DETAILED ACTION
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 7 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Borden US 7,453,164.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Borden discloses a floating power generation system, comprising:
a marine vessel 10;
an energy conversion system mounted on the marine vessel, the energy conversion system comprising a hydrogen fuel cell 26; and
a fuel storage system 24 mounted on the marine vessel and fluidly connected to the energy conversion system, the fuel storage system configured to supply hydrogen fuel to the hydrogen fuel cell of the energy conversion system (column 5, lines 4-12).
PNG
media_image1.png
254
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1- Borden Figure 1
Specifically regarding claim 11, the claimed method steps (directing the fuel, generating power) would be inherently performed.
Regarding claim 2, Borden discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Borden also discloses that the marine vessel is a powership (as this is an arbitrary label) comprising a command module (whatever controls the energy conversion) communicably connected to the energy conversion system.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Borden discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 11. Borden also discloses an energy transformation system 28 mounted on the marine vessel 10 and connected to the energy conversion system, the energy transformation system configured to receive produced energy from the energy conversion system 26. In this case, whatever component relays energy produced by the fuel cell to the battery is considered to be the energy transformation system.
Specifically regarding claim 12, the claimed method steps (receiving power) would be inherently performed.
Regarding claim 7, Borden discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Borden also discloses that the hydrogen fuel cell 26 comprises a proton exchange membrane fuel cell or solid oxide fuel cell (column 4, lines 33- column 5, line 3).
Regarding claim 13, Borden discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 12. Borden also discloses directing, with the energy transformation system, the generated amount of power over a cable system coupled to the energy transformation system. In this case, the energy has to go somewhere, and whatever conducts it can be considered a cable.
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.
Claims 6, 16, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borden US 7,453,164.
Regarding claims 6, 16 and 19, Borden discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 11. Borden does not teach that the hydrogen fuel cell is a first hydrogen fuel cell, the energy conversion system comprises a plurality of hydrogen fuel cells, and the plurality of hydrogen fuel cells comprises the first hydrogen fuel cell. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add a plurality of fuel cells in order to increase capacity or provide redundancy, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 20, Borden teaches the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 19. Borden also teaches that the marine vessel is a powership or a power barge.
Claims 1-3, 6-13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poldervaart US 7,119,460 in view of Borden US 7,453,164.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Poldervaart teaches a floating power generation system, comprising:
a marine vessel 152;
an energy conversion system (whatever generates the electricity) mounted on the marine vessel; and
a fuel storage system (whatever space the fuel occupies before being used) mounted on the marine vessel and fluidly connected to the energy conversion system (column 4, lines 24-35).
PNG
media_image2.png
198
561
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2- Poldervaart Figure 3
Poldervaart does not teach that the energy conversion system comprises a hydrogen fuel cell, or that the fuel storage system is configured to supply hydrogen fuel to the hydrogen fuel cell of the energy conversion system. Borden discloses a floating power generation system, comprising:
a marine vessel 10;
an energy conversion system mounted on the marine vessel, the energy conversion system comprising a hydrogen fuel cell 26; and
a fuel storage system 24 mounted on the marine vessel and fluidly connected to the energy conversion system, the fuel storage system configured to supply hydrogen fuel to the hydrogen fuel cell of the energy conversion system (column 5, lines 4-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the floating power generation system of Poldervaart with hydrogen fuel cell electricity generation as taught by Borden in order to generate electricity without producing any emissions, and/or eliminate the need for natural gas supplies.
Specifically regarding claim 11, the combination renders the claimed method steps obvious since such (directing the fuel, generating power) would be a logical manner of using the combination.
Regarding claim 2, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Poldervaart also teaches that the marine vessel is a powership (as this is an arbitrary label) comprising a command module (whatever controls the energy conversion) communicably connected to the energy conversion system.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 11. Poldervaart also teaches an energy transformation system mounted on the marine vessel and connected to the energy conversion system, the energy transformation system configured to receive produced energy from the energy conversion system. In this case, whatever component relays generated energy through the transmission line 162 is considered to be the energy transformation system.
Alternatively, Borden also discloses an energy transformation system 28 mounted on the marine vessel 10 and connected to the energy conversion system, the energy transformation system configured to receive produced energy from the energy conversion system 26. In this case, whatever component relays energy produced by the fuel cell to the battery is considered to be the energy transformation system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the floating power generation system of Poldervaart with electricity storage as taught by Borden in order to enable the use of electricity on in other ship systems.
Specifically regarding claim 12, the combination renders the claimed method steps obvious since such (directing the power) would be a logical manner of using the combination.
Regarding claims 6, 16 and 19, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 11. Neither Poldervaart nor Borden teach that the hydrogen fuel cell is a first hydrogen fuel cell, the energy conversion system comprises a plurality of hydrogen fuel cells, and the plurality of hydrogen fuel cells comprises the first hydrogen fuel cell. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add a plurality of fuel cells in order to increase capacity or provide redundancy, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 7, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Borden also teaches that the hydrogen fuel cell 26 comprises a proton exchange membrane fuel cell or solid oxide fuel cell (column 4, lines 33- column 5, line 3). In an alternative interpretation, Borden teaches that the electrolyzer 18 uses a proton exchange membrane, and that the fuel cell 26 could be a dual function fuel cell which also functions in reverse as an electrolyzer (column 4, lines 33- column 5, line 3), but does not explicitly state that the fuel cell is a proton exchange membrane fuel cell. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use a proton exchange membrane in the fuel cell as taught for the electrolyzer of Borden in order to use the same setup or to rely on proven technology.
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 11. As modified, Poldervaart also teaches that the marine vessel is a first marine vessel 152, and the floating power generation system further comprises:
a second marine vessel 144 separate from the first marine vessel;
a fuel storage tank (wherever the liquid fuel is received) mounted on the second marine vessel, the fuel storage tank configured to store hydrogen in liquid form;
a regasification system comprising a regasification unit mounted on the second marine vessel and fluidly connected to the fuel storage tank, the regasification system configured to convert liquid hydrogen from the fuel storage tank into gaseous hydrogen fuel; and
a fluid pipeline 150 fluidly connected to the regasification system and the fuel storage system, the fluid pipeline to transfer gaseous hydrogen fuel from the regasification system on the second marine vessel to the fuel storage system on the first marine vessel (column 4, lines 24-35).
Regarding claim 9, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 8. Borden does not explicitly teach that the fluid pipeline comprises a flexible hose extending between the regasification system and the fuel storage system. The examiner is taking official notice that flexible pipelines are well-known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the fluid pipeline of Poldervaart with a flexible hose in order to make the system more damage tolerant and/or accommodate misalignment. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a flexible material for the fluid pipeline in order to make the system more damage tolerant and/or accommodate misalignment, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
Regarding claims 10 and 18, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 11. As modified, Poldervaart also teaches:
a third marine vessel 142, the third marine vessel comprising a carrier ship having a second fuel storage tank configured to store hydrogen in liquid form; and
a second fluid pipeline (whatever transfers the fuel) fluidly connected to the second fuel storage tank of the third marine vessel and the fuel storage tank of the second marine vessel, the second fluid pipeline to transfer liquid hydrogen from the second fuel storage tank to the fuel storage tank of the second marine vessel (column 4, lines 24-35).
Regarding claim 20, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 8. Poldervaart also teaches that the marine vessel is a powership or a power barge.
Claims 4, 5, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poldervaart US 7,119,460 in view of Borden US 7,453,164 and Shoup US 2005/0236278.
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Poldervaart and Borden teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 11. Neither Poldervaart nor Borden teach a water processing system mounted on the marine vessel and fluidly connected to the hydrogen fuel cell of the energy conversion system, the water processing system configured to receive a water byproduct from the energy conversion system. Shoup teaches a hydrogen fuel cell power generating system 20 comprising a water processing system 62 fluidly connected to the hydrogen fuel cell 24 of the energy conversion system, the water processing system configured to receive a water byproduct from the energy conversion system [0020]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the floating power generation system of Poldervaart and Borden with a water processing system as taught by Shoup in order to retain the generated water for future use.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Poldervaart, Borden and Shoup teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 4 and 14. Shoup also teaches that the water processing system comprises a water storage tank 62, the water storage tank configured to receive and store the water byproduct from the energy conversion system [0020].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
James US 2015/0144500, Coman US 2006/0119107 and Kibbee US 2012/0038210 teach ships that generate electricity offshore to be transferred back to facilities on shore.
Morse US 6,918,350 teaches an offshore energy generating ship with pipes and couplings for transferring hydrogen, oxygen and water.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marc Burgess whose telephone number is (571)272-9385. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-15:00.
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, Samuel (Joseph) Morano can be reached at 517 272-6684. 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.
/MARC BURGESS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615