DETAILED ACTION
This detailed action is in response to the amendments filed on 09/25/2023, and any subsequent filings.
Notations “C_”, “L_” and “Pr_” are used to mean “column_”, “line_” and “paragraph_”.
Claim 15 is new. Claims 1-15 are pending.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 12 and 15 read “the power grid”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the valve units" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the predetermined loading pressure" in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the fluctuating power generation plant itself, or from other plants" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication US20090071902A1 (‘Stover’).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claims 1-2, 4-7 and 15, Stover teaches an energy buffer for at least one power generation plant from a time-varying energy source ([0023]), the energy buffer including:
an osmosis device (Fig. 1, [0017], separation membrane element or cartridge 11) configured to:
in a loading process ([0023], RO mode), separate a mixed liquid with a loading pressure into a permeate and a concentrate ([0025]), or
in an unloading process ([0020], PRO mode), mix the permeate with the concentrate while providing an osmotic pressure to form the mixed liquid ([0020]);
a permeate reservoir (Fig. 1, [0025], fresh water reservoir 45) fluidly communicating with the osmosis device and configured to store the permeate (Fig. 1, [0025]);
a concentrate reservoir ([0023], concentrated brine may be stored in a separate basin) fluidly communicating with the osmosis device and configured to store the concentrate ([0023]); and
a control device (Fig. 1, [0023], control device 65) configured to control the following functions:
the loading process with utilization of energy from the at least one power generation plant, the loading process being started in response to a loading signal indicating an excess of electrical energy ([0023]), or
the unloading process while providing electrical energy, the unloading process being started in response to an unload signal indicating a lack of electrical energy ([0023]).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 2: a pressure exchanger (Fig. 1, [0019], pressure transfer device 29) configured to partially utilize an outlet pressure of the osmosis device for the concentrate to generate the loading pressure of the osmosis device ([0021] and [0025], pressure of exit stream is transferred to inlet stream).
Claim 4: further including at least one of the following:
a first pump (Fig. 1, [0019], low pressure pump 55) configured to pump the mixed liquid through the pressure exchanger ([0019]) and, during the loading process, to bring the loading pressure at the osmosis device for the mixed liquid to a predetermined value above the osmotic pressure;
a second pump configured to feed the concentrate from the concentrate reservoir to the osmosis device at a predetermined concentrate pressure during the unloading process;
a third pump (Fig. 1, [0024], high pressure pump 77) configured to pump the mixed liquid bypassing the pressure exchanger (Fig. 1) and, during the loading process, to bring the loading pressure at the osmosis device for the mixed liquid to a predetermined value above the osmotic pressure ([0025], boosted pressure flow merges with output flow from high pressure pump 77 to provide the desired inlet stream);
a plurality of valve units configured to control one or more of the following flows: flow of mixed liquid (Fig. 1, [0024], valve 75), flow of permeate (Fig. 1, [0024], three-way valve 43), flow of concentrate;
a reservoir for the mixed liquid to enable a closed liquid circuit ([0021], diluted stream may be sent to a suitable body of water, such as seawater source 53 from which pump 55 draws).
Claim 5: the control device is further configured to control at least one of the following functions: actuating the first pump ([0024]) and/or the second pump and/or the third pump ([0025]) and/or the valve units ([0025]) to achieve the predetermined loading pressure ([0028]) and/or the predetermined concentrate pressure, wherein the predetermined concentrate pressure during the unloading process is equal to or lower than the osmotic pressure ([0020], the pressure of the liquid in the first subchamber is preferably a pressure not greater than about 90% of the osmotic pressure difference between the two aqueous streams) or equal to half an osmotic pressure.
Claim 6: wherein the osmosis device comprises a membrane (Fig. 1, [0017], membrane 17) configured to separate the mixed liquid ([0025]) at a concentration of at least 3% or at least 5% ([0014]) into the permeate and the concentrate ([0025]).
Claim 7: the membrane is configured to allow operation with a concentration of the concentrate of at least 10% ([0014]) or of at least 20%.
Claim 15: the excess or lack of electrical energy comes from the fluctuating power generation plant itself, or from other plants, or from the power grid ([0023]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication US20100183903A1 (‘McGinnis’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards a method.
Regarding Claim 13, McGinnis teaches a method of buffering energy (abstract) for at least one power generation plant from a time-varying energy source ([0004] and [0011]), the method including:
operating an osmosis device ([0011], RO system) in a loading process in which a mixed liquid with a loading pressure is separated into a permeate and a concentrate by reverse osmosis ([0011], separation);
storing the permeate in a permeate reservoir (Fig. 3, [0042] and [0049], fresh solution tank);
storing the concentrate in a concentrate reservoir (Fig. 3, [0042] and [0049], saline solution tank),
wherein energy of the at least one power generation plant is utilized ([0008], separation unit may be powered with heat generated from geothermal or solar thermal sources).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication US20180128250A1 (‘Iyer’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards a method.
Regarding Claim 14, Iyer teaches a method (abstract) for compensating for a shortage of produced electrical energy from at least one power generation plant or for compensating for a shortage of electricity in a power grid ([0036]), the method including:
operating an osmosis device (Fig. 1, [0030-0031], FO module 12) in an unloading process in which a permeate (Fig. 1, [0031], water 50) and a concentrate (Fig. 1, [0031], osmotic ionic solution 52) are mixed by forward osmosis to form a mixed liquid (Fig. 1, [0031], diluted ionic solution 54);
driving a turbine (Fig. 1, [0030], hydro-turbine) with the mixed liquid from the osmosis device ([0031]);
generating and providing electric power by a generator driven by the turbine ([0031]).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication US20090071902A1 (‘Stover’) in view of U.S. Publication US20110044824A1 (‘Kelada’) and in further view of International Publication WO2010008275A1 (‘Leerdam’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 3, Stover teaches the energy buffer of Claim 1, except that the concentrate reservoir is arranged above the permeate reservoir to maintain a hydrostatic pressure of the permeate lower than a hydrostatic pressure of the concentrate.
Kelada also relates to an energy buffer (abstract and [0072]), wherein the concentrate reservoir (Fig. 22, [0217], downpipe for brine) is arranged above the permeate reservoir (Fig. 22, [0218], permeate of RO1 goes to the bottom of ISOP 2) to maintain a hydrostatic pressure of the permeate lower than a hydrostatic pressure of the concentrate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the concentrate reservoir to be arranged above the permeate reservoir in Stover, as demonstrated by Kelada, to obtain higher potential energy storage due to the increased height difference (Leerdam, pg. 2, Pr4 and pg. 6, Pr1).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication US20090071902A1 (‘Stover’) in view of Publication Large scale energy storage using multistage osmotic processes: approaching high efficiency and energy density (‘Bhawadwaj’, Sustainable Energy Fuels, 2017,1, 599-614).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 8, Stover teaches the energy buffer according to Claim 1, except that the mixed liquid is a pure salt solution and the energy buffer is a closed system without mass transfer with the environment.
Bhawadwaj also relates to an energy buffer for at least one power generation plant from a time-varying energy source (section 2 Working principle of osmotic energy storage), wherein mixed liquid is a pure salt solution (section 2 Working principle of osmotic energy storage) and the energy buffer is a closed system without mass transfer with the environment (pg. 604, right column, Pr3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the mixed liquid of Stover to be a pure salt solution, as demonstrated by Bhawadwaj, and for the energy buffer to be a closed system without mass transfer with the environment, as demonstrated by Bhawadwaj, to assist in addressing the issue of fouling and improving membrane performance (Bhawadwaj, pg. 609, right column, Pr2).
Claims 9 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication US20090071902A1 (‘Stover’) in view of U.S. Publication US20100183903A1 (‘McGinnis’).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claims 9 and 11-12, Stover teaches a power generation plant from a time-varying energy source, comprising: an energy buffer according to any of the preceding claims (see analysis of Claim 1), except that the power generation plant is a wind power plant or a photovoltaic power plant or a hydroelectric power plant or a geothermal power plant or a combination thereof.
McGinnis also relates to a power generation plant from a time-varying energy source ([0004] and [0011]), wherein the power generation plant is a wind power plant or a photovoltaic power plant or a hydroelectric power plant or a geothermal power plant or a combination thereof ([0011]) comprising: an energy buffer ([0042-0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the power generation plant of Stover to be a wind power plant or a photovoltaic power plant or a hydroelectric power plant or a geothermal power plant or a combination thereof, as demonstrated by McGinnis, to provide power reliability to renewable energy sources that are inherently unreliable in nature (McGinnis, [0004]).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 11: further comprising at least one turbine configured to utilize the osmotic pressure of the mixed liquid generated by the osmosis device for electrical power generation (Stover, [0007] and [0021]), in PRO mode, delivering at least some of a liquid stream of amplified volume to a hydroturbine power generator).
Claim 12: the control device is further configured to receive the control signal and, based thereon, start the loading process or the unloading process, the control signal indicating one of the following:
a period of wind shortage or sunlight shortage (McGinnis, [0073]),
a phase of wind surplus or sunlight surplus (McGinnis, [0073]),
a phase of lack of power supply in a power system (Stover, [0023]),
a phase of excess power supply in the power grid (Stover, [0023]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication US20090071902A1 (‘Stover’) and U.S. Publication US20100183903A1 (‘McGinnis’) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of International Publication WO2010088919A1 (‘Elsaid’), U.S. Publication US20110044824A1 (‘Kelada’) and in further view of International Publication WO2010008275A1 (‘Leerdam’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Stover and McGinnis teaches the power generation plant of Claim 9, except that the energy buffer is a hybrid storage device in which: the permeate reservoir is located below the concentrate reservoir in a tower of the wind turbine or in a house with the photovoltaic system, and the reservoir for the mixed liquid is arranged above, on or below a ground surf ace or water surface, to achieve hybrid energy storage as a combination of osmotic energy storage with mechanical pumped storage.
Elsaid also relates to a power generation plant from a time-varying energy source, wherein the power generation plant is a wind power plant or a photovoltaic power plant or a hydroelectric power plant or a geothermal power plant or a combination thereof, comprising: an energy buffer (abstract and pg. 1, Technical Field), the energy buffer is a hybrid storage device in a tower of the wind turbine or in a house with the photovoltaic system (Fig. 7, pg. 16, last Pr-pg. 17, Pr1) to achieve hybrid energy storage as a combination of osmotic energy storage with mechanical pumped storage (Fig. 7, pg. 16, last Pr-pg. 17, Pr1).
Kelada teaches that the permeate reservoir (Fig. 22, [0218], permeate of RO1 goes to the bottom of ISOP 2) is located below the concentrate reservoir (Fig. 22, [0217], downpipe for brine) is arranged above the permeate reservoir.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the energy buffer of Stover and McGinnis to be a hybrid storage device, as demonstrated by Elsaid, so that additional area requirements for the energy storage system are not required (Elsaid, pg. 16, last Pr-pg. 17, Pr1). It would have been obvious to for the permeate reservoir to be located below the concentrate reservoir, as demonstrated by Kelada, to obtain higher potential energy storage due to the increased height difference (Leerdam, pg. 2, Pr4 and pg. 6, Pr1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-4613. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779