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 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a control unit” in claims 1-5; and “a power unit” in claims 1-5.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Paragraph [ 0006 ] discloses an aspect of the present disclosure provides a hydrogen supply device including:
a heater that heats a liquid heating medium;
a vaporizer that vaporizes liquid hydrogen into a hydrogen gas using the heated heating medium;
a circulation flow path that circulates the heating medium between the heater and the vaporizer; and
a control unit that receives as an input one or a plurality of a pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer, a temperature of the heating medium of the vaporizer, and a temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer, in which
the control unit is configured to limit an output of a power unit, to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, based on one or a plurality of the pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer, the temperature of the heating medium of the vaporizer, and the temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer.
Paragraph [ 0008 ] discloses in the hydrogen supply device according to the aspect of the present disclosure,
the control unit may be further configured to:
receive as inputs an inlet pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer and an outlet pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer; and
limit the output of the power unit, to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, when a differential pressure between the inlet pressure and the outlet pressure is equal to or more than a predetermined pressure threshold.
Paragraph [ 0009 ] discloses since the output of the power unit is limited by detecting freezing based on the differential pressure in this manner, the freezing of the heating medium can be effectively suppressed.
Paragraph [ 0010 ] discloses in the hydrogen supply device according to the aspect of the present disclosure,
the control unit may be further configured to:
receive as an input a temperature of the heating medium flowing out of the vaporizer; and
limit the output of the power unit, to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, when the temperature of the heating medium is less than a predetermined temperature threshold.
Paragraph [ 0011 ] discloses since the output of the power unit is limited by detecting freezing based on the temperature of the heating medium flowing out of the vaporizer in this manner, the freezing of the heating medium can be effectively suppressed.
Paragraph [ 0012 ] discloses in the hydrogen supply device according to the aspect of the present disclosure,
the control unit may be further configured to:
receive as an input the temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer; and
limit the output of the power unit, to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, when the temperature of the hydrogen gas is less than a predetermined hydrogen gas temperature threshold.
Paragraph [ 0013 ] discloses since the output of the power unit is limited based on the temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer in this manner, the supply of a hydrogen gas at an extremely low temperature can be effectively suppressed.
Paragraph [ 0014 ] discloses in the hydrogen supply device according to the aspect of the present disclosure,
the control unit may be further configured to:
receive as inputs an inlet pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer, an outlet pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer, a temperature of the heating medium flowing out of the vaporizer, and the temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer; and
limit the output of the power unit, to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, when a differential pressure between the inlet pressure and the outlet pressure is equal to or more than a predetermined pressure threshold, when the temperature of the heating medium is less than a predetermined temperature threshold, or when the temperature of the hydrogen gas is less than a predetermined hydrogen gas temperature threshold.
Paragraph [ 0015 ] discloses since the output of the power unit is limited based on one of a plurality of detected values or the plurality of detected values in this manner, the freezing of the heating medium can be effectively suppressed.
Paragraph [ 0029 ] discloses the control unit 70 is a computer including a CPU 71 that is a processor that performs information processing therein, and a memory 72 that stores control programs and control data. The circulation pump 34 and the liquid hydrogen pump 53 are connected to the control unit 70 and operate according to a command from the control unit 70. The inlet pressure sensor 35, the outlet pressure sensor 36, the heat medium temperature sensor 38, and the hydrogen gas temperature sensor 58 are connected to the control unit 70. The vaporizer inlet heat medium pressure P1 detected by the inlet pressure sensor 35, the vaporizer outlet heat medium pressure P2 detected by the outlet pressure sensor 36, the vaporizer outlet heat medium temperature TL detected by the heat medium temperature sensor 38, and the vaporizer outlet hydrogen gas temperature TH detected by the hydrogen gas temperature sensor 58 are inputted to the control unit 70. Further, the control unit 70 exchanges information with the engine control unit 60. The control unit 70 receives an on/off signal of the start switch 18 from the engine control unit 60. Further, the control unit 70 outputs the generated hydrogen engine output limit signal and hydrogen engine stop signal to the engine control unit 60.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park Jae Hoon et al. (KR 20180036221) in view of (JP 2003524864).
Regarding claim 1, Park Jae Hoon et al. discloses a hydrogen supply device (3, i.e. a gas regeneration) comprising:
a heater (42) that heats a liquid heating medium (page 2, i.e. a liquefied natural gas);
a vaporizer (40, 41, 401,402, 404) that vaporizes liquid hydrogen into a hydrogen gas using the heated heating medium;
a circulation flow path (L2, i.e. a liquefied gas second supply line) that circulates the heating medium between the heater (42) and the vaporize (41)r; and
a control unit (70, i.e. also called a control unit) that receives as an input one or a plurality of a pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer (pages 4, 10-11), a temperature of the heating medium of the vaporizer, and a temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer (page 9),
Park Jae Hoon et al. discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for wherein the control unit is configured to limit an output of a power unit, to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, based on one or a plurality of the pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer, the temperature of the heating medium of the vaporizer, and the temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer.
However, JP ’864 teaches wherein the control unit (30, 32, i.e. a controller/processor) is configured to limit an output of a power unit, to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, based on one or a plurality of the pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer, the temperature of the heating medium of the vaporizer, and the temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer (pages 6-8).
The combination of references are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of a fuel feed device. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Park Jae Hoon and JP ’864 before him or her, to include such a controlling/limiting power of JP ’864 because it ensures efficient generation of electrical power by monitoring and controlling the production of hydrogen and the supply of available oxygen within the fuel processor. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it prevents damage and/or failure to the device (abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Park Jae Hoon in view of JP ’864 discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Park Jae Hoon further discloses wherein the control unit (70, i.e. also called a control unit) is further configured to: receive as inputs an inlet pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer (page 2, i.e. a liquefied natural gas) and an outlet pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer (40, 41, 401,402, 404) (pages 6-8).
JP ’864 discloses limit the output of the power unit (e.g. a battery bank 20), to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, when a differential pressure between the inlet pressure and the outlet pressure is equal to or more than a predetermined pressure threshold (pages 3, 9).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Park Jae Hoon and JP ’864 before him or her, to include such a controlling/limiting power in term pressure differential of JP ’864 because it ensures efficient generation of electrical power by monitoring and controlling the production of hydrogen and the supply of available oxygen within the fuel processor. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it prevents damage and/or failure to the device (abstract).
Regarding claim 3, Park Jae Hoon in view of JP ’864 discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Park Jae Hoon further discloses wherein the control unit (70, i.e. also called a control unit) is further configured to: receive as an input a temperature of the heating medium flowing out of the vaporizer (40, 41, 401,402, 404) (pages 6-8).
JP ’864 discloses limit the output of the power unit (e.g. a battery bank 20), to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, when the temperature of the heating medium is less than a predetermined temperature threshold (pages 7, 11).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Park Jae Hoon and JP ’864 before him or her, to include such a controlling/limiting power in term temperature level of JP ’864 because it ensures efficient generation of electrical power by monitoring and controlling the production of hydrogen and the supply of available oxygen within the fuel processor. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it prevents damage and/or failure to the device (abstract).
Regarding claim 4, Park Jae Hoon in view of JP ’864 discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Park Jae Hoon further discloses wherein the control unit (70, i.e. also called a control unit) is further configured to: receive as an input the temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer (40, 41, 401,402, 404) (pages 6-8).
JP ’864 discloses limit the output of the power unit (e.g. a battery bank 20), to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, when the temperature of the hydrogen gas is less than a predetermined hydrogen gas temperature threshold (pages 7, 11).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Park Jae Hoon and JP ’864 before him or her, to include such a controlling/limiting power in term temperature threshold of JP ’864 because it ensures efficient generation of electrical power by monitoring and controlling the production of hydrogen and the supply of available oxygen within the fuel processor. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it prevents damage and/or failure to the device (abstract).
Regarding claim 5, Park Jae Hoon in view of JP ’864 discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Park Jae Hoon further discloses wherein the control unit (70, i.e. also called a control unit) is further configured to: receive as inputs an inlet pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer, an outlet pressure of the heating medium of the vaporizer, a temperature of the heating medium flowing out of the vaporizer, and the temperature of the hydrogen gas flowing out of the vaporizer (40, 41, 401,402, 404) (pages 6-8).
JP ’864 discloses limit the output of the power unit (e.g. a battery bank 20), to which the hydrogen gas is supplied, when a differential pressure between the inlet pressure and the outlet pressure is equal to or more than a predetermined pressure threshold, when the temperature of the heating medium is less than a predetermined temperature threshold, or when the temperature of the hydrogen gas is less than a predetermined hydrogen gas temperature threshold (pages 7, 11).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Park Jae Hoon and JP ’864 before him or her, to include such a controlling/limiting power of JP ’864 because it ensures efficient generation of electrical power by monitoring and controlling the production of hydrogen and the supply of available oxygen within the fuel processor. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it prevents damage and/or failure to the device (abstract).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. KR 101945596 and Meschter et al. (US 20100124678)discloses circulation between heater and vaporizer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KET D DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7827. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday 7:30 AM - 4:30 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, Steven W. Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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.
/KET D DANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/STEVEN W CRABB/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights