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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 20-35), Species A1 (primary power signal calculated as a function of primary power), and Species B1 (secondary power signal calculated as a function of secondary power) in the reply filed on 07/30/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that Feingold does not teach the shared technical features. This is not found persuasive because the features of claim 20 are taught by at least Feingold in view of Spurgin as discussed below. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Status of Claims
Claims 20-38 are pending in the application with claims 36-38 withdrawn. Claims 20-35 are examined herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 20-35 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 20 is indefinite because it is unclear where one feature ends and another begins. For example, it is unclear which feature is “implemented by an automated control system” and which feature “incorporat[es] a nuclear reactor.” Further, it is unclear the relationship between the “steam generator” and the “secondary circuit” as the claim appears to suggest that the “steam generator” is separate from the “secondary circuit,” but also recites the “secondary circuit” generates steam.
Claim 20 is indefinite because it is unclear where one feature ends and another begins. For example, it is unclear which feature “relat[es] to the operation of the primary circuit,” which feature is “of a secondary power representative of the thermal power,” and which feature “relat[es] to the operation of the secondary circuit.” Additionally, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the phrases “the operation of the primary circuit” and “the operation of the secondary circuit.” It is further unclear the relationship between the “thermal power generated by the nuclear reactor” and the “thermal power transferred from the primary circuit to the secondary circuit by the steam generator(s).” Thus, the antecedent basis for the phrase “the thermal power transferred from the primary circuit to the secondary circuit” is unclear.
Claim 20 is indefinite because it is unclear how the phrases “on the one hand” and “on the other hand” are intended to modify the limitation. It is unclear if the claim is intending to require detecting an imbalance between the “primary power signal” and the “secondary power signal,” an imbalance between the “primary power signal” and “at least one variable” and an imbalance between the “secondary power signal” and “at least one variable,” an imbalance between the “primary power signal” and “at least one variable” or an imbalance between the “secondary power signal” and “at least one variable,” or something else. This further renders claim 26 unclear. It is further unclear if “the detection of any imbalance” in claim 26 is intending to refer to the step of “detecting any imbalance” or the steps carried out “if an imbalance is detected” in parent claim 20.
Claim 20 is indefinite because it is unclear the relationship between the “detection of an imbalance” and the “an imbalance is detected” and the previously recited “detecting any imbalance.”
Claim 21 is indefinite because it is unclear the relationship between “the secondary power is determined by calculating a thermal power transferred by each steam generator from the primary circuit to the secondary circuit and by calculating a sum of these thermal powers” and “the secondary power being calculated as a function of second operating parameters of the nuclear power plant” previously recited in parent claim 20. For example, it is unclear if these are referring to the same calculations and it is unclear the relationship between the “second operating parameters” and the “thermal power” and “sum.”
Claim 22 is indefinite because it is unclear the relationship between “the primary power signal is calculated as a function of the primary power, a filtered derivative of the primary power, an axial offset of the nuclear reactor, a filtered derivative of the axial offset of the nuclear reactor, a control cluster motion signal and/or a filtered derivative of the control cluster motion signal” and the “a primary power signal calculated as a function of the primary power and/or at least one variable indicative of a variation in the primary power” previously recited in parent claim 20. For example, it is unclear if these are referring to the same calculations, it is unclear if the “functions” are referring to the same functions, and it is unclear the relationship between the “at least one variable indicative of a variation in the primary power” and the “filtered derivatives,” “axial offset,” and “control cluster motion signal.” Claim 23 is similarly indefinite because it is unclear the relationship between the calculations recited in claims 20, 22, and 23 and the relationship between the “sum” and the “function” previously recited in parent claim 22.
Claim 24 is indefinite because it is unclear the relationship between “the secondary power signal is calculated as a function of the secondary power, a steam pressure representative of the steam pressure at an outlet of the steam generator(s), a filtered derivative of the steam pressure, a feedwater temperature representative of a water temperature at an inlet of the steam generator(s), a filtered derivative of the feedwater temperature, a feedwater flow rate representative of the feedwater flow rate at the inlet of the steam generator(s), and/or a filtered derivative of the feedwater flow rate” and the “a secondary power signal calculated as a function of the secondary power and/or at least one variable indicative of a variation in the secondary power” previously recited in parent claim 20. For example, it is unclear if these are referring to the same calculations, it is unclear if the “functions” are referring to the same functions, and it is unclear the relationship between the “at least one variable indicative of a variation in the secondary power” and the “filtered derivatives,” “steam pressure,” “feedwater temperature,” “water temperature,” and “feedwater flow rate.” Claim 25 is similarly indefinite because it is unclear the relationship between the calculations recited in claims 20, 24, and 25 and the relationship between the “sum” and the “function” previously recited in parent claim 24.
Claim 27 is indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for the phrase “the generating.” It is further unclear what feature “order[s] a switch to the power-limiting mode.” Additionally, it is further unclear if “detecting any imbalance” is intending to refer to the step of “detecting any imbalance” or the steps carried out “if an imbalance is detected” in parent claim 20.
Claim 28 is indefinite because it is unclear if the claim requires activating the “power-limiting mode” or if the claim is intending to further limit the method if an imbalance is detected. Claim 29 is similarly indefinite because it is unclear if the claim requires calculating the “target equilibrium power” regardless of whether there is an absence of detection of an imbalance or if an imbalance is detected or if the claim is intending to further limit the method if an imbalance is detected.
Claim 30 is indefinite because it is unclear what the “non-zero difference” is a difference of.
Claim 31 is indefinite because it is unclear what “its” is intending to refer to in the claim.
Claim 32 is indefinite because it is unclear the process involved in “clipping” and which feature is “clip[ped].”
Claim 33 is indefinite because it is unclear the relationship between “the target equilibrium power is determined as a minimum of the primary power, the secondary power and the maximum equilibrium power” and “the target equilibrium power is calculated as a function of a maximum equilibrium power” previously recited in parent claim 29. For example, it is unclear if these are referring to the same calculations/determinations.
Claim 34 is indefinite because it is unclear the relationship between the “primary power setpoint” and “secondary power setpoint” and the previously recited “operational power setpoint.” It is further unclear if the “controlling the nuclear power plant in such a way that the primary power matches the primary power setpoint and the secondary power matches the secondary power setpoint” is intending to refer to the same process as “control of the nuclear power plant as a function of the target equilibrium power” recited in parent claim 20.
The phrases “optionally” and “preferably” in claim 35 render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrases are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP 2173.05(d). Additionally , it is unclear if the “calculat[ion]” is referring to the same calculation previously recited in parent claim 34.
Any claim not explicitly addressed above is rejected because it is dependent on a rejected base claim.
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 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.
Claims 20, 22, 24, 26-29, and 34-35, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FR Publication No. 3 082 989 (“Feingold”) in view of US Patent No. 4,129,475 (“Spurgin”).
Citations to Feingold refer to the machine translation provided with the PTO-892 dated 05/06/2026.
Regarding claim 20, Feingold (previously cited) (see FIG. 1) discloses a method for controlling a pressurized water nuclear power plant (2) implemented by an automated control system, the nuclear power plant comprising a primary circuit (4) for circulating water, a nuclear reactor (10), a secondary circuit (6) for circulating water, and N steam generator(s) (8), N being an integer greater than or equal to 1, each steam generator being configured to transfer thermal energy from the primary circuit to the secondary circuit with steam being generated in the secondary circuit (p. 2: “a method for monitoring and protecting a pressurized water nuclear power plant, the nuclear power plant, the nuclear power plant comprising a primary water circuit and a secondary water circuit thermally coupled via N steam generator(s), N being an integer equal to or greater than 1, each steam generator being configured to transfer thermal energy from the primary circuit to the secondary circuit, the primary circuit incorporating a nuclear reactor”; see also p. 4, claim 1), the control method comprising:
calculating a primary power (“P1”) representative of a thermal power generated by the nuclear reactor, the primary power being calculated as a function of measurements of first operating parameters (“neutron flux”) of the nuclear power plant, wherein the first operating parameters are related to operation of the primary circuit and measured by first sensors (42) (p. 2: “measuring operating parameters of the primary circuit and/or the secondary circuit; from the measurements of the operating parameters, the calculation, respectively for each steam generator, of a primary power representative of the thermal power generated by the nuclear reactor,” “calculation of the thermal power generated by the entire core of the nuclear reactor and/or by the regions of the core located opposite the primary loops as a function of a measurement of the neutron flux in said regions of the core of the nuclear reactor; the measurement of a neutron flux is carried out using neutron detectors”; p. 5: “The monitoring and protection system 40 includes first sensors to measure first operating parameters.... The first sensors include, for example, neutron detectors 42 to measure a neutron flux in the nuclear reactor 10”; p. 6: “The measurement of the neutron flux in reactor 10 allows us to calculate a representative value of the power generated by the nuclear reactor 10 or ‘primary power’,” “calculating, from the measurements of the operating parameters and respectively for each steam generator 8, a primary power P1, representative of the thermal power generated by the nuclear reactor and sent to the steam generator 8 via the primary circuit 4”; p. 7: “calculation of the primary power P1 as a function of a measurement of the neutron flux in the core 14 of the nuclear reactor 10”; p. 10: “calculate the primary power P1 from the measurement signals of the first sensors, here the neutron detectors 42”; see also claims 1-3);
calculating a secondary power (“P2”) representative of a thermal power transferred from the primary circuit to the secondary circuit by the steam generator(s), the secondary power being calculated as a function of second operating parameters (“steam flow,” “pressure,” “flow of water entering in liquid form into the steam generator,” “water temperature,” “flow of water in the liquid state extracted from the steam generator ... via a purge conduit”) of the nuclear power plant, wherein the second operating parameters are related to the operation of the secondary circuit and measured by second sensors (44, 46, 48, 50, 52) (p. 2: “measuring operating parameters of the primary circuit and/or the secondary circuit; from the measurements of the operating parameters, the calculation, respectively for each steam generator, of a primary power representative of the thermal power generated by the nuclear reactor, and of a secondary power representative of the thermal power extracted from the steam generator by the secondary circuit”; p. 3: “calculation of the secondary power as a function of the flow rate of the steam leaving the steam generator, the specific enthalpy of the steam leaving the steam generator, the flow rate of liquid water entering the steam generator and the specific enthalpy of liquid water entering the steam generator; the secondary power is calculated based on a further function of the flow rate of water in the liquid state purged from the steam generator and the specific enthalpy of water in the liquid state purged from the steam generator; it includes the calculation of the secondary power as a function of the calculation of the secondary power as a function of the pressure at the outlet of the steam generator, the temperature of the water in the primary circuit at the inlet of the steam generator, the temperature of the water in the primary circuit at the outlet of the steam generator, and the flow rate of water in the primary circuit; a secondary power is calculated as a function of a power transferred from the primary circuit to the steam generator, less a steam generation power representative of the power required to heat the water contained in the steam generator to the saturation temperature due to a pressure variation in the steam generator; the steam generation power is calculated based on the mass of water present in the steam generator, the specific heat capacity of the water present in the steam generator, the specific latent enthalpy of vaporization of the water in the liquid state contained in the steam generator, and the specific enthalpy of the steam at the outlet of the steam generator”; p. 5: “The monitoring and protection system 40 includes ... second sensors to measure second operating parameters”; p. 6: “The second sensors include, for example, example, a steam flow sensor 5 44 to measure the steam flow in the secondary circuit 6 at the outlet of the steam generator 8, a pressure sensor 46 to measure the pressure in the secondary circuit 6 at the outlet of the steam generator 8, an incoming water flow sensor 48 to measure the flow of water entering in liquid form into the steam generator 8 in the secondary circuit 6, and/or an incoming water temperature sensor 50 to measure the water temperature 10 at the inlet of the steam generator 8. The second sensors may further include a purge flow sensor 52 to measure a flow of water in the liquid state extracted from the steam generator 8 on the secondary circuit side 6, via a purge conduit 54,” “calculating, from the measurements of the operating parameters and respectively for each steam generator 8, ... a secondary power P2 representative of the thermal power transferred from the primary circuit to the secondary circuit 6 by the steam generator 8”; p. 10: “calculate the secondary power P2 associated with each steam generator 8 based on the measurement signals from the second sensors, here the steam flow sensor 44, the steam pressure sensor 46 at the outlet of the steam generator 8, the incoming water flow sensor 48, the incoming water temperature sensor 50”; see also claims 1, 4-8);
detecting any imbalance between a primary power signal calculated as a function of the primary power and/or at least one variable indicative of a variation in the primary power and a secondary power signal calculated as a function of the secondary power and/or at least one variable indicative of a variation in the secondary power (p. 2: “calculation of the difference between the primary power and the secondary power,” “detect any imbalance between primary and secondary power”; p. 6: “calculating, respectively for each steam generator 8[] the difference between the primary power P1 and the secondary power P2, the filtered derivative of a difference between the primary power P1 and the secondary power P2; and/or of an energy accumulated by integrating the difference between the primary power P1 and the secondary power P2”; p. 10: “determine whether a safety action is required based on the filtered derivative of the difference between the primary power P1 and the secondary power P2”; see also claim 1); and
if an imbalance is detected, automatically implementing a power-limiting mode, comprising calculation, by the control system, of a target equilibrium power less than or equal to the primary power and less than or equal to the secondary power, and control of the nuclear power plant as a function of the target equilibrium power (p. 2: “Detecting such an imbalance allows the necessary measures to be taken to, for example, limit the power produced, in particular by lowering the control rods to reduce the reactivity of the nuclear reactor and/or shutting down the nuclear reactor”; p. 3: “the reduction of the nuclear reactor power when the filtered derivative of the difference between the primary and secondary power, 20 falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold, the difference between the primary and secondary power falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold, and/or the energy obtained by integrating the difference between the primary and secondary power falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold”; p. 9: “the monitoring and protection process includes 10 the triggering of a safety measure when the difference between the primary power Pi and the secondary power P2 of one of the N steam generators goes above an upper threshold and/or below a lower threshold”; p. 12: “as soon as a comparison is positive, i.e. as soon as the derivative of the difference between the primary power and the secondary power, the difference between the primary power and the secondary power, and/or as soon as the accumulated energy falls below a lower threshold or rises above an upper threshold, the 5 control module 95 is configured to trigger a safety action. Safety actions ... include, for example: lowering control 18 groups and/or shutdown 18 groups to reduce the power of the reactor 10 and/or shut down the nuclear reactor 10”; see also claim 10).
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. Nevertheless, because Feingold does not explicitly address steps performed in an absence of detection of an imbalance, Spurgin is cited herein. Spurgin (newly cited) (see FIGS. 2-5) is similarly directed towards a method for controlling a pressurized water nuclear power plant (FIG. 1), the control method comprising detecting an imbalance between reactor parameters (4:6-13) and, if an imbalance is detected, automatically implementing a power-limiting mode comprising calculation, by a control system (40), of a target equilibrium power (“N2”) less than or equal to a primary power and less than or equal to a secondary power, and control of the nuclear power plant as a function of the target equilibrium power (2:49-56, 4:37-5:25, 5:54-68, 6:34-48, 7:21-59). Spurgin teaches in an absence of detection of an imbalance, implementing a setpoint-following mode, wherein the nuclear power plant is controlled as a function of an operational power setpoint received by the control system so that the primary power and the secondary power follow the operational power setpoint (2:38-43, 5:18-20, 5:30-50). Spurgin further teaches this response provides the advantages of allowing for safe operation of the nuclear reactor without needing to completely shut down the reactor and while meeting load demands during normal operation (3:4-10, 5:18-20, 5:30-50, 8:1-7). It would have therefore been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date (“POSA”) to modify Feingold’s method to include the imbalance detection responses taught by Spurgin for the benefits thereof. Thus, modification of Feingold in order to enhance reactor operation and safety, as suggested by Spurgin, would have been obvious to a POSA.
Regarding claim 22, Feingold in view of Spurgin teaches the control method according to claim 20. Feingold discloses the primary power signal is calculated as a function of the primary power (p. 6: “calculating, from the measurements of the operating parameters and respectively for each steam generator 8, a primary power P1, representative of the thermal power generated by the nuclear reactor and sent to the steam generator 8 via the primary circuit 4 ... calculating, respectively for each steam generator 8[] the difference between the primary power P1 and the secondary power P2, the filtered derivative of a difference between the primary power P1 and the secondary power P2; and/or of an energy accumulated by integrating the difference between the primary power P1 and the secondary power P2”).
Regarding claim 24, Feingold in view of Spurgin teaches the control method according to claim 20. Feingold discloses the secondary power signal is calculated as a function of the secondary power, a steam pressure representative of the steam pressure at an outlet of the steam generator(s), a filtered derivative of the steam pressure, a feedwater temperature representative of a water temperature at an inlet of the steam generator(s), a filtered derivative of the feedwater temperature, a feedwater flow rate representative of the feedwater flow rate at the inlet of the steam generator(s), and/or a filtered derivative of the feedwater flow rate (p. 3: “calculation of the secondary power as a function of the flow rate of the steam leaving the steam generator, the specific enthalpy of the steam leaving the steam generator, the flow rate of liquid water entering the steam generator and the specific enthalpy of liquid water entering the steam generator; the secondary power is calculated based on a further function of the flow rate of water in the liquid state purged from the steam generator and the specific enthalpy of water in the liquid state purged from the steam generator; it includes the calculation of the secondary power as a function of the calculation of the secondary power as a function of the pressure at the outlet of the steam generator, the temperature of the water in the primary circuit at the inlet of the steam generator, the temperature of the water in the primary circuit at the outlet of the steam generator, and the flow rate of water in the primary circuit; a secondary power is calculated as a function of a power transferred from the primary circuit to the steam generator, less a steam generation power representative of the power required to heat the water contained in the steam generator to the saturation temperature due to a pressure variation in the steam generator; the steam generation power is calculated based on the mass of water present in the steam generator, the specific heat capacity of the water present in the steam generator, the specific latent enthalpy of vaporization of the water in the liquid state contained in the steam generator, and the specific enthalpy of the steam at the outlet of the steam generator”; p. 6: “The second sensors include, for example, example, a steam flow sensor 44 to measure the steam flow in the secondary circuit 6 at the outlet of the steam generator 8, a pressure sensor 46 to measure the pressure in the secondary circuit 6 at the outlet of the steam generator 8, an incoming water flow sensor 48 to measure the flow of water entering in liquid form into the steam generator 8 in the secondary circuit 6, and/or an incoming water temperature sensor 50 to measure the water temperature 10 at the inlet of the steam generator 8. The second sensors may further include a purge flow sensor 52 to measure a flow of water in the liquid state extracted from the steam generator 8 on the secondary circuit side 6, via a purge conduit 54”; p. 10: “calculate the secondary power P2 associated with each steam generator 8 based on the measurement signals from the second sensors, here the steam flow sensor 44, the steam pressure sensor 46 at the outlet of the steam generator 8, the incoming water flow sensor 48, the incoming water temperature sensor 50”; see also claims 1, 4-8).
Regarding claim 26, Feingold in view of Spurgin teaches the control method according to claim 20. Feingold discloses the detection of any imbalance comprises comparing a difference between the primary power signal and the secondary power signal with a lower threshold and/or an upper threshold (p. 3: “the reduction of the nuclear reactor power when the filtered derivative of the difference between the primary and secondary power falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold, the difference between the primary and secondary power falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold, and/or the energy obtained by integrating the difference between the primary and secondary power falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold”; see also claim 10).
Regarding claim 27, Feingold in view of Spurgin teaches the control method according to claim 26. Feingold discloses detecting any imbalance comprises the generating of a rebalancing request logic signal when said difference is less than the lower threshold and/or greater than the upper threshold, ordering a switch to the power-limiting mode (p. 3: “the reduction of the nuclear reactor power when the filtered derivative of the difference between the primary and secondary power falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold, the difference between the primary and secondary power falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold, and/or the energy obtained by integrating the difference between the primary and secondary power falls below a lower threshold and/or above an upper threshold”; p. 9: “the monitoring and protection process includes 10 the triggering of a safety measure when the difference between the primary power P1 and the secondary power P2 of one of the N steam generators goes above an upper threshold and/or below a lower threshold”; p. 12: “as soon as a comparison is positive, i.e. as soon as the derivative of the difference between the primary power and the secondary power, the difference between the primary power and the secondary power, and/or as soon as the accumulated energy falls below a lower threshold or rises above an upper threshold, the 5 control module 95 is configured to trigger a safety action. Safety actions ... include, for example: lowering control 18 groups and/or shutdown 18 groups to reduce the power of the reactor 10 and/or shut down the nuclear reactor 10”; see also claim 10). Spurgin similarly also teaches detecting an imbalance comprises generating a rebalancing request logic signal ordering a switch to the power-limiting mode (5:59-68). Thus, Feingold, modified to include the imbalance detection response processes taught by Spurgin, would have resulted in the features of claim 27.
Regarding claim 28, Feingold in view of Spurgin teaches the control method according to claim 20. Spurgin teaches the power-limiting mode is activated for a power-limiting time determined from the detection of an imbalance (6:28-50). Thus, Feingold, modified to include the imbalance detection response processes taught by Spurgin, would have resulted in the features of claim 28.
Regarding claim 29, Feingold in view of Spurgin teaches the control method according to claim 20. Spurgin teaches the target equilibrium power is calculated as a function of a maximum equilibrium power (“N1”), the target equilibrium power being less than or equal to the maximum equilibrium power (4:66-5:25). Thus, Feingold, modified to include the imbalance detection response processes taught by Spurgin, would have resulted in the features of claim 29.
Regarding claim 34, Feingold in view of Spurgin teaches the control method according to claim 20. Spurgin teaches in the power-limiting mode, calculating a primary power setpoint and a secondary power setpoint as a function of the target equilibrium power, and controlling the nuclear power plant in such a way that the primary power matches the primary power setpoint and the secondary power matches the secondary power setpoint (4:37-5:25, 6:34-48, 7:21-59). Thus, Feingold, modified to include the imbalance detection response processes taught by Spurgin, would have resulted in the features of claim 34.
Regarding claim 35, Feingold in view of Spurgin teaches the control method according to claim 34. Spurgin teaches in the power-limiting mode, the primary power setpoint is calculated as equal to the target equilibrium power and the secondary power setpoint is calculated as equal to the target equilibrium power (4:37-5:25, 6:34-48, 7:21-59). Thus, Feingold, modified to include the imbalance detection response processes taught by Spurgin, would have resulted in the features of claim 35.
Note on Prior Art
It should be noted, as stated in MPEP 2173.06, “where there is a great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of a claim, it would not be proper to reject such a claim on the basis of prior art. As stated in In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962), a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should not be based on considerable speculation about the meaning of terms employed in a claim or assumptions that must be made as to the scope of the claims.” Therefore, no prior art rejections have been made for claims 30-32.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21, 23, 25, and 33 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Feingold is the closest prior art, but does not teach or suggest the features as recited in claims 21, 23, 25, and 33. Regarding claim 21, Feingold discloses the secondary power is determined by calculating a thermal power transferred by each steam generator from the primary circuit to the secondary circuit (p. 2), but does not disclose the secondary power is further determined by calculating a sum of the thermal power transferred by each steam generator as recited in claim 21. Regarding claims 23 and 25, while Feingold discloses the primary power signal is equal to the primary power, the secondary power signal is equal to the secondary power, and using filtered derivatives to determine any imbalance (pp. 2, 14), Feingold does not disclose the primary power signal is a sum of the primary power and one or more of the recited filtered derivatives or the secondary power signal is a sum of the secondary power and one or more of the filtered derivatives as recited in claims 23 and 25. Regarding claim 33, Feingold does not disclose the target equilibrium power is determined based on a relation of the primary power to the secondary power to the maximum equilibrium power as recited in claim 33.
The Applied References
For Applicant’s benefit, portions of the applied reference(s) have been cited (as examples) to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection, it is noted that the prior art must be considered in its entirety by Applicant, including any disclosures that may teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02(VI).
Application Status Information
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. For questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). For assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (in USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
Interview Information
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.
Contact Information
Examiner Jinney Kil can be reached at (571) 270-5217, on Monday-Thursday from 8:30AM-6:30PM ET. Supervisor Jack Keith (SPE) can be reached at (571) 272-6878.
/JINNEY KIL/Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights