to the outer vessel (necessarily present as indicated via. [0038]).
Thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bae, to incorporate wherein the storage tank comprises: an outer vessel; an inner storage vessel arranged within the outer vessel and adapted to store liquid methane, a support system connecting the inner storage vessel to the outer vessel., as clearly suggested and taught by Lurken, in order to have the low-temperature liquefied combustible gas preserve its composition of different components and is not enriched with less volatile constituents which have a higher boiling point ([0009]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bae, to incorporate wherein the storage vessel is non-cylindrical (or any other desired shape/form), as an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the storage vessel of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient (including non-cylindrical), since a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
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 JOHN D BAILEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5692. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5625. 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.
/JOHN D BAILEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LOGAN M KRAFT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747