DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Examiner Comment
The applicant is thanked for providing line numbers to the claims.
Drawings
The drawings dated 1/21/2026 are an improvement, however, the text on the drawings is illegible and therefore the drawings are objected to because it is unclear what the writing on the drawings say. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The amendment to the disclosure dated 1/21/2026 is accepted.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9, 12-14 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In regard to claim 1, the recitation, “to receive cryogenic liquid” (line 3) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing cryogenic liquid and it is unclear if this is the same liquid recited previously or not.
The recitation, “pump cryogenic liquid” (line 5) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing cryogenic liquid and it is unclear if this is the same liquid recited previously or not.
The recitation, “pump cryogenic liquid” (line 7) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing cryogenic liquid and it is unclear if this is the same liquid recited previously or not.
The recitation, “vaporize cryogenic liquid” (line 9) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing cryogenic liquid and it is unclear if this is the same liquid recited previously or not.
In regard to claim 2, the recitation, “the interior” lacks proper antecedent basis.
In regard to claim 6, the recitation, “store warming fluid” (line 3) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing warming fluid and it is unclear if this is the same or different fluid.
The recitation, “provide warming fluid” (line 3) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing warming fluid and it is unclear if this is the same or different fluid.
In regard to claim 7, the recitation, “warm warming fluid” (line 7) is indefinite is indefinite for improperly reintroducing warming fluid and it is unclear if this is the same or different fluid.
The recitation, “direct warming fluid” (line 7) is indefinite is indefinite for improperly reintroducing warming fluid and it is unclear if this is the same or different fluid.
In regard to claim 8, the recitation, “storing a cryogenic liquid” (line 11) is indefinite since it is unclear if this is or is not the previously recited cryogenic fluid.
The recitation, “directing cryogenic liquid” (line 12) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing cryogenic liquid and it is unclear if this is the same liquid recited previously or not.
The recitation, “pump in cryogenic liquid” (line 14) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing cryogenic liquid and it is unclear if this is the same liquid recited previously or not.
The recitation, “pumping cryogenic liquid” (line 15) is indefinite for improperly reintroducing cryogenic liquid and it is unclear if this is the same liquid recited previously or not.
The recitation, “in the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger” (line 24) is indefinite for lacking proper antecedent basis.
In regard to claim 12, the recitation “the step of receiving and storing warming fluid” (line 1-2) is indefinite for lacking proper antecedent basis for the step and for improperly reintroducing warming fluid.
In regard to claim 13, the recitation “the step of warming” is indefinite for lacking proper antecedent basis.
In regard to claim 14, the recitation “the step of insulating” is indefinite for lacking proper antecedent basis.
The recitation “the interior” is indefinite for lacking proper antecedent basis.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
All of the claims have been evaluated under the three-prong test set forth in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, and it is considered that none of the claim recitations should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drube (US 5954101) in view of Mackey (US 2014/0034162) and Loesch (US 4438729). See the indefiniteness rejections and note that the prior art teaches the claimed features as far as can be interpreted.
In regard to claim(s) 1, 6-7, Drube teaches a system (see whole disclosure) for dispensing a cryogenic fluid (“cryogenic liquid”, column 1, line 10-15) comprising:
a. a bulk tank (62) configured to contain a supply of the cryogenic liquid (61 column 4, line 36);
b. a sump (66) configured to receive the cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid) from the bulk tank (62);
c. a pump (24) positioned within the sump (66) and configured to be submerged within (within sump 62) and pump the cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid) stored within the sump (62);
e. a vaporizing heat exchanger (75) configured to receive and vaporize the cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid) pumped from the pump (24).
Drube does not explicitly teach a second positive-displacement pump submerged within the sump (66) configured to pump the cryogenic liquid stored within the sump (66). However providing a sump with a plurality of pumps is routine and ordinary for providing greater pumping capability as taught by Mackey. Mackey teaches a system (see whole disclosure) for dispensing a cryogenic fluid (liquid hydrogen, para. 16) comprising: a. a bulk tank (12) configured to contain a supply of the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen); b. a sump (10, para. 29) configured to receive the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) from the bulk tank (12); c. a first positive-displacement pump (26 or 28; para. 37) positioned within the sump (10) and configured to be submerged within (within 10) and pump the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) stored within the sump (10); d. a second positive-displacement pump (26 or 28, para. 37) positioned within the sump (10) and configured to be submerged within (within 10) and pump the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) stored within the sump (10); e. a vaporizing heat exchanger (para. 49) configured to receive and vaporize the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) pumped from the first pump and/or the second pump (26 or 28; para. 48-49). Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Drube with a second pump in the sump (66) of Drube for the purpose of providing greater pumping capabilities.
Drube does not explicitly teach that the vaporizing heat exchanger is heated by a warming fluid circuit as claimed. However, it is well known and obvious to vaporize cryogenic liquid with a warming fluid circuit having all of the claimed features in view of the teachings of Loesch.
Loesch teaches pumping (via 30) a cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) to a vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44); the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) receives a warming fluid (at least 70; “coolant fluid” column 8, line 55-60) so that the cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) is warmed and vaporized (column 6, line 25-35) by the warming fluid (at least 70) in the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44); at least one hydraulic motor (22, 31, 32, 24, column 5, line 18-32) configured to articulate (interpreted as provide at least some operation of) the pump (30) using a hydraulic fluid (column 5, line 24-30) so that the hydraulic fluid is warmed (column 11, line 40-45);
a hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) configured to receive cooled warming fluid (72; see fig. 3-5) from the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) wherein the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) is further configured to receive warmed hydraulic fluid (Fig. 5; at least 278, 304) from the at least one hydraulic motor (22, 31, 32, 24) so that the cooled warming fluid (72) from the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) is warmed in the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) using the warmed hydraulic fluid (at least 278, 304);
and additionally teaches the limitations of claim 6, including a warming fluid storage tank (46, 184) in fluid communication with the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) so as to receive and store the warming fluid (see volume within 46, 184), said warming fluid storage tank (46, 184) configured to provide the warming fluid (coolant fluid) to the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44);
and additionally teaches the limitations of claim 7, including a supplemental heat exchanger (56, 58) configured to receive and warm the warming fluid (coolant fluid) from the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) and direct the warming fluid (coolant fluid) to the warming fluid supply tank (184, 46).
Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the vaporizer of Drube with the warming fluid circuit and the hydraulic fluid circuit as identified from Loesch above for the purpose of providing useful vaporization heat from the waste heat of the first and second power sources of the first and second cryogenic liquid pumps thereby providing efficient vaporization to the cryogenic liquid and useful cooling of the power sources.
In regard to claim 2, Drube teaches that the bulk tank (62) and the sump (66) are positioned within a jacket (67, 68, 69, column 4, line 41) wherein an interior (inside) of the jacket (67, 68, 69) is at least partially evacuated of air (column 4, line 40-45).
In regard to claim 3, Drube does not appear to explicitly identify hydrogen as the cryogenic liquid. However, Mackey teaches that the cryogenic liquid is liquid hydrogen (para. 16). Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide liquid hydrogen in the system for the purpose of fueling and dispensing hydrogen powered vehicles.
In regard to claim(s) 8, 12-13, Drube teaches a method (see whole disclosure) for dispensing a cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid, column 1, line 10-15) comprising:
a. storing the cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid; column 4, line 36) in a bulk tank (62);
b. directing the cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid) from the bulk tank (62) to a sump (66);
c. submerging a positive displacement pump (24) in the cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid) in the sump (66);
d. pumping the cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid) from the sump (66) to a vaporizing heat exchanger (75) using the pump (24);
e. vaporizing the cryogenic liquid (cryogenic liquid) in the vaporizing heat exchanger (75) to form a cryogenic vapor (thereafter).
f. dispensing the cryogenic vapor (use after 75).
Drube does not explicitly teach a second positive-displacement pump submerged within the sump (66) configured to pump the cryogenic liquid stored within the sump (66). However providing a sump with a plurality of pumps is routine and ordinary for providing greater pumping capability as taught by Mackey. Mackey teaches a system (see whole disclosure) for dispensing a cryogenic fluid (liquid hydrogen, para. 16) comprising: a. a bulk tank (12) configured to contain a supply of the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen); b. a sump (10, para. 29) configured to receive the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) from the bulk tank (12); c. a first positive-displacement pump (26 or 28; para. 37) positioned within the sump (10) and configured to be submerged within (within 10) and pump the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) stored within the sump (10); d. a second positive-displacement pump (26 or 28, para. 37) positioned within the sump (10) and configured to be submerged within (within 10) and pump the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) stored within the sump (10); e. a vaporizing heat exchanger (para. 49) configured to receive and vaporize the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) pumped from the first pump and/or the second pump (26 or 28; para. 48-49). Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Drube with a second pump in the sump (66) of Drube for the purpose of providing greater pumping capabilities.
Drube does not explicitly teach that the vaporizing heat exchanger is heated by a warming fluid circuit as claimed. However, it is well known and obvious to vaporize cryogenic liquid with a warming fluid circuit having all of the claimed features in view of the teachings of Loesch. Loesch teaches pumping (via 30) a cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) to a vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44); vaporizing the cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) in the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) using a warming fluid (at least 70; “coolant fluid” column 8, line 55-60) that warms and vaporizes the cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) in the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) whereby the warming fluid is cooled (column 6, line 25-35);
articulating (interpreted as provide at least some operation of) the pump (30) with at least one hydraulic motor (22, 31, 32, 24, column 5, line 18-32) using a hydraulic fluid (column 5, line 24-30) so that the hydraulic fluid is warmed (column 11, line 40-45); warming the cooled warming fluid (72) in a hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) using the warmed hydraulic fluid (at least 278, 304) from the at least one hydraulic motor (22, 31, 32, 24);
and additionally teaches the limitations of claim 12, including a step of receiving and storing the warming fluid (coolant fluid to 46, 184) from the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) in a warming fluid storage tank (46, 184);
and additionally teaches the limitations of claim 13, including a step of warming the warming fluid (coolant fluid) using a supplemental heat exchanger (56, 58);
Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the vaporizing heat exchanger of Drube with the warming fluid circuit and the hydraulic fluid circuit as identified from Loesch above for the purpose of providing useful vaporization heat from the waste heat of the first and second power sources of the first and second cryogenic liquid pumps thereby providing efficient vaporization to the cryogenic liquid and useful cooling of the power sources.
In regard to claim 9, Drube does not appear to explicitly identify hydrogen as the cryogenic liquid. However, Mackey teaches that the cryogenic liquid is liquid hydrogen (para. 16). Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide liquid hydrogen in the system for the purpose of fueling and dispensing hydrogen powered vehicles.
In regard to claim 14, Drube teaches insulating the bulk tank (62) and the sump (66) using a jacket (67, 68, 69, column 4, line 41) containing the bulk tank (62) and the sump (66) where an interior (inside) of the jacket (67, 68, 69) is at least partially evacuated of air (column 4, line 40-45).
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6-9, 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackey (US 2014/0034162) and Loesch (US 4438729). See the indefiniteness rejections and note that the prior art teaches the claimed features as far as can be interpreted.
In regard to claim 1, Mackey teaches a system (see whole disclosure) for dispensing a cryogenic fluid (liquid hydrogen, para. 16) comprising:
a. a bulk tank (12) configured to contain a supply of the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen);
b. a sump (10, para. 29) configured to receive the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) from the bulk tank (12);
c. a first positive-displacement pump (26 or 28; para. 37) positioned within the sump (10) and configured to be submerged within (within 10) and pump the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) stored within the sump (10);
d. a second positive-displacement pump (26 or 28, para. 37) positioned within the sump (10) and configured to be submerged within (within 10) and pump the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) stored within the sump (10);
e. a vaporizing heat exchanger (para. 49) configured to receive and vaporize the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) pumped from the first pump and/or the second pump (26 or 28; para. 48-49).
Mackey does not explicitly teach that the vaporizing heat exchanger is heated by a warming fluid circuit as claimed. However, it is well known and obvious to vaporize cryogenic liquid with a warming fluid circuit having all of the claimed features in view of the teachings of Loesch.
Loesch teaches pumping (via 30) a cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) to a vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44); the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) receives a warming fluid (at least 70; “coolant fluid” column 8, line 55-60) so that the cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) is warmed and vaporized (column 6, line 25-35) by the warming fluid (at least 70) in the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44); at least one hydraulic motor (22, 31, 32, 24, column 5, line 18-32) configured to articulate (interpreted as provide at least some operation of) the pump (30) using a hydraulic fluid (column 5, line 24-30) so that the hydraulic fluid is warmed (column 11, line 40-45); a hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) configured to receive cooled warming fluid (72; see fig. 3-5) from the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) wherein the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) is further configured to receive warmed hydraulic fluid (Fig. 5; at least 278, 304) from the at least one hydraulic motor (22, 31, 32, 24) so that the cooled warming fluid (72) from the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) is warmed in the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) using the warmed hydraulic fluid (at least 278, 304);
and additionally teaches the limitations of claim 6, including a warming fluid storage tank (46, 184) in fluid communication with the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) so as to receive and store the warming fluid (see volume within 46, 184), said warming fluid storage tank (46, 184) configured to provide the warming fluid (coolant fluid) to the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44);
and additionally teaches the limitations of claim 7, including a supplemental heat exchanger (56, 58) configured to receive and warm the warming fluid (coolant fluid) from the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) and direct the warming fluid (coolant fluid) to the warming fluid supply tank (184, 46).
Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the vaporizing heat exchanger of Mackey with the warming fluid circuit and the hydraulic fluid circuit as identified from Loesch above for the purpose of providing useful vaporization heat from the waste heat of the first and second power sources of the first and second cryogenic liquid pumps thereby providing efficient vaporization to the cryogenic liquid and useful cooling of the power sources.
In regard to claim 3, Mackey teaches that the cryogenic liquid is liquid hydrogen (para. 16, 29).
In regard to claim 8, Mackey teaches a method (see whole disclosure) for dispensing a cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen, para. 16) comprising:
a. storing the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) in a bulk tank (12);
b. directing the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) from the bulk tank (12) to a sump (10, para. 29);
c. submerging a first positive-displacement pump (26 or 28; para. 37) and a second positive displacement pump (28 or 26) in the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) in the sump (10);
d. pumping the cryogenic liquid (liquid hydrogen) from the sump (10) to a vaporizing heat exchanger (para. 49) using the first pump and/or the second pump (26 or 28; para. 48-49)
e. vaporizing the cryogenic liquid in the vaporizing heat exchanger (para. 49) to form a cryogenic vapor (thereafter).
f. dispensing the cryogenic vapor (use after vaporization).
However, it is well known and obvious to vaporize cryogenic liquid with a warming fluid circuit having all of the claimed features in view of the teachings of Loesch. Loesch teaches pumping (via 30) a cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) to a vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44); vaporizing the cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) in the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) using a warming fluid (at least 70; “coolant fluid” column 8, line 55-60) that warms and vaporizes the cryogenic liquid (liquid nitrogen) in the vaporizing heat exchanger (42, 44) whereby the warming fluid is cooled (column 6, line 25-35);
Articulating (interpreted as provide at least some operation of) the pump (30) with at least one hydraulic motor (22, 31, 32, 24, column 5, line 18-32) using a hydraulic fluid (column 5, line 24-30) so that the hydraulic fluid is warmed (column 11, line 40-45); warming the cooled warming fluid (72) in a hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) using the warmed hydraulic fluid (at least 278, 304) from the at least one hydraulic motor (22, 31, 32, 24);
and additionally teaches the limitations of claim 12, including a step of receiving and storing the warming fluid (coolant fluid to 46, 184) from the hydraulic fluid heat exchanger (50, 52, 54) in a warming fluid storage tank (46, 184);
and additionally teaches the limitations of claim 13, including a step of warming the warming fluid (coolant fluid) using a supplemental heat exchanger (56, 58);
Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the vaporizing heat exchanger of Mackey with the warming fluid circuit and the hydraulic fluid circuit as identified from Loesch above for the purpose of providing useful vaporization heat from the waste heat of the first and second power sources of the first and second cryogenic liquid pumps thereby providing efficient vaporization to the cryogenic liquid and useful cooling of the power sources.
In regard to claim 9, Mackey teaches that the cryogenic liquid is liquid hydrogen (para. 16, 29).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments (page 9-10) are an allegation that Loesch does not teach a pump “powered by” a hydraulic motor and that Loesch teaches internal combustion engines. In response, the allegation is unpersuasive since the identified structure provides the claimed structure of a hydraulic motor. It is not clear what structure the applicant believes is missing from the identified prior art, but the recited structure is taught by the prior art and therefore the allegation is unpersuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated any of the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record on the 892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN F PETTITT whose telephone number is (571)272-0771. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 9-5p. 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): http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. The examiner’s supervisor, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like 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.
/JOHN F PETTITT, III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights