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 .
Response to Arguments
Examiner acknowledges the cancellation of claims 8, 10, 17, 21-23, 25, and 27.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the specification amendments, see page 10 of the Remarks, filed 26 September 2025, with respect to the specification objection of the abstract have been fully considered and are persuasive. The specification objection of the abstract has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see page 10 of the Remarks, filed 26 September 2025, with respect to the claim objection of claims 1, 7, 11-12, 18, and 24-26 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objection of claims 1, 7, 11-12, 18, and 24-26 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see pages 10-11 of the Remarks, filed 26 September 2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 18 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 18 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see page 10 of the Remarks, filed 26 September 2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claims 24 and 26 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claims 24 and 26 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see pages 11-13 of the Remarks, filed 26 September 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11-16, and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of independent claims 1 and 12 being amended to recite the operative coupling of the electrolyzer unit, compressor unit, and liquefier unit.
The amendments affected the prior scope, requiring further search and considerations. Therefore the instant office action has been made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the liquefier unit of claim 12, water storage of claim 12, water tank of claim 13 and liquefier of claim 20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 17, “wherein hydrogen tank” should be amended to –wherein the hydrogen--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The limitation being considered under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is “connection means” seen in claims 1 and 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 20 does not appear to further limit the liquefier unit of claim 12 with the liquefier of claim 20. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. For purposes of examination, the limitation will be considered as limiting.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haberbusch (US 20170341769 A1) in view of Park (KR 102142006 B1) in further view of Niedzwiecki (US 20060180240 A1), Caldeira (US 20130257144 A1) and Sui (CN 201371765 Y).
Regarding Claim 1:
Haberbusch discloses a trailer (39, Figure 3), comprising:
a hydrogen cylinder holder (20, Figure 3, the refueling coupling assembly is the hydrogen cylinder holder),
an electrolyzer unit (41, Figure 3), and
a liquefier unit (42, Figure 3).
Haberbusch does not disclose:
a hydrogen producing cube for refilling a hydrogen cylinder, wherein the hydrogen producing cube, comprises:
an electrolyzer unit for producing gas hydrogen,
a liquefier unit for converting the gas hydrogen to liquid hydrogen, and
a compressor unit being connected to the electrolyzer unit for compressing produced gas hydrogen, wherein the compressed gas hydrogen is forwardable to the liquefier unit,
connections means to take up the hydrogen producing cube,
a tow bar, and
a trailer cable.
Park teaches a gas and liquid hydrogen filling system, comprising:
an electrolyzer unit (11, Figure 7, the reformer is the electrolyzer) for producing gas hydrogen (Paragraph [0060]),
a liquefier unit (41, Figure 7, the liquefication module is the liquefier unit) for converting the gas hydrogen to liquid hydrogen (Paragraph [0036]), and
a compressor unit (21, Figure 7) being connected to the electrolyzer unit (11, Figure 7) for compressing produced gas hydrogen, wherein the compressed gas hydrogen is forwardable to the liquefier unit (Paragraph [0061], the compressor compresses the hydrogen gas and sends the gas to the liquefier unit).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch to include an electrolyzer unit for producing gas hydrogen, a liquefier unit for converting the gas hydrogen to liquid hydrogen,
a compressor unit being connected to the electrolyzer unit for compressing produced gas hydrogen, and the compressed gas hydrogen is forwardable to the liquefier unit as taught by Park with the motivation to compress the hydrogen to its desired pressure before liquefying the hydrogen.
Haberbusch and Park do not teach:
a hydrogen producing cube for refilling a hydrogen cylinder, wherein the hydrogen producing cube, comprises:
connections means to take up the hydrogen producing cube,
a tow bar, and
a trailer cable.
Niedzwiecki teaches a transportable fuel cell generator, comprising:
a hydrogen producing cube (Paragraph [0032], the enclosure is the hydrogen producing cube) for refilling a hydrogen cylinder (Paragraph [0031]), the hydrogen producing cube (24, Figure 2), comprises:
connection means to take up the hydrogen producing cube (Paragraph [0032], the base (14) is connected with the hydrogen producing cube).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch to include a hydrogen producing cube for refilling a hydrogen cylinder and connection means to take up the hydrogen producing cube as taught by Niedzwiecki with the motivation to contain the components within an enclosure to protect the components from the environment during use.
Haberbusch, Park, and Niedzwiecki do not expressly teach:
connections means to take up the hydrogen producing cube,
a tow bar, and
a trailer cable.
Calderia teaches an apparatus for supplying power to a hybrid vehicle, comprising:
a tow bar (109, Figure 1A, the coupling unit is the tow bar) and a trailer cable (114, Figure 1A).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Park, and Niedzwiecki to include tow bar and a trailer cable as taught by Calderia with the motivation to provide power to the tailer as well as the trailer can provide power to the vehicle in order to operate various components when needed.
Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Niedzwiecki do not expressly teach:
connections means to take up the hydrogen producing cube.
Sui teaches a truck, comprising:
connection means to take up the bracket (8, Figure 1 and Paragraph [0025], the sliding wheel is the connection means between the floor (7) and the bottom of the bracket (6)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Niedzwiecki to include connection means to take up the bracket as taught by Sui with the motivation to connect the components to the trailer to ensure the components do not move during transport and to easily remove when the bracket needs to be deployed.
Regarding Claim 2:
Haberbusch discloses:
the hydrogen producing station (39s, Figure 3) further comprises a human interface device (49, Figure 3 and Paragraph [0137], the control panel is the human interface device that contains the controls and gives readouts to operate the refueling station).
Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Sui do not expressly teach:
the hydrogen producing cube.
Niedzwiecki teaches:
the hydrogen producing cube (Paragraph [0032], the enclosure is the hydrogen producing cube).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Sui to include the hydrogen producing cube as taught by Niedzwiecki with the motivation to transport and supply hydrogen to various areas in order to provide hydrogen to vehicles.
Regarding Claim 3:
Haberbusch discloses:
the hydrogen producing station (39s, Figure 3) further comprises status display (49, Figure 3 and Paragraph [0137], the control panel is the status display that gives readouts to operate the refueling station).
Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Sui do not expressly teach:
the hydrogen producing cube.
Niedzwiecki teaches:
the hydrogen producing cube (Paragraph [0032], the enclosure is the hydrogen producing cube).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Sui to include the hydrogen producing cube as taught by Niedzwiecki with the motivation to transport and supply hydrogen to various areas in order to provide hydrogen to vehicles.
Regarding Claim 4:
Haberbusch discloses:
the hydrogen producing station (39s, Figure 3) further comprises a connection interface (40, Figure 3 and Paragraph [0137], the cabinet is the connection interface that allows for the connection to power and water).
Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Sui do not expressly teach:
the hydrogen producing cube.
Niedzwiecki teaches:
the hydrogen producing cube (Paragraph [0032], the enclosure is the hydrogen producing cube).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Sui to include the hydrogen producing cube as taught by Niedzwiecki with the motivation to transport and supply hydrogen to various areas in order to provide hydrogen to vehicles.
Regarding Claim 5:
Haberbusch discloses:
wherein the hydrogen cylinder holder (20, Figure 3) further comprises a moveable valve coupling element (3, Figure 5, the nozzle is the moveable valve coupling element).
Regarding Claim 6:
Haberbusch discloses:
wherein the hydrogen cylinder holder (20, Figure 3) further comprises a moveable shield (1, Figure 5, the bellow is the moveable shield).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haberbusch in view of Park in further view of Niedzwiecki, Calderia, Sui, and Capizzo (US 20090314382 A1).
Regarding Claim 7:
Haberbusch discloses:
the hydrogen producing station (39s, Figure 3).
Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Sui do not expressly teach:
wherein the hydrogen producing cube further comprises an electric cable and/or wherein the hydrogen producing cube further comprises a water hose.
Niedzwiecki teaches:
the hydrogen producing cube (Paragraph [0032], the enclosure is the hydrogen producing cube).
Haberbusch, Calderia, Niedzwiecki, Park, and Sui do not teach:
wherein the hydrogen producing cube further comprises an electric cable and/or wherein the hydrogen producing cube further comprises a water hose.
Capizzo teaches a service station facility, comprising:
wherein the service station (8, Figure 2) further comprises an electric cable (19, Figure 2) and the service station (8, Figure 2) further comprises a water hose (18, Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Calderia, Niedzwiecki, Park, and Sui to include an electric cable and a water hose as taught by Capizzo with the motivation to provide power to the electrolyzer system to produce hydrogen with water provided from the public facilities.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haberbusch in view of Park in further view of Niedzwiecki, Calderia, Sui, and Cohen (US 6745801 B1).
Regarding Claim 9:
Haberbusch discloses:
the hydrogen producing station (39s, Figure 3).
Haberbusch, Calderia, Park, and Sui do not expressly teach:
the hydrogen producing cube further comprises a water tank and/or wherein the hydrogen producing cube further comprises an energy storage.
Niedzwiecki teaches:
the hydrogen producing cube (Paragraph [0032], the enclosure is the hydrogen producing cube).
Haberbusch, Calderia, Niedzwiecki, Park, and Sui do not teach:
the hydrogen producing cube further comprises a water tank and/or wherein the hydrogen producing cube further comprises an energy storage.
Cohen teaches a mobile hydrogen generation and supply system, comprising:
the hydrogen producing and supply system (1, Figure 1) further comprises a water tank (7, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Calderia, Niedzwiecki, Park, and Sui to include a water tank as taught by Cohen with the motivation to have water prepared on the trailer in order to allow for the conversion to hydrogen in the electrolysis unit.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haberbusch in view of Park in further view of Niedzwiecki, Calderia, Sui, and Hirao (WO 2018110650 A1).
Regarding Claim 11:
See the rejection of claim 1 for the trailer.
Haberbusch discloses:
the hydrogen producing station (39s, Figure 3).
Haberbusch, Calderia, and Sui do not expressly teach:
A vehicle combination, comprising:
a motor,
a generator,
a generator cable, and
an electric power storage.
Niedzwiecki teaches:
A vehicle combination (Paragraph [0033], the vehicle combination is the station (10) being towed by a vehicle).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Calderia, and Sui to include a vehicle combination as taught by Niedzwiecki with the motivation to easily maneuver the station to locations that have hydrogen vehicles to be filled.
Haberbusch, Calderia, Niedzwiecki, and Sui do not teach:
a motor,
a generator,
a generator cable, and
an electric power storage.
Hirao teaches a moving body, comprising:
a motor (22, Figure 1, the propulsion engine is the motor),
a generator (1, Figure 1, the hydrogen generator is the generator),
a generator cable (Figure 1, the generator cable is the connection between generator and the electrical power storage), and
an electric power storage (33, Figure 1, the battery is the electrical power storage).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Haberbusch, Calderia, Niedzwiecki, Park, and Sui to include a motor, a generator, a generator cable, and an electric power storage as taught by Hirao with the motivation to have a hydrogen powered vehicle to allow for less damage to the environment due to almost zero emissions.
Claims 12, 14-15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Capizzo (US 20170327091 A1) in view of Park (KR 102142006 B1) in further view of Hobbs (US 7287558 B2), Rainville (20200180940 A1), Wankewycz (US 20180245365 A1), Caldeira (US 20130257144 A1), and Sui (CN 201371765 Y).
Regarding Claim 12:
Capizzo discloses a trailer (95, Figure 8), comprising:
a hydrogen producing unit (17, Figure 8, the electrolyzer system is the hydrogen producing unit),
a hydrogen producing unit hose (Paragraph [0118] and [0161], the electrolyzer has a hose to connect to the tanks),
a hydrogen tank (11, Figure 8), and
a platform (34, Figure 2 and Paragraph [0135]).
Capizzo does not disclose:
a drone box for a drone, wherein the drone box comprises:
a pump, a pump hose, and a hydrogen tank hose,
connections means to take up the drone box,
a tow bar, and
a trailer cable,
wherein the pump is configured to pump water from a water storage through the pump hose into the hydrogen producing unit,
wherein hydrogen producing unit comprises an electrolyzer unit for producing gas hydrogen, a liquefier unit for converting the gas hydrogen to liquid hydrogen, and a compressor unit being connected to the electrolyzer unit for compressing produced gas hydrogen, wherein the compressed gas hydrogen is forwardable to the liquefier unit,
wherein the hydrogen producing unit hose is configured to convey the liquid hydrogen to the hydrogen tank, and
wherein hydrogen tank is connected to the hydrogen tank hose to convey the liquid hydrogen stored in the hydrogen tank to the drone.
Park teaches a gas and liquid hydrogen filling system, comprising:
wherein hydrogen producing unit (11, 21, and 41, Figure 7, the reformer, compressor, and liquefier are the hydrogen producing unit) comprises an electrolyzer unit (11, Figure 7, the reformer is the electrolyzer) for producing gas hydrogen (Paragraph [0060]), a liquefier unit (41, Figure 7, the liquefication module is the liquefier unit) for converting the gas hydrogen to liquid hydrogen (Paragraph [0036]), and a compressor unit (21, Figure 7) being connected to the electrolyzer unit for compressing produced gas hydrogen, wherein the compressed gas hydrogen is forwardable to the liquefier unit (Paragraph [0061], the compressor compresses the hydrogen gas and sends the gas to the liquefier unit),
wherein the hydrogen producing unit hose (40, Figure 7, the second supply line is the hydrogen producing unit hose) is configured to convey the liquid hydrogen to the hydrogen tank (42, Figure 7).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo to include hydrogen producing unit comprises an electrolyzer unit for producing gas hydrogen, a liquefier unit for converting the gas hydrogen to liquid hydrogen, and a compressor unit being connected to the electrolyzer unit for compressing produced gas hydrogen, wherein the compressed gas hydrogen is forwardable to the liquefier unit, and the hydrogen producing unit hose is configured to convey the liquid hydrogen to the hydrogen tank as taught by Park with the motivation to compress the hydrogen to its desired pressure before liquefying the hydrogen.
Capizzo and Park do not teach:
a drone box for a drone, wherein the drone box comprises:
a pump, a pump hose, and a hydrogen tank hose,
connections means to take up the drone box,
a tow bar, and
a trailer cable,
wherein the pump is configured to pump water from a water storage through the pump hose into the hydrogen producing unit, and
wherein hydrogen tank is connected to the hydrogen tank hose to convey the liquid hydrogen stored in the hydrogen tank to the drone.
Hobbs teaches a hydrogen dispensing system, comprising:
a pump (133, Figure 1), a pump hose (122 and 124, Figure 1, the pipes are the pump hose), and
wherein the pump (133, Figure 1) is configured to pump water from a water storage through the pump hose (Column 7, Lines 63-65 and Column 10, Lines 15-18, the pump pumps water from a water storage) into the hydrogen producing unit (120, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo and Park to include a pump, a pump hose, and the pump is configured to pump water from a water storage through the pump hose into the hydrogen producing unit as taught by Hobbs with the motivation to pressurize the water before it enters the hydrogen generator.
Capizzo, Hobbs, and Park do not teach:
a drone box for a drone, wherein the drone box comprises:
a hydrogen tank hose,
connections means to take up the drone box,
a tow bar, and
a trailer cable, and
wherein hydrogen tank is connected to the hydrogen tank hose to convey the liquid hydrogen stored in the hydrogen tank to the drone.
Rainveille teaches a mobile autonomous hydrogen refueling station for a drone (103, Figure 1), comprising:
a hydrogen tank hose (Figure 1, the hydrogen tank hose is between the hydrogen tank (109) and the refueling arm (115)),
the station is trucked to its location (Paragraph [0022]), and
wherein the hydrogen tank (109, Figure 1) is connected to the hydrogen tank hose to convey the liquid hydrogen stored in the hydrogen tank (Paragraph [0013]) to the drone (103, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Park, and Hobbs to include a hydrogen tank hose, the station is trucked to its location, and the hydrogen tank is connected to the hydrogen tank hose to convey the liquid hydrogen stored in the hydrogen tank to the drone as taught by Rainville with the motivation to refuel the drone with liquid hydrogen to reduce greenhouse gases.
Capizzo, Hobbs, Rainville, and Park do not teach:
a drone box for a drone,
connections means to take up the drone box,
a tow bar, and
a trailer cable.
Waynkewycz teaches a drone box, comprising:
a drone box (10, Figure 1) for a drone (2, Figure 1, the unmanned aerial vehicle is the drone).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Park, and Hobbs and Rainville to include a drone box for a drone as taught by Waynekwycz with the motivation to protect the drone and the components within the drone box from the environment to prevent potential damage to key components.
Capizzo, Waynkewycz, Hobbs, Park, and Rainville do not teach:
connections means to take up the drone box,
a tow bar, and
a trailer cable.
Calderia teaches an apparatus for supplying power to a hybrid vehicle, comprising:
a tow bar (109, Figure 1A, the coupling unit is the tow bar) and a trailer cable (114, Figure 1A).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Rainville, Hobbs, Park, and Waynekwycz to include tow bar and a trailer cable as taught by Calderia with the motivation to provide power to the tailer as well as the trailer can provide power to the vehicle in order to operate various components when needed.
Capizzo, Rainville, Waynekwycz, Hobbs, and Park, and Calderia do not teach:
connections means to take up the drone box.
Sui teaches a truck, comprising:
connection means to take up the bracket (8, Figure 1 and Paragraph [0025], the sliding wheel is the connection means between the floor (7) and the bottom of the bracket (6)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Rainville, Hobbs, Park, Waynekwycz, and Calderia to include connection means to take up the bracket as taught by Sui with the motivation to connect the components to the trailer to ensure the components do not move during transport and to easily remove when the bracket needs to be deployed.
Regarding Claim 14:
Capizzo discloses:
a platform (34, Figure 2 and Paragraph [0135]).
Capizzo, Waynkewycz, Calderia, Sui, Hobbs, Park, and Rainville do not teach:
the platform is mounted to a scissor lift.
Waynkewycz teaches:
the platform (30, Figure 1) is mounted to a scissor lift (20, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Rainville, Sui, Rainville, Hobbs, Park, and Calderia to include the platform is mounted to a scissor lift as taught by Waynekwycz with the motivation to move the platform in and out of the box to allow for launching and storing of the drone dependent on activity near the box to protect the drone.
Regarding Claim 15:
Capizzo discloses:
a drone (9, Figure 8).
Capizzo, Calderia, Sui, Hobbs, Park, and Rainville do not teach:
wherein the drone box further comprises a cover, wherein the cover has a shape of a hood in cross section.
Waynkewycz teaches:
the drone box (10, Figure 1) comprises a cover (11 and 12, Figure 1, the sliding covers are the cover).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Rainville, Sui, Rainville, Hobbs, Park, and Calderia to include the drone box further comprises a cover as taught by Waynekwycz with the motivation to protect the components within the drone box from the elements and other people in the area.
Capizzo, Rainville, Sui, Rainville, Waynekwycz, Hobbs, Park, and Calderia discloses the claimed invention except for the cover has a shape of a hood in cross section. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the cover has a shape of a hood in cross section, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the form or shape of a component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding Claim 20:
Capizzo discloses:
The hydrogen tank (11, Figure 1) is exchangeable (Paragraphs [0118] and [0153], the hydrogen tanks are exchangeable) and/or wherein the drone box further comprises a liquefier.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Capizzo in view of Park in further view of Hobbs, Rainville, Waynekwycz, Calderia, Sui and Kelly (US 20190077521 A1).
Regarding Claim 13:
Capizzo discloses:
a platform (34, Figure 2 and Paragraph [0135]).
Capizzo, Calderia, Sui, Park, Hobbs, and Rainville do not teach:
wherein the drone box further comprises a water tank.
Waynkewycz teaches:
the drone box (10, Figure 1).
Capizzo, Waynkewycz, Calderia, Sui, Hobbs, Park, and Rainville do not teach:
wherein the drone box further comprises a water tank.
Kelly teaches a fueling station, comprising:
wherein the station (10, Figure 1) further comprises a water tank (13, Figure 1 and Paragraph [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Rainville, Sui, Rainville, Waynekwycz, Hobbs, Park, and Calderia to include the station further comprises a water tank as taught by Kelly with the motivation to remove the weight in the cartridge for holding reactant.
Claims 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Capizzo in view of Park in further view of Hobbs, Rainville, Waynekwycz, Calderia, Sui and Wang (US 20160144734 A1).
Regarding Claim 16:
Capizzo discloses:
modular changeable modules (Paragraph [0135], the batteries and the tanks are the modular changeable modules).
Capizzo, Calderia, Sui, Hobbs, Park, and Rainville do not teach:
wherein the drone box further comprises modular changeable modules.
Waynkewycz teaches:
the drone box (10, Figure 1).
Capizzo, Waynkewycz, Calderia, Sui, Hobbs, Park, and Rainville do not teach:
wherein the drone box further comprises modular changeable modules.
Wang teaches a method for managing unmanned aerial vehicles, comprising:
wherein the drone box (300, Figure 2, the base station is the drone box) further comprises modular changeable modules (Paragraph [0064], the payload and the battery are the changeable modules).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Rainville, Sui, Rainville, Waynekwycz, Hobbs, Park, and Calderia to include the drone box further comprises modular changeable modules as taught by Wang with the motivation to have payload swapping to allow for longer autonomous missions.
Regarding Claim 18:
The above-discussed combination of Capizzo, Rainville, Sui, Rainville, Waynekwycz, Wang, Hobbs, Park, and Calderia accounts for this subject matter where Capizzo teaches the modular changeable modules are a power module (Paragraph [0135], the hydrogen tank is the power module). Additionally, Wang teaches the modular changeable modules are a payload module and a power module (Paragraph [0064], the payload and the battery are the changeable modules).
Regarding Claim 19:
Capizzo discloses:
a drone (9, Figure 8).
Capizzo, Calderia, Sui, Wang, Hobbs, Park, and Rainville do not teach:
wherein the drone box further comprises a tethering module with a tethering cable.
Waynkewycz teaches:
the drone box (10, Figure 1) further comprises a tethering module (215, Figure 9) with a tethering cable (280, Figure 9).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Capizzo, Rainville, Sui, Rainville, Wang, Hobbs, Park, and Calderia to include the drone box further comprises a tethering module with a tethering cable as taught by Waynekwycz with the motivation to obtain sensor information from the drone to adjust the rotation of the cable spool.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest pieces of prior art are Cohen (US 6745801 B1) in view of Niedzwiecki (US 20040197611) in further view of Capizzo (US 20170327091), Devine (US 7911071 B2), Campagnac (FR 3079908 A1), and Vanzandt (US 20160001215 A1).
Regarding Claim 24:
Cohen discloses a trailer (5, Figure 1), comprising the equipment (Column 8, Lines 13-16, the hydrogen processing and storage equipment is the equipment) comprising:
a water reservoir (7, Figure 1) for storing water (Column 9, Lines 24-26),
an electrolyzer unit (23, Figure 1) for transforming the water into hydrogen gas (Column 9, Lines 25-27),
a hydrogen gas buffer unit (15, Figure 1) for storing the hydrogen gas at low pressure (Column 10, Lines 50-56),
a compressor unit (17, Figure 1) for increasing the pressure of the hydrogen gas to high pressure (Column 10, Lines 50-56), a
hydrogen gas buffer bunker unit (19, Figure 1) for storing the hydrogen gas at high pressure (Column 10, Lines 50-56),
a refueling connector (21, Figure 1, the hydrogen delivery system is the refueling connector) for connecting the hydrogen gas to a cylinder for refueling (Column 9, Lines 7-16, the hydrogen gas goes to a hydrogen vehicle), and
a power supply for providing electrical power to the equipment (Column 8, Lines 49-56, electrical power is provided top the equipment).
Niedzwiechi teaches a transportable hydrogen refueling station, comprising: a box body for storing equipment (Paragraph [0032], the enclosure is the box body for storing equipment), the box body being mounted on a trailer chassis (14, Figure 1A) with wheels (18, Figure 1A),
the equipment comprising:
a refueling connector (116, Figure 6) for connecting the hydrogen gas to a cylinder (25, Figure 6) for refueling; and
a safety valve (120 and 120’, Figure 6) for preventing any pressure in the refueling connector from surfing above a predetermined limit (Paragraph [0056]) and a hydrogen pipe (40, 90, and 88, Figure 6, the feed line, bypass feed line, and inlet/outlet line is the hydrogen pipe) for allowing hydrogen gas to flow from one component to another end of the equipment.
Capizzo teaches a service station facility, comprising a controller (13, Figure 2) for sending commands to the equipment (Paragraphs [0007-0008], the control system is the controller that sends commands to the equipment).
Devine teaches a system for producing and storing hydrogen comprising a reverse osmosis filter for removing contaminants form the water (Column 13, Lines 63-67).
Niedzwiecki teaches a safety valve (120 and 120’, Figure 6) for preventing any pressure in the refueling connector from surfing above a predetermined limit (Paragraph [0056]) and a hydrogen pipe (40, 90, and 88, Figure 6, the feed line, bypass feed line, and inlet/outlet line is the hydrogen pipe) for allowing hydrogen gas to flow from one component to another end of the equipment.
Campagnac teaches a tank filling station comprising a start/stop button for actuating the refuelling of the cylinder (Page 7, Line 318).
Vanzandt teaches a system for compressing and drying hydrogen comprising a hydrogen dryer (150, Figure 1) for removing humidity from the hydrogen gas (Paragraph [0008]).
The limitation “a plurality of a wire rope isolators for reducing vibrations from reaching the electrolyzer unit” in lines 17-18 in view of all other limitations of claim 24 are not disclosed or obvious in the prior art as if any additional reference were to be found and used, the potential for hindsight would occur.
Claim 26 is objected to as being dependent on claim 24.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hoffjann (US 20130312871 A1) teaches a platform for filling a tank with hydrogen comprising a box body, a tank, and a hose.
Pick (US 20130240080 A1) teaches a mobile fueling vehicle comprising a trailer, tanks, a compressor, and a controller.
Haberbusch 2 (US 12011989 B1) teaches a direct liquefaction for vehicle refueling comprising a drone, a compressor, a controller, a chiller, and a trailer.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE A SHRIEVES whose telephone number is (571)272-5373. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday: 9:30AM to 5:30PM.
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 Rinehart can be reached at (571) 272-4881. 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.
/STEPHANIE A SHRIEVES/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/KENNETH RINEHART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753