Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/10/2026 have been fully considered. Prior arts Sesmat and Lee are used to address the arguments.
Please see the rejection below.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/10/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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) 1–6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sesmat et al. (FR 3105343 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US PGPub 20210305594 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
573
1243
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 - Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1
Regarding Claim 1, Sesmat discloses a device for decompressing a gas from a first container (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) but does not disclose the gas as being explosive.
Lee teaches an explosive process gas (Para. 101, where hydrogen is the explosive gas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an explosive gas with the invention of Sesmat, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. MPEP §2144.07. Here, Sesmat discloses that any motive gas can be used, but uses air as an example of motive gas. Because of this, the selection of gas utilized in the motive system is a matter of design choice. Therefore, the explosive gas (hydrogen gas) as taught by Lee is a reasonable design choice.
Per the Sesmat–Lee combination the motive gas is an explosive gas.
The Sesmat–Lee combination teaches a device for decompressing an explosive gas from a first container (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1), and for compressing the explosive gas into a second gas container (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) the device comprising: a source of compressed air (Sesmat 190) but does not teach a source of compressed air positioned outside a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone around the first container.
Lee teaches a source of compressed air (800), positioned outside a perimeter (20) of an explosive atmosphere zone around the first container (200) in order to improve safety and reliability (Para. 101).
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 boundary of Sesmat with an explosion–proof zone as taught by Lee in order to ensure the safety of the materials as well as operators.
For simplification, henceforward Lee’s container 200 will be designated as the first container.
The Sesmat–Lee combination teaches the perimeter (Lee 20) being determined based on the explosive gas (this is inherent) in the first container (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1); a pneumatic booster (Sesmat 30) equipped with an expansion chamber (Sesmat 17) and a compression chamber (Sesmat 23), positioned inside the perimeter (Lee 20) of the explosive atmosphere zone (Lee Fig. 1); a first pipe (Sesmat 30), for air, between the compressed air outlet (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) of the source of compressed air (Sesmat 190) and an inlet (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) of the expansion chamber (Sesmat 17); a second pipe (Sesmat 34), for air, connected to an outlet (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) of the expansion chamber (Sesmat 17); a third pipe (Sesmat 31), for gas, between the first container (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) and an inlet (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) of the compression chamber (Sesmat 23); and a fourth pipe (Sesmat 314), for compressed gas, between an outlet of the compression chamber (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) and the second gas container (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 2, the Sesmat–Lee combination teaches a means for determining a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone around the first container (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1) based on the explosive gas in the first container (Sesmat Annotated Fig. 1). Furthermore, the structural limitation of the apparatus described in the claim is recited in claim(s) 1.
Regarding Claim 3, the Sesmat–Lee combination does not explicitly teach determining a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone comprises a means for collecting an item of information representative of the perimeter of the explosive atmosphere zone based on the explosive gas in the first container.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone comprises a means for collecting an item of information representative of the perimeter of the explosive atmosphere zone based on the explosive gas in the first container, since it has been held that “choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success”. MPEP §2143(I)(E). Here, the type of gas in the first container is a necessary element when designing a perimeter of the explosive atmosphere zone. Knowing contributing factors (such as an item of information representative of the perimeter) that directly affect the design of the explosive atmosphere zone is required in order to ensure the safety inside and outside of the explosive atmosphere zone. Therefore, the Sesmat–Lee combination is capable of teaching determining a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone comprises a means for collecting an item of information representative of the perimeter of the explosive atmosphere zone based on the explosive gas in the first container.
Regarding Claim 4, the Sesmat–Lee combination does not explicitly teach determining a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone comprises a means for calculating the perimeter based on the explosive gas in the first container.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone comprises a means for calculating the perimeter based on the explosive gas in the first container since it has been held that “choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success”. MPEP §2143(I)(E). Here, the type of gas in the first container is a necessary element when designing a perimeter of the explosive atmosphere zone. Without knowing the type of gas used, understanding the parameters required to ensure the safety of elements outside of the perimeter of the explosive atmosphere zone cannot be determined. Therefore, the Sesmat–Lee combination is capable of teaching a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone comprises a means for calculating the perimeter based on the explosive gas in the first container.
Regarding Claim 5, the Sesmat–Lee combination does not explicitly teach the means for determining a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone comprises a means for manually inputting the perimeter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determining a perimeter of an explosive atmosphere zone comprises a means for manually inputting the perimeter, since it has been held that “choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success”. MPEP §2143(I)(E). Knowing contributing factors (such as distance between the compressed air source and the pneumatic booster) that directly affect the design of the explosive atmosphere zone is required in order to ensure safety inside and outside of the explosive atmosphere zone. Therefore, the Sesmat–Lee combination is capable of teaching measuring the distance between the compressed air source and the pneumatic booster, and a means for comparing the distance measured with the perimeter representative of the explosive atmosphere zone determined.
Regarding Claim 6, the Sesmat–Lee combination does not explicitly teach measuring the distance between the compressed air source and the pneumatic booster, and a means for comparing the distance measured with the perimeter representative of the explosive atmosphere zone determined.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to measure the distance between the compressed air source and the pneumatic booster, and a means for comparing the distance measured with the perimeter representative of the explosive atmosphere zone determined, since it has been held that “choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success”. MPEP §2143(I)(E). Knowing contributing factors (such as distance between the compressed air source and the pneumatic booster) that directly affect the design of the explosive atmosphere zone is required in order to ensure safety inside and outside of the explosive atmosphere zone. Therefore, the Sesmat–Lee combination is capable of teaching measuring the distance between the compressed air source and the pneumatic booster, and a means for comparing the distance measured with the perimeter representative of the explosive atmosphere zone determined.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sesmat et al. (FR 3105343 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US PGPub 20210305594 A1), in further view of Mahmoudian et al. (US PGPub 20200271110 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, the Sesmat–Lee combination does not explicitly teach issuing an alert when the distance measured is inside the perimeter of the explosive atmosphere zone determined.
Mahmoudian teaches an alarm when a threshold is exceeded (Para. 17) in order to alert an operator of the conditions and prevent damage (Para. 17).
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 system of the Sesmat–Lee combination with an alarm as taught by Mahmoudian in order to protect apparatuses and people.
The Sesmat–Lee–Mahmoudian combination teaches issuing an alert when the distance measured is inside the perimeter of the explosive atmosphere zone determined.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Angelisa L. Hicks whose telephone number is 571-272-9552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:30AM-5:00PM 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 supervisor, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607 or Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
/Angelisa L. Hicks/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights