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 .
Claims 1-9, 11-18, and 20 are pending and under consideration for this Office Action.
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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Itoi et al (WO 2019189501 A1).
Claim 13: Itoi discloses a method for producing hydrogen (see e.g. abstract), the method comprising:
obtaining a current cost of power (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The planning device…update unit that updates”);
obtaining a predicted cost of power (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The planning device…a predicted power price using a power price prediction model” and page 36, paragraph starting with “The power price prediction model generation unit 1030 may generate”);
obtaining a current value of hydrogen (see e.g. connecting paragraph of pages 5 and 6);
obtaining a predicted value of hydrogen (see e.g. page 16, paragraph starting with “Also, the constraint”);
determining a rate for an electrolyzer to produce hydrogen based on the current cost of power, the predicted cost of power, the current value of hydrogen, and the predicted value of hydrogen (via the planning device, see e.g. pages 5-7);
controlling operations of the electrolyzer such that the electrolyzer produces hydrogen at substantially the determined rate (see e.g. page 7, paragraph starting with “In a seventh aspect of the present invention, a control device”);
determining to store a first amount of hydrogen based on the current cost of power, the predicted cost of power, the current value of hydrogen, and the predicted value of hydrogen (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The hydrogen production system”);
directing the first amount of hydrogen to a hydrogen storage (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The hydrogen production system”);
determining to remove a second amount of hydrogen from the hydrogen storage based on the current cost of power, the predicted cost of power, the current value of hydrogen, and/or the predicted value of hydrogen (see e.g. page 30, paragraph staring with “The storage amount”; page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus 100; page 20, paragraph starting with “The simulation”); and
directing the second amount of hydrogen from the hydrogen storage (see e.g. page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus”).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoi in view of Li et al (CN 113572158 A).
Claim 1: Itoi discloses a method for producing hydrogen (see e.g. abstract), the method comprising:
obtaining a current cost of power (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The planning device…update unit that updates”);
obtaining historical power-cost data indicative of historical costs of power (see e.g. page 36, paragraph starting with “The power price prediction model generation unit 1030 may generate”);
determining a predicted cost of power based on the historical power-cost data (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The planning device…a predicted power price using a power price prediction model” and page 36, paragraph starting with “The power price prediction model generation unit 1030 may generate”);
obtaining a request for hydrogen (see e.g. page 26, paragraph starting with “Here, the demand”);
determining a current value of hydrogen based on the request for hydrogen (see e.g. connecting paragraph of pages 5 and 6);
obtaining historical hydrogen-value data indicative of historical values of hydrogen (see e.g. page 16, paragraph starting with “Also, the constraint”);
determining a predicted value of hydrogen based on the historical hydrogen- value data (see e.g. page 16, paragraph starting with “Also, the constraint”);
determining a rate for an electrolyzer to produce hydrogen based on the current cost of power, the predicted cost of power, the current value of hydrogen, and the predicted value of hydrogen (via the planning device, see e.g. pages 5-7); and
controlling operations of the electrolyzer such that the electrolyzer produces hydrogen at substantially the determined rate (see e.g. page 7, paragraph starting with “In a seventh aspect of the present invention, a control device”).
Itoi does not explicitly teach obtaining a priority request for hydrogen and including the priority request for hydrogen in determining a rate for an electrolyzer to produce hydrogen. Li teaches a method of controlling hydrogen production (see e.g. abstract) wherein priority (different time periods) is included with requests for hydrogen and is used to determine a rate for an electrolyzer to produce hydrogen (see e.g. page 9, paragraph starting with “Further, considering). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the method of Itoi to include a priority request for hydrogen and including the priority request for hydrogen in determining a rate for an electrolyzer to produce hydrogen as taught in Li to ensure that sufficient hydrogen is provided depending on the time period and demands.
Claim 2: Itoi in view of Li discloses determining an amount of hydrogen to store based on the current value of hydrogen and the predicted value of hydrogen (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The hydrogen production system”).
Claim 3: Itoi in view of Li discloses determining a storage capacity of a hydrogen storage (see e.g. page 14, paragraph starting with “Fig. 4”).
Claim 4: Itoi in view of Li discloses directing the amount of hydrogen to a hydrogen storage (see e.g. page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus 100”).
Claim 5: Itoi in view of Li discloses determining an amount of hydrogen to remove from a hydrogen storage based on the current value of hydrogen and the predicted value of hydrogen (see e.g. page 30, paragraph staring with “The storage amount”; page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus 100; page 20, paragraph starting with “The simulation”).
Claim 6: Itoi in view of Li discloses determining an amount of hydrogen to store based on the current cost of power and the predicted cost of power (see e.g. page 6).
Claim 7: Itoi in view of Li discloses determining a storage capacity of a hydrogen storage (see e.g. page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus 100”).
Claim 8: Itoi in view of Li discloses directing the amount of hydrogen to a hydrogen storage (see e.g. page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus 100”).
Claim 9: Itoi in view of Li discloses determining an amount of hydrogen to remove from a hydrogen storage based on the current value of hydrogen and the predicted value of hydrogen (see e.g. page 30, paragraph staring with “The storage amount”; page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus 100; page 20, paragraph starting with “The simulation”).
Claim 14: Itoi discloses a system for producing hydrogen (see e.g. abstract), the system comprising:
one or more electrolyzers configured to receive power and to produce hydrogen (see e.g. abstract); and
a controller (see e.g. page 60, paragraph starting with “Fig 13”) configured to:
obtain a current cost of the power (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The planning device…update unit that updates”);
obtain historical power-cost data indicative of historical costs of power (see e.g. page 36, paragraph starting with “The power price prediction model generation unit 1030 may generate”);
determine a predicted cost of power based on the historical power-cost data (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The planning device…a predicted power price using a power price prediction model” and page 36, paragraph starting with “The power price prediction model generation unit 1030 may generate”);
obtain a request for hydrogen (see e.g. page 26, paragraph starting with “Here, the demand”);
determine a current value of hydrogen based on the request for hydrogen; (see e.g. connecting paragraph of pages 5 and 6);
obtain historical hydrogen-value data indicative of historical values of hydrogen (see e.g. page 16, paragraph starting with “Also, the constraint”);
determine a predicted value of hydrogen based on the historical hydrogen-value data (see e.g. page 16, paragraph starting with “Also, the constraint”);
determine a rate for the one or more electrolyzers to produce hydrogen based on the current cost of power, the predicted cost of power, the current value of hydrogen, and the predicted value of hydrogen (via the planning device, see e.g. pages 5-7); and
control operations of the one or more electrolyzers such that the one or more electrolyzers produces hydrogen at substantially the determined rate (see e.g. page 7, paragraph starting with “In a seventh aspect of the present invention, a control device”).
Itoi does not explicitly teach obtaining a priority request for hydrogen and including the priority request for hydrogen in determining a rate for an electrolyzer to produce hydrogen. Li teaches a method of controlling hydrogen production (see e.g. abstract) wherein priority (different time periods) is included with requests for hydrogen and is used to determine a rate for an electrolyzer to produce hydrogen (see e.g. page 9, paragraph starting with “Further, considering). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the method of Itoi to include a priority request for hydrogen and including the priority request for hydrogen in determining a rate for an electrolyzer to produce hydrogen as taught in Li to ensure that sufficient hydrogen is provided depending on the time period and demands.
Claim 15: Itoi in view of Li discloses that the controller is further configured to determine an amount of hydrogen to store based on the current value of hydrogen, the predicted value of hydrogen, the current cost of power, and the predicted cost of power (see e.g. page 6, paragraph starting with “The hydrogen production system”).
Claim 16: Itoi in view of Li discloses determining a storage capacity of a hydrogen storage (see e.g. page 14, paragraph starting with “Fig. 4”).
Claim 17: Itoi in view of Li discloses directing the amount of hydrogen to a hydrogen storage (see e.g. page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus 100”).
Claim 18: Itoi in view of Li discloses determining an amount of hydrogen to remove from a hydrogen storage based on the current value of hydrogen and the predicted value of hydrogen (see e.g. page 30, paragraph staring with “The storage amount”; page 9, paragraph starting with “The power generation apparatus 100; page 20, paragraph starting with “The simulation”).
Claim(s) 11 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoi in view of Li as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Kitaura et al (WO 2020196889 A1).
Claim 11: Itoi in view of Li does not explicitly teach that obtaining the current cost of power comprises selecting the current cost of power from among two or more costs of power from two or more respective power providers. Kitaura teaches a method of reduction the product cost of an electrolyzer (see e.g. abstract) wherein method includes using a planning device that predicts the rates of electricity by including multiple electricity sources (see e.g. page 2, paragraph starting with “In order”) to reduce manufacturing cost (see e.g. connecting paragraph of pages 4 and 5). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the method of Itoi by obtaining the current cost of power comprises selecting the current cost of power from among two or more costs of power from two or more respective power providers as taught in Kitaura to reduce manufacturing costs.
Claim 20: Itoi in view of Li does not explicitly teach that obtaining the current cost of power comprises selecting the current cost of power from among two or more costs of power from two or more respective power providers. Kitaura teaches a method of reduction the product cost of an electrolyzer (see e.g. abstract) wherein method includes using a planning device that predicts the rates of electricity by including multiple electricity sources (see e.g. page 2, paragraph starting with “In order”) to reduce manufacturing cost (see e.g. connecting paragraph of pages 4 and 5). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the method of Itoi by obtaining the current cost of power comprises selecting the current cost of power from among two or more costs of power from two or more respective power providers as taught in Kitaura to reduce manufacturing costs.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoi in view of Li as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Beskwick et al (“Does the Green Hydrogen Economy Have a Water Problem?”, ACS Energy Lett., 2021, 6, 3167−3169).
Claim 12: Itoi in view of Li does not explicitly teach obtaining a current cost of water, wherein determining the rate for the electrolyzer to produce hydrogen is further based on the current cost of water. However, Itoi does disclose incorporating operating costs as part of their method (see e.g. page 47, paragraph starting with “Further”). Beswick teaches that the source of water can have an impact on the cost of producing hydrogen via electrolysis (see e.g. 3169) as freshwater only makes up 1% of the planets water and desalination is a likely requirement for providing an adequate amount of water (see e.g. page 3168, “2. Desalination of Saltwater”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the method of Itoi by obtaining a current cost of water as a part of the operating costs to make sure the total cost of producing hydrogen is accurately calculated.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER W KEELING whose telephone number is (571)272-9961. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM. 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, Luan Van can be reached at 571-272-8521. 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.
/ALEXANDER W KEELING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795