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 .
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.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8 June 2026 has been entered.
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.
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) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious over Ewan et al (US 2022/0307652) in view of Duncan et al (US 20130134700) in further view of Kreager et al (US 20140170353).
Regarding Claim 1, Ewan et al discloses a method of storing at least one fluid (Figure 2 generally). The method comprising the steps of:
via a production device (¶ 58; 202 in Figure 2), providing a desired quantity of at least one fluid to be stored (to produce hydrogen as disclosed in ¶ 58);
transporting the quantity of fluid from the production device (from 102 in Figure 1(a) into at least one flexible pipe member (¶ 63 to FRP pipe shown in Figure 1(b)) via at least one fluid import region (310 shown in Figure 3(b)) of the flexible pipe member (313 in Figure 3(b)),
the flexible pipe member (the FRP of ¶ 59);
closing the fluid import region of the flexible pipe member to thereby retain the quantity of fluid in the bore region of the flexible pipe member (to transport as disclosed in ¶ 82 via the shutoff valve at the fitting 310; “Shutoff valves in combination with fast-release couplings and fittings 310 at the end of one or multiple spools of FRP pipe enable an operator to rapidly isolate and replace damaged sections, or to adjust total storage capacity”);
and storing the quantity of fluid at a first pressure in the bore region (¶ 82; “large spools 313 of FRP pipeline may be used for gaseous hydrogen 101 storage in lieu of traditional hydrogen tanks” where the quantity is inherently storage at a pressure defined as the first pressure),
but fails to expressly disclose the flexible pipe member has an inner fluid retaining layer that defines a bore region of the flexible pipe member,
an outer sheath disposed over and coaxial with the inner fluid retaining layer and at least one reinforcement layer comprising helically wound thermoplastic tapes, comprising a composite material having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes, wherein the at least one reinforcement layer is disposed between the inner fluid retaining layer and the outer sheath.
Duncan et al teach a flexible pipe member (Figure 8; ¶ 113); where the flexible pipe member has an inner fluid retaining layer (10; ¶ 116) that defines a bore region (12; Figure 8) of the flexible pipe member (Figure 8),
an outer sheath (20) disposed over and coaxial with the inner fluid retaining layer (Figure 8) and at least one reinforcement layer (15 generally with layers 16, 18, 22 and 24 of Figure 8) comprising helically wound thermoplastic tapes (¶ 114 and ¶ 33 disclose reinforcement layer being thermoplastic tapes and Figure 8 with ¶ 110 disclose the thermoplastic tapes being helically wound), wherein the at least one reinforcement layer (15 generally with layers 16, 18, 22 and 24 of Figure 8) is disposed between the inner fluid retaining layer (10) and the outer sheath (20; Figure 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible pipe of Ewan et al with the flexible pipe as taught by Duncan et al for the advantage of allowing for use and deflection without impacting the flexible pipe member’s structure over time.
Kreager et al teach a thermoplastic tape (Figure 12) formed of a composite material (¶ 22; a thermoplastic material with embedded fibers) having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes (¶ 22; Figure 12; and ¶ 30 teach winding the thermoplastic tapes helically).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible pipe of Ewan et al, as modified by Duncan et al with the thermoplastic tape material as taught by Kreager et al for the advantage of providing a strong, flexible material, as taught by Kreager et al (¶ 3).
Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the flexible pipe of Ewan et al to be made from thermoplastic tapes, comprising a composite material having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes, since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a commonly used material that is inexpensive and durable.
Regarding Claim 2, Ewan et al disclose where subsequent to closing the fluid import region, at least partially winding the flexible pipe member around a spool element, or prior to transporting the quantity of fluid from the production device into the at least one flexible pipe member, at least partially winding the flexible pipe member around a spool element (¶ 82 discloses storing hydrogen in pipes wound on spools for transportation to a point of use. This hydrogen would inherently have to be added to the line either before the pipe was added to the spool or after for the hydrogen to be present within the pipe, therefore the limitations of the claim are met).
Regarding Claim 3, Ewan et al disclose where transporting the quantity of fluid from the production device into the bore region via at least one valve element that is disposed at the fluid import region that, in a first configuration, fluidly connects the bore region to a fluid communication region disposed outside of the flexible pipe member (¶ 82, from the production device 202 in Figure 2, shown via 102 to 111(a) in Figure 1(a)).
Regarding Claim 4, Ewan et al disclose where subsequent to closing the fluid import region and after a storage period of time (¶ 82; during the hydrogen transport of Figure 1(a)), removing at least a portion of the quantity of fluid from the flexible pipe member via a fluid export region of the flexible pipe member (Figure 3(b) via 310).
Regarding Claim 5, Ewan et al disclose where subsequent to removing a portion of the quantity of fluid from the flexible pipe member (219), via a compressor device (via 223; ¶ 68), providing the portion of the quantity of fluid to a substantially rigid container (such as the pipeline 307 disclosed in ¶ 84; pipeline 412 disclosed in ¶ 94 or the tanks provided in at least fuel cell vehicles 132, busses 133 or trucks 134 as disclosed in ¶ 57) and storing compressed fluid in the substantially rigid container at a further pressure that is greater than the first pressure (at least within the fuel cell vehicles at 132 in Figure 1(b)).
Regarding Claim 6, Ewan et al disclose locating the flexible pipe member across an onshore region to thereby store the quantity of fluid across said onshore region (Figure 1(b) at least discloses locating the flexible pipe member (via FRP spool disclosed at ¶ 82 as storage 111(b) above ground).
Regarding Claim 7, Ewan et al disclose storing the said quantity of fluid at the first pressure that is less than 2000 pounds per square inch (PSI) (¶ 59 discloses storing hydrogen in FRP pipe at pressures up to 2500 psi; since the recited “less than 2000 pounds per square inch (PSI)” encompasses a range that is within the “up to 2500 psi” ¶ 59 reads on this limitation).
Regarding Claim 8, Ewan et al disclose providing the desired quantity of at least one fluid to be stored as hydrogen (¶ 59).
Regarding Claim 9, Ewan et al disclose where prior to or during transporting the quantity of fluid from the production device (¶ 59 discloses the production device provides the hydrogen at a pressure of up to 2500psi) into the at least one flexible pipe member (¶ 59), compressing the quantity of fluid to be at the first pressure (the first pressure being up to 2500psi).
Regarding Claim 10, Duncan et al teach limiting permeation of the fluid from the bore region radially towards the outer sheath via a permeation resistant layer (at least at layer 10; ¶ 116).
Regarding Claim 11, Ewan et al disclose providing a desired quantity of at least one fluid to be stored via electrolysis of a precursor fluid (¶ 50 discloses providing hydrogen by water electrolysis).
Regarding Claim 12, Ewan et al disclose a system for storing at last one fluid (Figure 2 generally). The system comprising:
a flexible pipe member (¶ 63 to FRP pipe shown in Figure 1(b)) that is at least partially windable around a spool element (¶ 59 and Figure 3(b) at 313),
but fails to expressly disclose the flexible pipe member has an inner fluid retaining layer that defines a bore region of the flexible pipe member, and
an outer sheath disposed over and coaxial with the inner fluid retaining layer and at least one reinforcement layer comprising helically wound thermoplastic tapes, comprising a composite material having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes, wherein the at least one reinforcement layer is disposed radially between the inner fluid retaining layer and the outer sheath;
wherein at least one permeation resistant region of the flexible pipe member limits permeation of a desired fluid that is to be stored from the bore region radially towards the outer sheath.
Duncan et al teach a flexible pipe member (Figure 8; ¶ 113); where the flexible pipe member has an inner fluid retaining layer (10; ¶ 116) that defines a bore region (12; Figure 8) of the flexible pipe member (Figure 8),
an outer sheath (20) disposed over and coaxial with the inner fluid retaining layer (Figure 8) and at least one reinforcement layer (15 generally with layers 16, 18, 22 and 24 of Figure 8) comprising helically wound thermoplastic tapes (¶ 114 and ¶ 33 disclose reinforcement layer being thermoplastic tapes and Figure 8 with ¶ 110 disclose the thermoplastic tapes being helically wound), wherein the at least one reinforcement layer (15 generally with layers 16, 18, 22 and 24 of Figure 8) is disposed radially between the inner fluid retaining layer (10) and the outer sheath (20; Figure 8),
wherein at least one permeation resistant region (at least inner liner 10; ¶ 116) of the flexible pipe member limits permeation of a desired fluid that is to be stored from the bore region radially towards the outer sheath (¶ 116).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible pipe of Ewan et al with the flexible pipe as taught by Duncan et al for the advantage of allowing for use and deflection without impacting the flexible pipe member’s structure over time.
Kreager et al teach a thermoplastic tape (Figure 12) formed of a composite material (¶ 22; a thermoplastic material with embedded fibers) having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes (¶ 22; Figure 12; and ¶ 30 teach winding the thermoplastic tapes helically).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible pipe of Ewan et al, as modified by Duncan et al with the thermoplastic tape material as taught by Kreager et al for the advantage of providing a strong, flexible material, as taught by Kreager et al (¶ 3).
Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the flexible pipe of Ewan et al to be made from thermoplastic tapes, comprising a composite material having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes, since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a commonly used material that is inexpensive and durable.
Regarding Claim 13, Ewan et al, as modified by Duncan et al and Kreager et al teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose the flexible pipe member has an outer diameter of around 6 inches, an inner diameter that is a diameter of the bore region of around 5.6 inches and a length of around 990 ft so that the bore region has a volume, that is a fluid storage volume, of around 4795 L so that at a pressure of around 1500 PSI the flexible pipe member can store a mass from 30 to 50 kg of the desired fluid.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pipe outer diameter, inner diameter and length of Ewan et al with the flexible pipe member has an outer diameter of around 6 inches, an inner diameter that is a diameter of the bore region of around 5.6 inches and a length of around 990 ft since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component, since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentable distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A): Smith v. Nichols, 88 U.S. 112, 118-19 (1874) (a change in form, proportions, or degree "will not sustain a patent"); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). In the instant case, the pipe of Ewan et al would not operate differently with the claimed pipe dimensions since the pipe of Ewan et al would function in the same manner as the inventor’s disclosed pipe.
Regarding Claim 14, Ewan et al disclose where at least one valve element that, in a first configuration, permits fluid communication of the desired fluid in the bore region between a first fluid communication region in the bore region and a further fluid communication region external to the flexible pipe member (to transport as disclosed in ¶ 82 via the shutoff valve at the fitting 310; “Shutoff valves in combination with fast-release couplings and fittings 310 at the end of one or multiple spools of FRP pipe enable an operator to rapidly isolate and replace damaged sections, or to adjust total storage capacity”), and, in a further configuration, reduces fluid communication of the desired fluid between the first and further fluid communication regions (to transport as disclosed in ¶ 82 via the shutoff valve at the fitting 310; “Shutoff valves in combination with fast-release couplings and fittings 310 at the end of one or multiple spools of FRP pipe enable an operator to rapidly isolate and replace damaged sections, or to adjust total storage capacity”).
Regarding Claim 15, Ewan et al disclose where the desired fluid comprises hydrogen (¶ 16), and
wherein the valve element (¶ 82 via the shutoff valve at the fitting 310) in the further configuration is arranged to reduce transport of hydrogen in storage from the first fluid communication region towards the further fluid communication region (to transport as disclosed in ¶ 82 via the shutoff valve at the fitting 310; “Shutoff valves in combination with fast-release couplings and fittings 310 at the end of one or multiple spools of FRP pipe enable an operator to rapidly isolate and replace damaged sections, or to adjust total storage capacity”).
Regarding Claim 16, Ewan et al disclose where the valve element (to transport as disclosed in ¶ 82 via the shutoff valve at the fitting 310; “Shutoff valves in combination with fast-release couplings and fittings 310 at the end of one or multiple spools of FRP pipe enable an operator to rapidly isolate and replace damaged sections, or to adjust total storage capacity”) is selectively operable to permit fluid communication of the desired fluid from the first fluid communication region towards the further fluid communication region (to transport as disclosed in ¶ 82 via the shutoff valve at the fitting 310; “Shutoff valves in combination with fast-release couplings and fittings 310 at the end of one or multiple spools of FRP pipe enable an operator to rapidly isolate and replace damaged sections, or to adjust total storage capacity”) and is selectively operable to permit fluid communication of the desired fluid from the further fluid communication region towards the first fluid communication region (to transport as disclosed in ¶ 82 via the shutoff valve at the fitting 310; “Shutoff valves in combination with fast-release couplings and fittings 310 at the end of one or multiple spools of FRP pipe enable an operator to rapidly isolate and replace damaged sections, or to adjust total storage capacity”).
Regarding Claim 17, Duncan et al teach where the permeation resistant region (10; ¶ 116) is integral with the inner fluid retaining layer (Figure 8; ¶ 116) or at least partly coats an outer surface of the helically wound thermoplastic tapes of the reinforcement layer.
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious over Duncan et al (US 20130134700) in view of Kreager et al (US 20140170353).
Regarding Claim 18, Duncan et al disclose a flexible fluid storage pipe (Figure 8). The pipe comprising:
an inner fluid retaining layer (10; ¶ 116) that defines a bore region (within 12; Figure 8);
an outer sheath (20) that is disposed over and coaxial with the inner fluid retaining layer and that comprises an outer surface of the flexible fluid storage pipe (Figure 8);
at least one reinforcement layer (15 generally with layers 16, 18, 22 and 24) comprising helically wound thermoplastic tapes (¶ 114 and ¶ 33 disclose reinforcement layer being thermoplastic tapes and Figure 8 with ¶ 110 disclose the thermoplastic tapes being helically wound), wherein the at least one reinforcement layer (15 generally) is disposed between the inner fluid retaining layer and the outer sheath (Figure 8); and
a fluid import region (an end of the pipe or end fitting of the pipe disclosed in ¶ 19) configured to selectively permit transport of fluid into the bore region from a region exterior to the flexible fluid storage pipe (Figure 8); wherein
a stored fluid is disposed in the bore region (¶ 115 during passage of the fluid) and a permeation resistant region (liner 10) disposed radially within the outer sheath limits permeation of the stored fluid from the bore region towards the outer sheath (¶ 116),
but fails to expressly disclose a composite material having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes.
Kreager et al teach a thermoplastic tape (Figure 12) formed of a composite material (¶ 22; a thermoplastic material with embedded fibers) having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes (¶ 22; Figure 12; and ¶ 30 teach winding the thermoplastic tapes helically).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible pipe of Duncan et al with the thermoplastic tape material as taught by Kreager et al for the advantage of providing a strong, flexible material, as taught by Kreager et al (¶ 3).
Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the flexible pipe of Duncan et al to be made from thermoplastic tapes, comprising a composite material having fibres reinforcing the helically wound thermoplastic tapes, since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a commonly used material that is inexpensive and durable.
Regarding Claim 19, Duncan et al disclose the stored fluid comprises hydrogen (The recitation of the actual fluid handled has been given no patentable weight in the apparatus claims, MPEP 2115).
Regarding Claim 20, Duncan et al, as modified by Kreager et al teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly teach the flexible pipe member has an external diameter of around 6 inches, an inner diameter of around 5.6 inches that is a diameter of the bore region and a length of around 990 ft so that the bore has volume, that is a fluid storage volume, of around 4795 L so that at a pressure of around 1500 PSI the flexible pipe member can store a mass from 30 to 50 kg of the desired fluid, (The recitation of the actual fluid handled has been given no patentable weight in the apparatus claims, MPEP 2115; and therefore since the mass of fluid is given no patentable weight in the apparatus claim).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pipe outer diameter, inner diameter and length of Duncan et al with the flexible pipe member has an outer diameter of around 6 inches, an inner diameter that is a diameter of the bore region of around 5.6 inches and a length of around 990 ft since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component, since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentable distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A): Smith v. Nichols, 88 U.S. 112, 118-19 (1874) (a change in form, proportions, or degree "will not sustain a patent"); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). In the instant case, the pipe of Duncan et al would not operate differently with the claimed pipe dimensions since the pipe of Duncan et al would function in the same manner as the inventor’s disclosed pipe.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment has overcome the rejection of record. However, a new ground of rejection is applied to the amended claims. US
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE GARDNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-4PM 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 supervisors, KENNETH RINEHART (571-272-4881) or CRAIG SCHNEIDER (571-272-3607) can be reached by telephone. 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.
/NICOLE GARDNER/
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights