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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-15 are currently pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 19 December 2023 was filed before the mailing date of the first Office Action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
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: fluid storage device, electricity-generating device in claims 1-15, electricity storage device in claim 5-7, and electricity transformation device in claims 8-10.
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.
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, 8, and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oimatsu (WO 2022191134 A1) in view of Dolliou (FR 2954928 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Oimatsu teaches an electricity-generating system (3) configured to be mounted on a trailer (31) (Fig. 1) having a chassis (32), the electricity-generating system being of modular construction (as seen in Fig. 1) and comprising a fluid storage module (62) comprising a fluid storage device (621) (Fig. 2) and an electricity-generating module (61) comprising an electricity-generating device (611) configured to produce electricity from fluid(s) stored in the fluid storage device (see machine translation, para. [0020], lines 10-12), the fluid storage module and the electricity-generating module being configured to be mounted on the chassis of the trailer (as seen in Fig. 1), the fluid storage module being separate from the electricity-generating module (as seen in Fig. 1) and configured to be mounted in
Oimatsu does not teach the fluid storage module being mounted in a removable manner.
Dolliou teaches modules (31-35) (Fig. 3) being mounted in a removable manner (see machine translation, pg. 2, para. 2, lines 5-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fluid storage module of Oimatsu to include being mounted in a removable manner as taught by Dolliou with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the scalability and flexibility of the modularity of the system (see Dolliou, pg. 9, para. 4, lines 1-5).
In regards to claim 2, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 1, wherein
Oimatsu does not explicitly teach wherein the fluid storage module comprises a transport carrier where the fluid storage device is installed.
Dolliou teaches wherein a module comprises a transport carrier (pg. 6, para. 2, lines 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fluid storage module of Oimatsu to include their own transport carrier where the fluid storage device is installed rather than one shared container as taught by Dolliou with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the scalability and flexibility of the modularity of the system (see Dolliou, pg. 9, para. 4, lines 1-5).
In regards to claim 3, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 1, wherein the electricity-generating module is configured to be mounted
Oimatsu does not teach the electricity-generating module being mounted in a removable manner.
Dolliou teaches modules (31-35) (Fig. 3) being mounted in a removable manner (pg. 2, para. 2, lines 5-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electricity-generating module of Oimatsu to include being mounted in a removable manner as taught by Dolliou with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the scalability and flexibility of the modularity of the system (see Dolliou, pg. 9, para. 4, lines 1-5).
In regards to claim 4, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 3, wherein the
Oimatsu does not explicitly teach wherein the electricity-generating module comprises a transport carrier where the electricity-generating device is installed.
Dolliou teaches wherein a module comprises a transport carrier (pg. 6, para. 2, lines 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electricity-generating module of Oimatsu to include their own transport carrier where the electricity-generating device is installed rather than one shared container as taught by Dolliou with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the scalability and flexibility of the modularity of the system (see Dolliou, pg. 9, para. 4, lines 1-5).
In regards to claim 5, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 1, comprising an electricity storage device (65) (Oimatsu, Fig. 2) for storing electricity produced by the electricity-generating device (Oimatsu, para. [0021], lines 9-13).
In regards to claim 8, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 1, comprising an electricity transformation device (63) (Oimatsu, Fig. 2) configured for transformation of the electricity produced by the electricity-generating device (Oimatsu, para. [0021], lines 1-9).
In regards to claim 11, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 1, wherein the electricity-generating device is configured to produce electricity by implementing a redox reaction (the process of generating electricity in a fuel cell as disclosed in Oimatsu includes a redox reaction) from the fluid or fluids stored in the fluid storage device (Oimatsu, para. [0020], lines 10-12).
In regards to claim 12, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 1, wherein the electricity-generating device comprises at least one fuel cell (Oimatsu, para. [0020], lines 1-3).
In regards to claim 13, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 12, wherein each fuel cell is of the hydrogen/oxygen type or of the hydrogen/air type (Oimatsu, para. [0020], lines 1-3).
In regards to claim 14, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches an electricity-generating assembly comprising trailer (31) (Oimatsu, Fig. 1) having a chassis (32) and an electricity generating system according to claim 1 mounted on the trailer (Oimatsu, as seen in Fig. 1).
In regards to claim 15, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches a train (1) (Oimatsu, Fig. 1) comprising a motor vehicle (2) having at least one electric traction motor (25), and, in addition, the electricity-generating assembly according to claim 14, the trailer of which is coupled to the motor vehicle (Oimatsu, as seen in Fig. 1) and the electricity-generating system is connected to the motor vehicle (Oimatsu, as seen in Fig. 1) for the supply of electric power to each electric traction motor (Oimatsu, para. [0015]).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oimatsu (WO 2022191134 A1) in view of Dolliou (FR 2954928 A1) and Li (CN 105365594 A).
In regards to claim 6, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 5, wherein the electricity storage device is integrated into the electricity-generating module (Oimatsu, as seen in Fig. 2) or into
Oimatsu does not teach wherein the electricity storage device is separate from the fluid storage module and the electricity generating module.
Li teaches wherein the electricity storage device (5) (Fig. 3) is separate (as seen in Fig. 3) from the fluid storage module (1) and the electricity-generating module (2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electricity storage device of Oimatsu to include an additional module separate from the fluid storage module and the electricity-generating module as taught by Li with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the resilience of the system should the electricity-generating module be damaged since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). See MPEP § 2144.04(V)(C).
In regards to claim 7, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou and Li above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 6, wherein the additional module is configured to be mounted in a removable manner (Dolliou, pg. 2, para. 2, lines 5-8) on the chassis of the trailer.
In regards to claim 9, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 8, wherein the electricity transformation device is integrated into the electricity-generating module (Oimatsu, as seen in Fig. 2) or into an
Oimatsu does not teach wherein the electricity transformation device is separate from the fluid storage module and the electricity generating module.
Li teaches wherein the electricity transformation device (4) (Fig. 3) is separate (as seen in Fig. 3) from the fluid storage module (1) and the electricity-generating module (2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electricity transformation device of Oimatsu to include an additional module separate from the fluid storage module and the electricity-generating module as taught by Li with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the resilience of the system should the electricity-generating module be damaged since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). See MPEP § 2144.04(V)(C).
In regards to claim 10, the combination of Oimatsu as modified by Dolliou and Li above teaches the electricity-generating system according to claim 9, wherein the additional module is configured for mounting in a removable manner (Dolliou, pg. 2, para. 2, lines 5-8) on the chassis of the trailer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Crossley (WO 2022248818 A1) discloses a power generation system.
Klaassen (US 20220285714 A1) discloses a liquid carbon-neutral energy facility system with redox reactions in fuel cells.
Lin (CN 216467366 U) discloses a high-power supply vehicle based on hydrogen energy power generation.
Kondo (WO 2022092073 A1) discloses a power supply station used as a charging or feeding station.
Liang (CN 212604543 U) discloses a power system of modularized fuel cell and emergency power supply for a vehicle.
Mack (WO 2017054079 A1) discloses a locomotive with fuel storage modules.
Boudjemaa (FR 2999342 A1) discloses an on-board electricity generation system with a fuel cell.
Kim (KR 20060059456 A) discloses a fuel cell system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WILLIAM JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-7063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11am-7pm.
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 Morano can be reached at (571) 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.
/JAMES WILLIAM JONES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights