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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 28 February, 2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract filed on 28 February, 2024 includes implied phrases (“The present disclosure relates”) in the first line.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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 “cryocooler”, as set forth in claim 15, 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 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the pre-cooling device" in lines 6 and 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, it is being interpreted the claimed invention includes the recitation of a pre-cooling device in line 6, so as to provide antecedent basis for the limitation within the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the first heat exchange unit" in lines 9 and 12-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, it is being interpreted the claimed invention includes the recitation of a first heat exchange unit in line 9, so as to provide antecedent basis for the limitation within the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-17 are allowable.
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 recites, “a hydrogen pipe, where gaseous hydrogen is introduced at a front end, heat exchange occurs in a first heat exchange unit leading to liquefaction of gaseous hydrogen into liquid hydrogen, and liquefied liquid hydrogen can be discharged at a rear end; a pre-cooling device formed between the front end of the hydrogen pipe and the first heat exchange unit, pre-cooling gaseous hydrogen; an oxygen pipe, where gaseous oxygen is introduced at a front end, heat exchange occurs in the pre-cooling device leading to liquefaction of gaseous oxygen into liquid oxygen”, claim 17 recites, “a hydrogen pipe, where gaseous hydrogen is introduced at a front end, heat exchange occurs in a first heat exchange unit leading to liquefaction of gaseous hydrogen into liquid hydrogen, and liquefied liquid hydrogen can be discharged at a rear end; a pre-cooling device formed between the front end of the hydrogen pipe and the first heat exchange unit, pre-cooling gaseous hydrogen; an oxygen pipe, where gaseous oxygen is introduced at a front end, heat exchange occurs in the pre-cooling device leading to liquefaction of gaseous oxygen into liquid oxygen”, and claim 18 recites, “(a) preparing a hydrogen pipe, where gaseous hydrogen is introduced at a front end, heat exchange occurs in a heat exchange unit leading to liquefaction of gaseous hydrogen into liquid hydrogen, and liquefied liquid hydrogen can be discharged at a rear end; (b) preparing an oxygen pipe, where gaseous oxygen is introduced at a front end, heat exchange occurs in the pre-cooling device leading to liquefaction of gaseous oxygen into liquid oxygen, and liquefied liquid oxygen can be discharged at a rear end; (c) pre-cooling gaseous hydrogen between the front end of the hydrogen pipe and the first heat exchange unit by using the pre-cooling device, and liquefying gaseous oxygen into liquid oxygen”, which necessarily requires wherein both the hydrogen and oxygen are supplied to the pre-cooling device to provide cooling to produce pre-cooled hydrogen and liquefied oxygen. At best, the prior art teaches away from such a solution of cooling oxygen and hydrogen within the same pre-cooling device, as required by the claims. PESCHEL (EP 4001462 A1) is the closest prior art of record and explicitly teaches liquefying hydrogen and oxygen, wherein each are produced from an electrolysis process (electrolysis occurs within cell 10, so as to produce raw oxygen gas, C, and raw hydrogen gas, H). Each are cooled against a nitrogen cycle (flowpath F shown in figure 1 and figure 2). However, the hydrogen and oxygen are kept separate from one another to prevent formation of explosive mixtures (pg. 5 of the EP 4001462 A1 NPL document including both the foreign document and machine translation). As such, the prior art neither anticipates nor renders obvious, absent impermissible hindsight reasoning, the claimed invention as set forth by the independent claims, and the dependents thereof.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNA M MARONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-8588. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7AM to 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, Len Tran can be reached at (571) 272-1184. 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.
/JENNA M MARONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763 1/23/2026
JENNA M. MARONEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3763