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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for domestic benefit based on a provisional application 63/404,805 filed on August 08, 2022.
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions was required under 35 U.S.C. 121 filed on 03/25/2026 wherein the applicant elected Group I (claims 1 – 16). Claims 17 – 20 were non-elected, withdrawn, and not considered in this office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception {i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claims are directed to a method of utilizing a variable renewable energy by determining a time range.
Step 1: The claim (claim 1) recites a method of utilizing a variable renewable energy including using a look-ahead forecast model, measuring cell stacks, and determining a time range. Thus, the claims are directed to a process and machine, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong 1: Abstract ideas have been identified by the courts by way of example, including fundamental economic practices, certain methods of organization of human activities, an idea 'of itself,' and mathematical relationships/formulas. Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2355 - 56. Claim 1 recites limitations of: -using a look-ahead forecast model; -measuring an operation of an electrolyzer cell stack using the model; and -determining a time range of operation of the cell stacks. The determining limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic power components. That is, other than reciting “electrolyzer cell stacks,” “a controller,” and “renewable energy,” nothing in the claim precludes the determining steps from practically being performed in the human mind. For example, but for the “utilizing a variable renewable energy” language in the preamble, the claim encompasses measuring and determining a time range of operation of the cell stacks which is a limitation as a mental process. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites in the preamble controlling power generation. The steps of determining and measuring recited at a high level of generality, These limitations are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using an unknown structure and these steps could be performed as a mental process. Accordingly, this element in the preamble and the other steps of determining do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to the abstract idea. Accordingly, this additional element of determining a time range does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step (2B): The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea and do not provide an inventive concept. In this instance, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of the determining, using a model, and measuring amounts to no more than mere mental steps to apply the exception using unknown or generic hydrogen power components. Mere generalities of determining and measuring to apply an exception using a generic components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Thus the claim is not drawn to patent eligible subject matter as it is directed to the same abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claim 2: the elements of wherein the look-ahead forecast model assesses wind energy, solar energy, geothermal energy, hydro-energy, or any combination thereof are only generic elements of renewable energy and do not add anything significantly more and is also rejected under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claim 3: the elements of minimizing loss or minimizing missed production is drafted to a high degree of generality of reducing costs and does not add anything significantly more or recited a practical application and is also rejected under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claim 4: the elements of wherein minimizing loss comprises minimizing available renewable energy loss and minimizing missed production comprises minimizing potential loss due to suboptimal implementation of the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks, further narrows the limitations of claim 3, but do not add anything significantly more or recited a practical application and is also rejected under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claim 5: the elements of further comprising using the look-ahead
forecast model for forecasting available variable energy over a period of about 14 days, do not add anything significantly more or recited a practical application and is also rejected under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claim 6: the elements of further comprising the controller determining the operation of the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks based on a characteristic of the electrolysis system, wherein the characteristic of the electrolysis system includes one or more of a capacity factor, a cost to produce hydrogen, and an availability of the electrolyzer cell stacks, do not add anything significantly more or recited a practical application and is also rejected under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claim 7: the elements of comprising the controller determining the operation of the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks based on a constant hydrogen demand due to a designated process demand, do not add anything significantly more or recited a practical application and is also rejected under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claim 8: the elements of comprising the controller determining if an excess hydrogen is being produced, and storing the excess hydrogen produced in a hydrogen storage system. do not add anything significantly more or recited a practical application and is also rejected under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claim 9: the elements of comprising the controller determining if the excess hydrogen is being produced based on the constant hydrogen demand due to the designated process, do not add anything significantly more or recited a practical application and is also rejected under 35 USC 101.
Dependent claims 10 – 16 also do not add anything more to the mental process and therefore are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 5 discloses the element of “about” 14 days. The term “about” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Appropriate action is required.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 7 discloses the element of “comprising the controller determining the operation of the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks based on a constant hydrogen demand due to a designated process demand.” The term is indefinite as one having ordinary skill would not understand the meaning of “determining the operation of…” One having ordinary skill would not understand the meaning of determining the operation of based on the two elements of hydrogen demand and process demand. The claim and specification do not relate the two elements mentioned of process and hydrogen demand in a meaningful way as to trigger a controller command of determining. The term(s) and claim overall ill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Appropriate action is required.
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)(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 – 4, 6, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mehta et al. (US Patent No. 11,625,020), herein “Mehta.”
Regarding claim 1,
Mehta teaches a method of utilizing a variable renewable energy comprising: (Abstract: “a method of controlling an industrial gas plant complex comprising a plurality of industrial gas plants powered by one or more renewable power sources…” Col. 1, lines 28 – 32: “…the variable and intermittent nature of wind, solar and/or tidal power is problematic and renders it difficult to ensure maximum utilisation of an industrial gas plant or industrial gas plant complex utilizing such power sources.” See also Col. 8, lines 18 – 23 that teaches the renewable energy source may be from stored hydrogen. )
using a look-ahead forecast model that provides an assessment of an available renewable energy, (Col. 13, lines 43 – 48: “The model is trained periodically (for example, on a daily basis) or on demand (if, for example, the accuracy of the model demands a training process) to create a relationship between predicted variables of the renewable energy power plant to determine predicted energy availability for a pre-determined future period.”)
measuring an operation of one or more electrolyzer cell stacks in an electrolysis system to produce hydrogen by a controller that uses the look-ahead forecast model in real-time, (Col. 4, lines Col. 22, lines 15 – 24: “In addition, the operational characteristic data may comprise data generated by one or more physics-based models as discussed above. The physics-based models may take measured specific industrial gas plant characteristics (specific to each industrial gas plant) and may generate one or more metrics indicative of the performance of the industrial gas plant. These time-dependent metrics may then be used as inputted operational characteristic data to train the machine learning model assigned to the respective industrial gas plant.” Col. 11, line 63 – Col. 12, line 2: “By way of example, the Hydrogen production plant control system 112 may be configured to monitor the amount and rate of generation of Hydrogen gas from the electrolysis by measurement. Such a measurement may be derived from sensor measurements such as direct flow measurements, or alternatively inferred through indirect measurements such as the electrolyser current or power demand.” Col. 12, 52 – 60: “The power prediction module 152 comprises a machine learning algorithm implemented on a computing system and operable to generate a model to predict future power generation. In embodiments, an aspect of the power prediction module 152 is to be able to predict future power generation from a variable and/or intermittent source such as a renewable power source so that one or more industrial gas plants (which in general require a constant power load) can be controlled without risk of power starvation of the plants.” Col. 14, lines 19 – 24: “As noted above, meteorological measurements come from the weather and forecast database 160 which may comprise a weather data service or other internet-connected resource. Load, solar power and wind power are measured by the operator or fed via the renewable energy control systems 120 as part of an automated data collection system.”)
and determining a time range of operation of each of the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks in the electrolysis system. (Col. 9, lines 30 – 33: “The Hydrogen production plant 12 comprises a plurality of electrolysis units 12a, 12b ... 12n or electrolysis cells. Each unit or cell may be referred to as an "electrolyser" 12a, 12b ... 12n.” Col. 22, lines 25 – 32: “At step 320, the trained machine learning model for each industrial gas plant is executed to predict operational characteristics for each respective industrial gas plant for a pre-determined future time period. This prediction may optionally be used to control the behavior of the respective industrial gas plant, to predict likely usage, maintenance schedules, resource allocation or to identify process issues and potential problems.” See also Col. 23, lines 33 – 43: “At step 350, a determination is made as to whether a further training process is required. This may be based on an empirical metric such as a pre-determined time period. Alternatively, it may be based on an assessment of the accuracy of the machine learning model by comparing a value of the predicted operational characteristics for a pre-determined future time period with the actual operational characteristics of the industrial gas plant at the end of the predicted future time period. This enables determination of a prediction error value which provides a metric for the accuracy of the model.” See also Col. 17, lines 12 – 22.)
Regarding claim 2,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 2 depends. Mehta also teaches that the look-ahead forecast model assesses wind energy, solar energy, geothermal energy, hydro-energy, or any combination thereof. (Col. 19, lines 6 – 15: “A further aspect of the Ammonia loop is the different modes of operation. In embodiments, two main modes are present: Normal and Stand-by. The Normal model involves ramping up and down in response to the amount of Hydrogen available. This data is tracked in the DCS and is utilized to see any performance differences or to diagnose any process deviations from production planning. This time-dependent operational characteristic data may be utilized as inputs to the trained machine learning model to predict future operational behavior.” Claims 1: “A method of controlling an industrial gas plant complex comprising a plurality of industrial gas plants powered by one or more renewable power sources, the method being executed by at least one hardware processor, the method comprising: receiving time-dependent predicted power data for a pre-determined future time period from the one or more renewable power sources; receiving time-dependent predicted operational characteristic data for each industrial gas plant, the time-dependent predicted operational characteristic data including data for: hydrogen storage for hydrogen storage of hydrogen output from a hydrogen production plant; nitrogen storage for nitrogen storage of an air separation unit (ASU); electrolyzer hydrogen produced for the hydrogen production plant; and ammonia flow to storage for an ammonia loop of an ammonia production plant; utilizing the predicted power data and predicted characteristic data in an optimization model to generate a set of state variables for the plurality of industrial gas plants, the industrial gas plants comprising the hydrogen production plant and the ammonia production plant;”)
Regarding claim 3,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 3 depends. Mehta also teaches comprising minimizing loss or minimizing missed production. (Col. 23, lines 11 – 19: “In addition, in embodiments, the scheduling of maintenance may be done in conjunction with determination of power resources and capacity of storage units. For example, the maintenance of a gas-generating component (e.g. electrolyzers, ASUs, Ammonia production plant) may be scheduled to occur during a period when gas stores are high and predicted available renewable power is low so as to minimize disruption and maintain continuity of service provision.”)
Regarding claim 4,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 3 which claim 4 depends. Mehta also teaches minimizing loss comprises minimizing available renewable energy loss and minimizing missed production comprises minimizing potential loss due to suboptimal implementation of the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks. (Col. 23, lines 11 – 19: “In addition, in embodiments, the scheduling of maintenance may be done in conjunction with determination of power resources and capacity of storage units. For example, the maintenance of a gas-generating component (e.g. electrolyzers, ASUs, Ammonia production plant) may be scheduled to occur during a period when gas stores are high and predicted available renewable power is low so as to minimize disruption and maintain continuity of service provision.” See also Col. 22, lines 33 – 44.)
Regarding claim 6,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim which claim 6 depends. Mehta also teaches the controller determining the operation of the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks based on a characteristic of the electrolysis system, wherein the characteristic of the electrolysis system includes one or more of a capacity factor, a cost to produce hydrogen, and an availability of the electrolyzer cell stacks. (Col. 2, lines 27 – 30: “In embodiments, controlling the utilization comprises utilizing an algorithm to select one or more storage resources from a group of storage resources for a given pattern of predicted power availability as a function of time.” Col. 3, lines 21 – 26: “executing the trained machine learning model to predict available power resources for the one or more industrial gas plants for a pre-determined future time period; and controlling the one or more industrial gas plants in response to the predicted available power resources for the pre-determined future time period.” Col. 23, line 66 – Col. 24, line 6: “The rates of the other industrial gas plants such as Hydrogen production plant 12, hydrogen compression and storage system 14, the air separation unit 16, Nitrogen storage 16a and the water plant are linked to ammonia rate and are controlled by lower-level controllers as described above. Only the first value from the list of optimal value for time c+1 is implemented, and the calculation is repeated at time c+1 with new data as it becomes available.” See also Col. 24, lines 42 – 49.)
Regarding claim 16,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim which claim 16 depends. Mehta also teaches the controller (control system (items 100, 110, 114, 118 and 120.) and/or hardware processor.) operating the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks to account for a change in renewable energy availability. (Col. 8, lines 11 – 16: “Electricity for powering the industrial gas plant complex 10 is generated at least in part by renewable energy sources such as wind 24 and/or the solar 26 although other sources such as a diesel-, petrol- or hydrogen-powered generator (not shown) or a national power grid (not shown) may optionally be utilised.” Col. 9, lines 39 – 46: “Any suitable type of electrolyser may be used. In embodiments, the plurality of electrolysers usually consists of a multiplicity of individual cells combined into “modules” that also include process equipment such as pumps, coolers, and/or separators. Hundreds of cells may be used and may be grouped in separate buildings. Each module typically has a maximum capacity greater than 10 MW, although this is not intended to be limiting.” Col. 18, lines 9 – 18: “Water electrolysis is an energy intensive process and a key process step in the production of Green Hydrogen. Each of the electrolyser modules 12a, 12b . . . 12n of the Hydrogen production plant 12 is made up of hundreds of electrolytic cells working together to covert the renewable power into molecules of hydrogen governed by the time-dependent module efficiency η. Each of the electrolyser modules 12[k] in the Hydrogen production plant 12 is modelled independently based on its historical performance data.”)
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehta in view of Nagino et al. (US Patent No. 12,078,975), herein “Nagino.”
Regarding claim 5,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 5 depends. Mehta does not teach forecasting a period of 14 days or several weeks. However, Nagino does teach further comprising using the look-ahead forecast model for forecasting available variable energy over a period of about 14 days. (Col. 31, line 60 – Col. 32, line 2: “The prediction unit 120 and the planning unit 130 treat the period of M days over the period from time t0 to time t1 as a virtual target period, as one example. Note that, M days may be a period of, for example, several days or ten or more days, or one or several weeks. Next, the prediction unit 120 and the planning unit 130 executes learning, so that the error, between the prediction result or the planning data of the target period based on the factors of a period prior to the target period over the period from time t0 to time t1, and the actual data or the virtual data of the target period, becomes.” See also Col. 31, lines 36 – 59. See also Col. 19, lines 41 – 53 – teaches a hydrogen production amount prediction.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the variable hydrogen production renewable energy plant that uses future forecasting model to predict renewable production of hydrogen and uses the prediction model to forecast production of power as in Mehta with a hydrogen production system that uses a prediction model and to forecast the production for several weeks in the future as in Nagino so that the error in planning for production or demand of the energy, given several weeks of future prediction, becomes minimal. (Col. 31, line 65 – Col. 32, line 2)
Claims 7, 8, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehta in view of Chinese patent document Li et al. (CN 113516274 A), herein “Li.”
Regarding claim 7,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 7 depends. Mehta may implicitly teach, but does not explicitly teach control the hydrogen elements based on the power or processing demand wherein the hydrogen is used for processing. However, Li does teach the controller determining the operation of the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks based on a constant hydrogen demand due to a designated process demand. (Page 15, Par. 4 and 5: “…when the new energy power supply pre-measurement corresponding to the hydrogen production quantity is greater than hydrogen production requirement premeasurement, determining the supply and demand balance strategy is only the first strategy for preparing hydrogen by new energy power. when the supply and demand balance policy is the first policy, the supply and demand balance policy may further include: the residual power for producing hydrogen by new energy power is used for supplying power to the auxiliary electronic system.” See also Page 9, Par. 5 – Page 10, Par. 5; Page 7, Par. 2: “As can be seen…”; Page 13, Par. 6: “It should be noted that…”; and Page 18, Par. 4. See also Mehta: Col. 15, lines 38 – 54: “In a non-limiting example, the PPM 152 may determine that sufficient power is available over the next 24 hours to run the electrolyzers 12a . . . n of the Hydrogen production plant 12 under greater load to generate more Hydrogen than required to produce an optimal Ammonia production rate over the predetermined time period. The additional Hydrogen may then be stored in the Hydrogen storage 14 for use during lower power availability periods. The same may apply to the ASU 16 and Nitrogen storage 16a. ) The PPM 152 may receive operational characteristic data for the Hydrogen storage 14 and Nitrogen storage 16a. This may include fill levels and other operational data (e.g. fill pressures, fill volume, density etc.) This operational data may be used by an algorithm forming part of the PPM 152 to determine optimal storage requirements to address predicted future power availability distribution as a function of time.” See also Mehta Col. 12, line 59: “…which in general require a constant power load…” and Col. 8, line 14: “hydrogen-powered generator.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the variable hydrogen production renewable energy plant that uses future forecasting model to predict renewable production of hydrogen and uses the prediction model to forecast production of power as in Mehta with a system that stores excess hydrogen and balances the hydrogen demand by using the stored hydrogen for hydrogen production as in Li in order to balance the supply and demand in the production of hydrogen to satisfy a hydrogen production requirement. (Page 9, Par. 5).
Regarding claim 8,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 7 which claim 8 depends. Mehta also teaches that the controller determining if an excess hydrogen is being produced, and storing the excess hydrogen produced in a hydrogen storage system. (Col. 24, lines 38 – 41: “The RTOM 156 system also accounts for hydrogen storage and hydrogen may either be stored or consumed from storage based on future power prediction.” See also Li Page 4, Par. 3 – 7, that teaches storing residual hydrogen.)
Regarding claim 10,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 8 which claim 10 depends. Li also teaches that the controller operating the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks in the electrolysis system based on the excess hydrogen stored in the hydrogen storage system. (Page 12, last paragraph: “For the research of alkaline electrolytic cell hydrogen-making sub-system, the input power and output hydrogen production amount of the electrolytic cell is in a linear relationship, so that the predicted power and hydrogen-making amount of hydrogen producing sub-system have a linear relation; from the value is a scaling of the power curve for a ρ, ρ reflects the hydrogen-making energy consumption ratio of the hydrogen-making sub-system ψ H2 is the hydrogen production amount, unit can be kg, Preal is input power, which is equivalent to the predicted power PTsamp, the unit is kW, ρ is hydrogen production energy consumption ratio of hydrogen-making subsystem the unit is kg/kW; the working formula for preparing hydrogen is as follows…” Examiner’s Note – Mehta teaches a controller or control system (items 100, 110, 114, 118 and 120.) and/or hardware processor.)
Regarding claim 11,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 7 which claim 11 depends. Li also teaches that the controller determining if insufficient hydrogen is being produced, supplementing the hydrogen with stored hydrogen or adding electricity from a supplementary grid to produce a balance of hydrogen. (Page 9, last paragraph – Page 10, Par. 1: “In practical application, when the new energy sub-system output, preferably the new energy power into the hydrogen; when the new energy power is not enough to meet the hydrogen production requirement, then introducing the power of the power grid to produce hydrogen; when the new energy sub-system not output, and the new energy is sub-system to generate power or urgently needs to produce hydrogen to meet the hydrogen production requirement; it can adopt pure electric net to prepare hydrogen; Of course, it also can be provided with energy storage sub-system according to the energy storage power condition, properly using energy storage power hydrogen. Examiner’s Note – Li teaches control by way of electronic hardware and/or computer software (Page 20, Par. 1). Mehta teaches a controller or control system (items 100, 110, 114, 118 and 120.) and/or hardware processor
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehta in view of Chinese patent document Li in further view of Oates et al. (US Patent No. 9,950,927), herein “Li.”
Regarding claim 9,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 8 which claim 9 depends. They may implicitly teach but do not explicitly teach determining excess hydrogen production based on hydrogen demand. However, Oates does teach the controller determining if the excess hydrogen is being produced based on the constant hydrogen demand due to the designated process. (Claim 1: “…demand periods such that during a low demand period any excess hydrogen can be compressed and injected into and stored within the hydrogen storage cavern and during a high demand period hydrogen can be withdrawn from the hydrogen storage cavern and introduced into the hydrogen pipeline distribution system, and maintaining an optimal hydrogen production rate for each of the multiple hydrogen production sources during operation such that each hydrogen production source operates substantially along an optimum efficiency curve and while transitioning during the low and high demand periods above, minimizing variable cost and/or maximizing variable margin; wherein an economic objective function is optimized by adjusting production rates based on a given demand profile.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the variable hydrogen production renewable energy plant that uses future forecasting model to predict renewable production of hydrogen and uses the prediction model to forecast production of power as in Mehta with a system that stores excess hydrogen and balances the hydrogen demand by using the stored hydrogen for hydrogen production as in Li with producing excess hydrogen based on demand for hydrogen as in Oates in order that the hydrogen plants, and pipeline distribution system meets real time dynamic demand requirements. (Abstract)
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehta in view of Chinese patent document Li in further view of Katikaneni et al. (US Patent No. 11,277,004), herein “Katikaneni.”
Regarding claim 12,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 7 which claim 12 depends. They may implicitly teach but do not explicitly teach storing hydrogen to minimize grid power. However, Katikaneni does teach determining if the excess hydrogen is being produced based on the constant hydrogen demand due to the designated process and minimizing utilizing a supplementary grid when the excess hydrogen is being produced. (Col. 2, lines 17 - 19: “…the energy storage assembly is electrically coupled to the off-grid hydrocarbon production or processing facility through the power electronics assembly.” Col. 10, lines 38 – 63: “FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of another example implementation of an off-grid power system 200 according to the present disclosure. Generally, off-grid power system 200 is operational to provide electrical power (and is electrically coupled to) a remote facility 222. In some aspects, off-grid power system 200 differs from off-grid power system 100 in that hydrogen fuel for a PEM fuel cell assembly is produced at the location of the off-grid power system 200 (in other words, at or near the remote facility 222). Thus, on-site hydrogen production instead of portable hydrogen storage is used to supply the hydrogen fuel. The on-site production of hydrogen may have some advantages. For example, by utilizing on-site production of hydrogen, excess power produced by a solar power assembly may be converted to hydrogen and stored on-site. By utilizing one or more reversible polymer exchange membrane (PEM) and/or solid oxide fuel cells, hydrogen can be produced from excess power like an electrolyzer and/or by using onsite hydrocarbon reformer. Further, by applying on-site hydrogen production, operational costs of the off-grid power system 200 may be reduced, but there also may be a reduction on overall system efficiency compared to the use of compressed hydrogen storage tanks. In some aspects, such a feature may save a delivery cost of hydrogen accounting for an expensive portion (for example, up to one-third cost) in a hydrogen fuel price.” See also Col. 17, lines 6 – 19.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the variable hydrogen production renewable energy plant that uses future forecasting model to predict renewable production of hydrogen and uses the prediction model to forecast production of power as in Mehta with a system that stores excess hydrogen and balances the hydrogen demand by using the stored hydrogen for hydrogen production as in Li with using stored hydrogen for electrical production to minimize grid power as in Katikaneni in order to implement an energy management system that optimizes power demand and energy utilization effectively and improves operational reliability and minimizes overall operational cost. (Col. 10, lines 33 – 37)
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehta in view of Salvador et al. (US PG Pub. No. 20110087441), herein “Salvador.”
Regarding claim 15,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 15 depends. Mehta does not teach changing the cell to avoid startup delay. However, Salvador does teach that the controller operating the one or more electrolyzer cell stacks to avoid a late start-up or to avoid missing out on the available renewable energy. (Par. 0013: “ It is desirable to predict or estimate the amount of hydrogen in the anode and cathode of a fuel cell system during system start-up to allow the start-up strategy to meet emissions requirements while maximizing reliability and minimizing start time. It is generally desirable that the hydrogen concentration estimator be robust to shut-down and off time related functions and account for membrane permeation of gases as well as air intrusion from external sources. At the same time, the estimation algorithm must be simple enough to be provided in an automotive controller with the calculation sufficiently minimal so as to be completed without delaying the start-up.” Par. 0026: “As discussed above, a known fuel cell system shut-down procedure includes leaving a nitrogen/hydrogen mixture in both the anode and cathode flow fields of the fuel cell stack 12, where a low concentration of oxygen is typically maintained in the cathode plumbing. Hydrogen enters the cathode by permeating through the stack membranes after the cathode oxygen is substantially consumed. The present invention proposes a system and method for estimating the concentration of hydrogen and/or nitrogen in a fuel cell stack cathode and anode at system start-up and shut-down. The system and method for estimating the concentration of hydrogen and/or nitrogen in the cathode and anode is separated into a first part and a second part. The first part determines gas concentrations in the cathode and anode as the system is being shut down and the second part estimates the hydrogen concentrations within the cathode and anode through time until the next system start-up.” Par. 0014. )
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the variable hydrogen production renewable energy plant that uses future forecasting model to predict renewable production of hydrogen and uses the prediction model to forecast production of power as in Mehta with a system that change the concentrations in the hydrogen cell to avoid startup delay or minimizing the startup as in Salvador in order to generate the desired power in a hydrogen fuel stack and allow the fastest possible start time. (Par. 0007 and 0014.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims pending resolving all intervening issues such as the 35 U.S.C. §101 rejections above. Reasons for allowance will be held in abeyance pending final recitation of the claims. For claim 13, the prior art does not disclose the elements of claim 1 and claim 7 and wherein the controller determining if the excess hydrogen is being produced based on a downstream feedback from an equipment audit. Claim 14 depends on claim 13 and therefore is also allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of claims 1, 7, and 13.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Japanese patent document Shimada (JP 2004316779 A) teaches most elements of claim 12: (Par. 0017: “…the excess hydrogen gas is supplied to the pressure hydrogen tank 7. Since it can be stored, no special treatment for surplus hydrogen is required, and gasified hydrogen can be effectively used without waste.” Par. 0019: “…the excess hydrogen gas is supplied to the pressure hydrogen tank 7. Since it can be stored, no special treatment for surplus hydrogen is required, and gasified hydrogen can be effectively used without waste.” Par. 0022 – storing hydrogen in a pressurized hydrogen tank.)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAD G ERDMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0177. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7am - 3pm or 4pm 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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9774. 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.
/CHAD G ERDMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights