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 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.
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:
hydrogen supply unit in claims 1, 15 and 16 understood to be storage tank,
heat transfer unit in claim 1 and 16 understood to be a heat pipe or a pillar,
refrigerant supply unit in claim 4 understood to be a storage tank,
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.
Neither instant of heat exchange unit in claims 1 or 15 are considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f) as sufficient structure is provided for both. Heat exchange unit in claim 16 is also not considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f) as sufficient structure is provided.
Heat transfer unit is not considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f) in claim 15 as sufficient structure is provided.
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.
Claims 1-20 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 1 recite “at least one or more heat exchangers” and then later recites “wherein the heat exchanger includes” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the invention are as it is unclear if this requires all the heat exchangers if there are more than one heat exchanger to be configured this way. For the purpose of examination, the one or more heat exchangers of claim 1 are considered to all have the configuration.
Claim 1 recites “a heat exchange unit” in line 4 which has heat exchangers which as a part of them as recited in line 14 also have “a heat exchange unit” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear if they are the same heat exchange unit, or unrelated. For the purpose of examination, the heat exchange unit that is part of the heat exchanger is a separate component formed including a micro-channel which is part of the overall heat exchange unit.
Claim 2 recites “pipe shaped” which is considered indefinite. A “pipe shaped” object does not have a definite configuration that would be understood by one having ordinary skill in the art as pipes can be shaped in a myriad of different ways. For the purpose of examination this limitation is considered that the heat pipe of the heat transfer unit is elongated in a vertical direction.
Claim 2 recites “is formed with a micro-channel” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear how it relates to the micro-channel of claim 1. For the purpose of examination, they are considered to be the same micro-channel.
Claim 7 recites “heat exchange unit” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear which heat exchange unit the limitation refers to. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood to refer to the heat exchange unit that is part of the heat exchanger.
Claim 8 recites “pillar shape” which is considered indefinite as “pillar shape” is not a term of art and one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that pillars can have multiple shapes. For the purpose of examination, as long as heat conductor has a generally cylindrical shape the limitation is met.
Claim 8 recites “heat exchange unit” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear which heat exchange unit the limitation refers to. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood to refer to the heat exchange unit that is part of the heat exchanger.
Claim 8 recites “which is formed to penetrate a surface of the heat conductor” which is considered indefinite. For the micro-channel to penetrate the surface of the heat conductor as claimed, it would be generally understood would be that it would result in the pillar shape being “porous” or similar for it to “penetrate the surface”. which is not shown in the figure or described in the specification. As best understood in view of the specification and the drawings, this limitation is understood for the purpose of rejection that the structure of the heat conductor is provided with channel with which the micro-channels form in such as grooves.
Claim 9 recites “the heat exchange unit” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear which heat exchange unit is begin referred to. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood to refer to the first heat exchange unit.
Claim 9 recites “a plurality of heat exchangers” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear how this relates to the limitation of both “one or more heat exchangers” and the specific configuration of the heat exchanger as described in claim 1. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood that the one or more heat exchangers is positively requiring there be a plurality in that configuration.
Claim 9 recites “from front to rear based on a flow direction of hydrogen” which is considered indefinite as no front or rear or specific flow direction has been described. For the purpose of examination, front is considered warmer heat exchangers and rear is considered colder heat exchangers.
Claim 10 recites “the heat exchange unit” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear which heat exchange unit is begin referred to. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood to refer to the first heat exchange unit.
Claim 10 recites “a first heat exchanger” and “a second heat exchanger” which are for cooling the hydrogen to progressively lower temperatures; however, claim 9 has already claimed a plurality of heat exchangers which are used for this purpose so it is unclear how this relates to the already claimed plurality of heat exchangers or further limits them. For the purpose of examination, claim 10 is not considered to further limit claim 9 other than labeling the first and second heat exchanger and the first and second heat exchanger would be within the plurality of heat exchangers.
Claim 13 recites “the heat exchange unit” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear which heat exchange unit is begin referred to. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood to refer to the first heat exchange unit.
Claim 13 recites “further includes: an n-th heat exchanger installed at a rear of an n-1th heat exchanger” which is considered indefinite as n-th and n-1th heat exchanger is within of a plurality of heat exchangers and it is unclear if the heat exchangers are required to be separate or part of the originally described heat exchanger. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood to not be further limiting claim 10 or 13, and only redescribing a plurality of heat exchangers. Further this limitation is indefinite as no front or rear or specific flow direction has been described. For the purpose of examination, rear is considered a colder heat exchanger after a first heat exchanger after a warmer heat exchanger.
Claim 14 recites “a cold head formed to be in thermal contact” which is considered indefinite as the claims have not previously required a cold head and the way this limitation is written it is unclear if this is requiring a cold head. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood that the cryocooler has a cold head and that is it in thermal contact with the heat transfer unit and it is installed in a vacuum container.
Claim 15 recite “a plurality of heat exchangers” and then later recites “wherein the heat exchanger includes” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the invention are as it is unclear if this requires all the heat exchangers if there are more than one heat exchanger to be configured this way. For the purpose of examination, the plurality of heat exchangers of claim 15 are considered to all have the configuration.
Claim 15 recites “a heat exchange unit” in line 4 which has heat exchangers which as a part of them as recited in line 16 also have “a heat exchange unit” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear if they are the same heat exchange unit, or unrelated. For the purpose of examination, the heat exchange unit that is part of the heat exchanger is a separate component formed including a micro-channel which is part of the overall heat exchange unit.
Claim 15 recites “pipe shaped” which is considered indefinite. A “pipe shaped” object does not have a definite configuration that would be understood by one having ordinary skill in the art as pipes can be shaped in a myriad of different ways. For the purpose of examination this limitation is considered that the heat pipe of the heat transfer unit is elongated in a vertical direction.
Claim 15 recites “from front to rear based on a flow direction of hydrogen” which is considered indefinite as no front or rear or specific flow direction has been described. For the purpose of examination, front is considered warmer heat exchangers and rear is considered colder heat exchangers.
Claim 15 recites “the heat exchanger unit” in line 25 which is considered indefinite as it is unclear which “heat exchange unit” this limitation refers. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood to be the heat exchange unit of the heat exchanger.
Claim 15, line 26 recites “is formed with a micro-channel” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear how it relates to the micro-channel already claimed. For the purpose of examination, they are considered to be the same micro-channel.
Claim 15 recites “pillar shape” which is considered indefinite as “pillar shape” is not a term of art and one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that pillars can have multiple shapes. For the purpose of examination, as long as heat conductor has a generally cylindrical shape the limitation is met.
Claim 15 line 28 recites “the refrigerant” which is considered indefinite as no refrigerant has been previously recited. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is only considered to apply when the heat pipe is present and is understood to refer to a refrigerant of the heat pipe.
Claim 16 recites “one or more heated exchangers” which is considered indefinite as it is unclear how this relates to the limitation of both “the heat exchanger” and the specific configuration of the heat exchanger as described in claim 15. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood that the this is only requiring a single heat exchanger but if there are more in this configuration they have the same configuration.
Claim 16 recites “cooling the heat transfer unit by a cryocooler” and “the heat transfer unit of the heat exchanger” which is considered indefinite as “the heat transfer unit” lacks antecedent basis. For the purpose of examination there is considered to be a heat transfer unit as claimed as part of the heat exchanger
Claim 16 recites “the heat exchange unit” which lacks antecedent basis. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood that there is a heat exchange unit as part of the heat exchanger.
Claim 17 recites “a plurality of heat exchangers “ which is considered indefinite as it is unclear how it relates to the one or more heat exchangers of claim 16. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is understood that the there is more than one heat exchanger present in the configuration as claimed.
Claim 17 recites “from front to rear based on a flow direction of hydrogen” which is considered indefinite as no front or rear or specific flow direction has been described. For the purpose of examination, front is considered warmer heat exchangers and rear is considered colder heat exchangers.
Claim 19 recites “pipe shaped” which is considered indefinite. A “pipe shaped” object does not have a definite configuration that would be understood by one having ordinary skill in the art as pipes can be shaped in a myriad of different ways. For the purpose of examination this limitation is considered that the heat pipe of the heat transfer unit is elongated in a vertical direction.
Claim 19 recites limitations related to b2 but is unclear how this relates to “via an intermediary” in claim 16. For the purpose of examination, the refrigerant of claim 20 is considered to be the intermediary.
Claim 20 recites “pillar shape” which is considered indefinite as “pillar shape” is not a term of art and one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that pillars can have multiple shapes. For the purpose of examination, as long as heat conductor has a generally cylindrical shape the limitation is met.
Claim 20 recites limitations related to b2 but is unclear how this relates to “via an intermediary” in claim 16. For the purpose of examination, the material of the heat conductor of claim 20 is considered to be the intermediary.
Claim 20 recites “which is formed to penetrate a surface of the heat conductor” which is considered indefinite. For the micro-channel to penetrate the surface of the heat conductor as claimed, it would be generally understood would be that it would result in the pillar shape being “porous” or similar for it to “penetrate the surface”. which is not shown in the figure or described in the specification. As best understood in view of the specification and the drawings, this limitation is understood for the purpose of rejection that the structure of the heat conductor is provided with channel with which the micro-channels form in such as grooves.
Claims 3-6, 11-12 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
While this is meant to be a comprehensive list of all issues in regard to 35 USC 112 in the claims, due to the length and nature of the claims, it may not be possible to indicate every issue in regard to 35 USC 112 and the Applicant is requested to perform a thorough review of the claims for any outstanding issues in regard to 35 USC 112. The applicant is also requested to proof-read any future amendments for any potential issues in regard to 35 USC 112 that can arise from the amendments due to the complexity of the claims.
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.
Claim(s)s 1, 9-11, 13-14, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN115325774), hereinafter referred to as Li and further in view of Mathias et al. (US Patent No. 7000427), hereinafter referred to as Mathias.
With respect to claim 1, Li (Figure 1) teaches a hydrogen liquefaction device (paragraph 1), comprising a hydrogen pipe for connecting a hydrogen supply unit in which gaseous liquid is stored and a storage container in which liquid hydrogen liquefied in a liquid state is stored (the hydrogen starts at high-pressure cylinder 1, paragraph 32 and is ultimately stored in liquid hydrogen storage tank 16, paragraph 35, which as seen in the figure is achieved by a hydrogen pipe which starts at the top of 1 and passes through each heat exchanger and along the pathway before being discharged into 16),
and a heat exchange unit (cooling refrigerator 8 and at least one of the liquefaction refrigerators 9, paragraph 33) that cools hydrogen by at least one or more heat exchangers installed on the hydrogen pipe so that hydrogen being introduced from the hydrogen supply unit and flowing through the hydrogen pipe toward the storage container can be cooled and liquefied in a process of passing through the hydrogen pipe and be discharged to the storage container as liquid hydrogen (hydrogen passing along the pipe first exchanges heat with the cooling head 10 of 8 and then with the cooling head with each of the refrigerators 9, paragraphs to cool and then liquefy the hydrogen 49-53); wherein the heat exchanger includes:
a cryocooler (the cooling refrigerator 8 with the cold head 10 and the liquefaction refrigerator 9 with the cold head 13, are cryocoolers and would be recognized as such by one having ordinary skill in the art)
a heat transfer unit configured to be in thermal contact with the cryocooler (the heat exchange tube 11 and 14 of the refrigeration units can be in the form of heat pipes, paragraph 36);
and a heat exchange unit configured to be in thermal contact with the heat transfer unit and therein through which hydrogen can flow to perform heat exchange between the cryocooler and hydrogen through the heat transfer unit (the hydrogen is cooled as it passes through the heat exchange tubes, paragraphs 33 and 35).
Mathias teaches that a fluid product being liquefied in a heat exchanger can be flowed through microchannels of that heat exchanger (abstract) and that microchannels have a higher heat transfer unit volume in a heat exchanger compared to other heat exchangers (Column 2, lines 53-55
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed for the heat exchange unit (pathway through which the hydrogen passes when it exchanges heat with the heat transfer unit) is formed as a microchannel heat based on the teaching of Mathias in Li since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that its common knowledge in the art that using a microchannel as the heat exchanger would provide a compact and efficient method of providing the heat exchange flow path for the hydrogen that is exchanging heat with the heat transfer unit compared to using non-microchannels.
With respect to claim 9, Li as modified teaches wherein the heat exchange unit includes: a plurality of heat exchangers installed on the hydrogen pipe at predetermined intervals and having lower cooling temperatures from front to rear based on a flow direction of hydrogen so that hydrogen can be cooled in multiple stages from room temperature to liquefaction temperature in a process of passing through the hydrogen pipe (there are two heat exchangers, the one formed by 8/10/11 and the one formed by 9/13/14, where cooling is first in 8/10/11 and then in 9/13/14 at a colder temperature, paragraphs 35 and 36, where cooling overall starts at room temperature, paragraph 30, and as they are placed in the system they can be said to have predetermined intervals).
With respect to claim 10, Li as modified teaches wherein the heat exchange unit includes: a first heat exchanger installed on the hydrogen pipe to cool hydrogen to a first cooling temperature (8/10); and a second heat exchanger (9/13) installed at a rear of the first heat exchanger based on the flow direction of hydrogen on the hydrogen pipe to cool hydrogen to a second cooling temperature lower than the first cooling temperature (there are two heat exchangers, the one formed by 8 and 10 and the one formed by 9 and 13, where cooling is first in 8 and 10 and then in 9 and 13 at a colder temperature, paragraphs 35 and 36, 9/13 can be considered at a rear of 8/10 as heat exchange in 9/13 is after heat exchange in 8/10).
With respect to claim 11, Li as modified teaches wherein the hydrogen pipe includes: a connecting pipe configured to connect a bottom of the first heat exchanger and a top portion of the second heat exchanger to flow hydrogen discharged from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger (as seen in the figure, the pipe extends from the bottom of the combination of 8/1011 and the top of 9/13/14).
With respect to claim 13, Li as modified teaches wherein the heat exchange unit further includes: an n-th heat exchanger installed at a rear of an n-1th heat exchanger based on a flow direction of hydrogen on the hydrogen pipe to cool hydrogen to an n-th cooling temperature lower than an n-1th cooling temperature (the two heat exchangers as shown in the rejection of claim 10 above).
With respect to claim 14, Li as modified teaches wherein the cryocooler is configured so that a cold head formed to be in thermal contact with the heat transfer unit to cool the heat transfer unit by conductive cooling (as modified, the cryocooler is in thermal contact with the heat pipes at the cold head).
Li as modified does not teach the cold head is installed in a vacuum container.
Examiner takes official notice that it would be obvious for the overall container (16 that is the storage container) of Li to have been within a vacuum container (which would result in the cold heads would also be in the vacuum container whereby providing the components within the vacuum container would provide insulation from the outside of the container reducing the heat intrusion into the container.
With respect to claim 16, Li teaches (Figure 1) teaches (a) introducing hydrogen into a hydrogen pipe in a gaseous stage from a hydrogen supply unit at room temperature (hydrogen is supplied into the cooling system at room temperature, paragraph 30)
(b) cooling and liquefying hydrogen in a process of passing through the hydrogen pipe by at least one or more heat exchangers installed on the hydrogen pipe (as it passes along the pipe as seen in the figure hydrogen is cooled by multiple heat exchangers including the combinations of 8/10/11 and 9/13/14 and the liquefied paragraphs 33-35);
and (c) discharging liquid hydrogen liquefied in a liquid state from the hydrogen pipe and storing it in a storage container (liquid hydrogen is discharged into storage tank 16, paragraph 35) ;
wherein (b) includes: (b-1) cooling the heat transfer unit by a cryocooler that is formed to be in thermal contact with the heat transfer unit of the heat exchanger (heat pipes formed at 11 and 14, paragraph 36 are heat transfer unit cooled by the cold heads of the refrigerators 8 and 9 respectively, paragraphs 33-36, which based on how they are described in the specification and shown in the figure would be cryocoolers),
(b-2) cooling hydrogen by heat exchange between the cryocooler and the heat exchange unit of the heat exchanger, which is configured to be in thermal contact with the heat transfer unit through which hydrogen flows, via an intermediary of the heat transfer unit (the hydrogen is cooled as it passes through the heat exchange tubes, paragraphs 33 and 35, which intermediary would be the fluid of the heat pipe).
Li does not teach the heat exchange unit includes a micro-channel.
Mathias teaches that a fluid product being liquefied in a heat exchanger can be flowed through microchannels of that heat exchanger (abstract) and that microchannels have a higher heat transfer unit volume in a heat exchanger compared to other heat exchangers (Column 2, lines 53-55
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed for the heat exchange unit (pathway through which the hydrogen passes when it exchanges heat with the heat transfer unit) is formed as a microchannel heat based on the teaching of Mathias in Li since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that its common knowledge in the art that using a microchannel as the heat exchanger would provide a compact and efficient method of providing the heat exchange flow path for the hydrogen that is exchanging heat with the heat transfer unit compared to using non-microchannels.
With respect to claim 17, Li teaches wherein (b) is performed multiple times by a plurality of heat exchangers installed on the hydrogen pipe at predetermined intervals and having lower cooling temperatures from front to rear based on a flow direction of hydrogen so that hydrogen can be cooled in multiple stages from room temperature to liquefaction temperature in a process of passing through the hydrogen pipe (there are two heat exchangers, the one formed by 8/10/11 and the one formed by 9/13/14, where cooling is first in 8/10/11 and then in 9/13/14 at a colder temperature, paragraphs 35 and 36, where cooling overall starts at room temperature, paragraph 30).
Claim(s) 2-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li/Mathias and further in view of Baik (US PG Pub 20160231049), hereinafter referred to as Baik.
With respect to claim 2, Li teaches wherein the heat transfer unit is formed in a pipe shape (a heat pipe is pipe shaped).
Li does not the heat pipe is elongated in a vertical direction elongated in a vertical direction so that one end thereof can be in thermal contact with the cryocooler, and includes a heat pipe filled with a refrigerant therein; wherein the heat exchange unit is formed to surround the heat pipe, which is formed in a pipe shape, in an annular shape, and is formed with a micro-channel such that the heat exchange between the cryocooler and hydrogen can be performed by heat convection of the refrigerant.
Baik (Figure 1) teaches that when exchanging heat between hydrogen and a cryocooler using a heat pipe (40) which has an inner tube (44) which has an evaporating part and a condensing part where the outer tube is filled with solid nitrogen and a tube is provided which the hydrogen passes through (paragraphs 22-24).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have provided based on the teaching of Baik the heat pipes and cryocoolers of Li as modified with the configuration part at the bottom and a evaporating part at the top connected to the cryocooler is provided where an outer tube is formed with a solid refrigerant through which the pipe which carries the hydrogen (which would be a micro-channel as modified) since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby configuring the heat pipe to extend in this way with the outer tube with the channel wrapping around (annularly) to exchange heat would result in what would be common knowledge in the art of providing a high amount of heat exchange area between the heat pipe and the hydrogen by having the extend in this way around the heat pipe. It should be noted, that although applicant refers to the entire device including both the inner and outer tubes as the heat pipe, one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the heat pipe component itself would only be the inner tube which has the refrigerant which is evaporating and condensing, and the outer tube would form a heat exchanger separate from the heat pipe.
With respect to claim 3, Li as modified teaches wherein a top portion in the pipe shape of the heat pipe is configured to be in contact with a cold head of the cryocooler (as modified the condensing portion, the top of the heat pipe is in contact with the cryocooler) such that the refrigerant vaporized into a gaseous state at a bottom in the pipe shape and raised to the top portion is liquefied again into a liquid state to flow back down along an inner wall by gravity (the top is the condensing part and the bottom is the evaporating part and this is how it would operate where any liquid on the inner wall formed by the condensing would flow down the inner wall).
With respect to claim 4, Li as modified does not teach wherein the heat exchanger further includes: a refrigerant supply unit capable of supplying or retrieving at least any one of methane, argon, nitrogen, neon, hydrogen, and helium into the heat pipe as the refrigerant.
Baik teaches that gaseous hydrogen being transferred into the system can be used to fill the heat pipe inner tube (paragraph 34).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed for the hydrogen supply unit to have also been used as and considered a refrigerant supply unit to provide hydrogen to the heat pipe it of Li as modified based on the teaching of Baik since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable result whereby this would allow for the use of a suitable fluid such as hydrogen to be introduced into the heat pipe which would as would be common knowledge in the art be a fluid with a suitable temperature profile and range of operation for liquefying hydrogen.
With respect to claim 5, Li as modified wherein the refrigerant supply unit is configured to fill a single refrigerant made of hydrogen so as to fill the heat pipe with the refrigerant suitable for a predetermined temperature range in which heat exchange is performed in the heat exchanger (as modified the hydrogen in the heat pipe is a single refrigerant and is suitable for a predetermined temperature range as claimed, as it is useable in cooling hydrogen).
With respect to claim 6, Li as modified does not teach wherein the heat pipe is configured to be filled with hydrogen and to be sealed from outside so as to be suitable for a for a predetermined temperature range in which heat exchange is performed in the heat exchanger.
Baik teaches that the working fluid inner tube of the heat pipe can be filled with gaseous hydrogen as the working and is hermetically filled (paragraph 28).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have based on the teaching of Baik provided the heat pipe of Li as modified hermetically filled with hydrogen as the working fluid since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby providing the heat pipe as hermetically filled (which would understood to be that the heat pipe was filled and sealed) with hydrogen would provide what would be common knowledge in the art of a suitable refrigerant for the temperature ranges needed without the need to refill the refrigerant as the refrigerant is not able to leave the heat pipe.
With respect to claim 7, Li as modified does not teach wherein the heat exchange unit configured to be filled with a porous material therein or to be installed with at least one of a perforated thin plate and a protruding disk so as to form the micro-channel.
Mathias teaches that microchannels can include microstructures to increase the heat transfer area including porous layers which can provide a number of advantages to enhance the mass and heat transfer process (Column 23, lines 43-48, 67 – Column 24, line 5)
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the at the time the invention was filed to have in Li as modified have provided porous layers in the microchannels based on the teaching of Mathias to increase the heat transfer areas and thus the heat transfer performance in the microchannels.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li/Mathias and further in view of Kim (US PG Pub 20170205140), hereinafter referred to as Kim and Porter (US PG Pub 20200231425), hereinafter referred to as Porter.
With respect to claim 8, Li as modified does not teach wherein the heat transfer unit includes a heat conductor formed in a pillar shape elongated in a vertical direction so that one end thereof can be in thermal contact with the cryocooler, and the heat exchange unit is formed as the micro-channel.
Kim teaches that a heat exchange for a cryocooler for heat exchange with hydrogen and a cold head (24) is formed by providing a cold head which is connected to a heat exchanger (24) which is formed as a tube-cylinder heat exchanger in which a tube through which the hydrogen passes is wrapped around the wall of the cylinder which is an easily manufacturable type of heat exchanger and the number of turns of the tube around the heat exchanger can be controlled to achieve a target exit temperature (paragraphs 58-59).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have based on the teaching of Kim provided instead of a heat pipe configuration as in Li to have used a tube-cylinder where a cylinder is connected to the cold head of each cryocooler and a tube containing hydrogen is wrapped around the cylinder based on the teaching of Kim since it has been shown that a simple substitution of one known element for another to yield predictable results is obvious whereby as they are both known method of providing heat exchange between cooling hydrogen and a cryocooler it would have been obvious to have utilized the tube-cylinder heat exchanger (which would be a pillar with a tube around it) to be able to achieve a target exit temperature as taught by Kim for the hydrogen.
Li as modified does not teach wherein the micro-channel is formed to penetrate a surface of the heat conductor or an inside of the heat conductor so as to expand a heat transfer area of the heat conductor, such that heat exchange between the cryocooler and hydrogen can be performed by heat conduction of the heat conductor.
Porter (Figure 5) teaches that when a coil is exchanging heat by being wrapped circumferentially the outer surface the coil is in contact with can be machined to have spiral grooves for holding the coil (paragraph 33).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed for the micro-channel which carries the hydrogen and is in contact with the tube-cylinder as modified to have been in spiral grooves formed in the outer surface of the cylinders of Li as modified based on the teaching of Porter whereby providing the microchannel in the grooves since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby providing the channel in grooves would provide what would be common knowledge in the art of increasing the heat transfer between the microchannel and the tube by increasing the overall surface contact area which could allow for a reduction in the overall size needed for providing the cooling of hydrogen on the tube.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li/Mathias and further in view of Minta (US PG Pub 20090217701), hereinafter referred to as Minta.
With respect to claim 12, Li as modified does not teach wherein the connecting pipe is installed with a Joule-Thomson (JT) valve to decrease temperature of hydrogen by expanding hydrogen that passes through the connecting pipe.
Li teaches the use of a pressure reduce valve (2, paragraph 35) but it is upstream of heat exchange.
Minta teaches that during heat exchange for liquefying a gas (feed gas 10) the gas is pressurized and cooled (56-58) before being expanded (35) and cooled again (59) for a final stage of cooling (paragraph 40). Minta also teaches that it is known that expanders for expanding cooled gas in a liquefaction system include Joule Thompson valves (paragraph 39).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed for the expansion of the gas of Li to have not been at the beginning of the system (where valve 2 is) but to have been on the connecting pipe between the two stages of heat exchange by a JT valve (a pressure reducing valve) based on the teaching of Minta since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby maintaining the stream at pressure during some of the heat exchange and then expanding would provide what would be common knowledge in the art of increasing the heat transfer with the hydrogen gas as well as be able to take advantage of the expansion after cooling for further cooling before the final liquefaction.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li and further in view of Mathias and Baik.
With respect to claim 15, Li (Figure 1) teaches a hydrogen liquefaction device (paragraph 1), comprising a hydrogen pipe for connecting a hydrogen supply unit in which gaseous liquid is stored and a storage container in which liquid hydrogen liquefied in a liquid state is stored (the hydrogen starts at high-pressure cylinder 1, paragraph 32 and is ultimately stored in liquid hydrogen storage tank 16, paragraph 35, which as seen in the figure is achieved by a hydrogen pipe which starts at the top of 1 and passes through each heat exchanger and along the pathway before being discharged into 16),
and a heat exchange unit (cooling refrigerator 8 and at least one of the liquefaction refrigerators 9, paragraph 33) that cools hydrogen by a plurality of heat exchangers installed on the hydrogen pipe at predetermined intervals and having lower cooling temperatures from front to rear based on a flow direction of hydrogen so that hydrogen being introduced from the hydrogen supply unit and flowing through the hydrogen pipe toward the storage container can be cooled and liquefied in multiple stages in a process of passing through the hydrogen pipe and be discharged to the storage container as liquid hydrogen (hydrogen passing along the pipe first exchanges heat with the cooling head 10 of 8 and then is further cooled in cooling head with each of the refrigerators 9 with cold head 13, paragraphs to cool and then liquefy the hydrogen 49-53, one of which can be considered the claimed second of the multiple stages, and as they are spaced already they are at a predetermined interval) wherein the heat exchanger includes:
a cryocooler (the cooling refrigerator 8 with the cold head 10 and the liquefaction refrigerator 9 with the cold head 13, are cryocoolers and would be recognized as such by one having ordinary skill in the art);
a heat transfer unit configured to be in thermal contact with the cryocooler (the heat exchange tube 11 and 14 of the refrigeration units can be in the form of heat pipes, paragraph 36);
a heat exchange unit configured to be in thermal contact with the heat transfer unit which hydrogen can flow to perform heat exchange between the cryocooler and hydrogen through the heat transfer unit (the hydrogen is cooled as it passes through the heat exchange tubes, paragraphs 33 and 35)
wherein the heat transfer unit includes a heat pipe formed in a pipe shape (the heat transfer unit is heat pipes).
Li does not teach the heat exchange unit has a micro-channel formed therein.
Mathias teaches that a fluid product being liquefied in a heat exchanger can be flowed through microchannels of that heat exchanger (abstract) and that microchannels have a higher heat transfer unit volume in a heat exchanger compared to other heat exchangers (Column 2, lines 53-55
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed for the heat exchange unit (pathway through which the hydrogen passes when it exchanges heat with the heat transfer unit) is formed as a microchannel heat based on the teaching of Mathias in Li since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that its common knowledge in the art that using a microchannel as the heat exchanger would provide a compact and efficient method of providing the heat exchange flow path for the hydrogen that is exchanging heat with the heat transfer unit compared to using non-microchannels.
Li does not teach the heat pipe elongated in a vertical direction so that one end thereof can be in thermal contact with the cryocooler wherein the heat exchange unit is formed to surround the heat pipe, which is formed in a pipe shape, in an annular shape, and is formed with a micro-channel through which hydrogen can flow such that heat exchange between the cryocooler and hydrogen can be performed by heat convection of the refrigerant.
Baik (Figure 1) teaches that when exchanging heat between hydrogen and a cryocooler using a heat pipe (40) which has an inner tube (44) which has an evaporating part and a condensing part where the outer tube is filled with solid nitrogen and a tube is provided which the hydrogen passes through (paragraphs 22-24).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have provided based on the teaching of Baik the heat pipes and cryocoolers of Li as modified with the configuration part at the bottom and a evaporating part at the top connected to the cryocooler is provided where an outer tube is formed with a solid refrigerant through which the pipe which carries the hydrogen (which would be a micro-channel as modified) since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby configuring the heat pipe to extend in this way with the outer tube with the channel wrapping around (annularly) to exchange heat would result in what would be common knowledge in the art of providing a high amount of heat exchange area between the heat pipe and the hydrogen by having the extend in this way around the heat pipe. It should be noted, that although applicant refers to the entire device including both the inner and outer tubes as the heat pipe, one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the heat pipe component itself would only be the inner tube which has the refrigerant which is evaporating and condensing, and the outer tube would form a heat exchanger separate from the heat pipe.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li/Mathias and further in view of Minta.
With respect to claim 18, Li as modified does not teach wherein, in (b), when hydrogen cooled in any of the heat exchangers flows through a connecting pipe to another heat exchanger for multi-stage cooling, a volume thereof expands and temperature decreases in a process of passing through a JT valve installed in the connecting pipe.
Li teaches the use of a pressure reduce valve (2, paragraph 35) but it is upstream of heat exchange.
Minta teaches that during heat exchange for liquefying a gas (feed gas 10) the gas is pressurized and cooled (56-58) before being expanded (35) and cooled again (59) for a final stage of cooling (paragraph 40). Minta also teaches that it is known that expanders for expanding cooled gas in a liquefaction system include Joule Thompson valves (paragraph 39).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed for the expansion of the gas of Li to have not been at the beginning of the system (where valve 2 is) but to have been on the connecting pipe between the two stages of heat exchange by a JT valve (a pressure reducing valve) based on the teaching of Minta since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby maintaining the stream at pressure during some of the heat exchange and then expanding would provide what would be common knowledge in the art of increasing the heat transfer with the hydrogen gas as well as be able to take advantage of the expansion after cooling for further cooling before the final liquefaction.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li/Mathias and further in view of Baik.
With respect to claim 19, Li as modified teaches wherein, in (b-1), a refrigerant filled inside a heat pipe formed in a pipe shape of the heat transfer unit (the heat transfer unit as modified is a heat pipe, which would have a refrigerant in it as that is a heat pipe).
Li as modified does not teach the refrigerant in the heat pipe is liquefied by being cooled by the cryocooler that is in thermal contact with the heat pipe where in (b-2), hydrogen is cooled by heat exchange performed between the cryocooler and hydrogen that flows through the micro-channel inside the heat exchange unit which is formed to surround the heat pipe in an annular shape, by heat convection of the refrigerant vaporized inside the heat pipe.
Baik (Figure 1) teaches that when exchanging heat between hydrogen and a cryocooler using a heat pipe (40) which has an inner tube (44) which has an evaporating part and a condensing part where the outer tube is filled with solid nitrogen and a tube is provided which the hydrogen passes through (paragraphs 22-24).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have provided based on the teaching of Baik the heat pipes and cryocoolers of Li as modified with the configuration part at the bottom and a evaporating part at the top connected to the cryocooler is provided where an outer tube is formed with a solid refrigerant through which the pipe which carries the hydrogen (which would be a micro-channel as modified) since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby configuring the heat pipe to extend in this way with the outer tube with the channel wrapping around (annularly) to exchange heat would result in what would be common knowledge in the art of providing a high amount of heat exchange area between the heat pipe and the hydrogen by having the extend in this way around the heat pipe. It should be noted, that although applicant refers to the entire device including both the inner and outer tubes as the heat pipe, one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the heat pipe component itself would only be the inner tube which has the refrigerant which is evaporating and condensing, and the outer tube would form a heat exchanger separate from the heat pipe. This would result in the bottom of the heat pipe vaporizing refrigerant for cooling the hydrogen and the condensing of the hydrogen being caused by the cryocooler as claimed.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li/Baik and further in view of Kim and Porter.
With respect to claim 20, Baik as modified does not teach in (b-1), the heat conductor formed in a pillar shape of the heat transfer unit is cooled by the cryocooler which is in thermal contact with the heat conductor.
Kim teaches that a heat exchange for a cryocooler for heat exchange with hydrogen and a cold head (24) is formed by providing a cold head which is connected to a heat exchanger (24) which is formed as a tube-cylinder heat exchanger in which a tube through which the hydrogen passes is wrapped around the wall of the cylinder which is an easily manufacturable type of heat exchanger and the number of turns of the tube around the heat exchanger can be controlled to achieve a target exit temperature (paragraphs 58-59).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have based on the teaching of Kim provided instead of a heat pipe configuration as in Li to have used a tube-cylinder where the cylinder is connected to the cold head and a tube containing hydrogen is wrapped around the cylinder based on the teaching of Kim since it has been shown that a simple substitution of one known element for another to yield predictable results is obvious whereby as they are both known method of providing heat exchange between cooling hydrogen and a cryocooler it would have been obvious to have utilized the tube-cylinder heat exchanger (which would be a pillar with a tube around it) to be able to achieve a target exit temperature as taught by Kim for the hydrogen.
Li as modified does not teach in (b-2), hydrogen is cooled by heat exchange performed between the cryocooler and hydrogen that flows through the micro-channel of the heat exchange unit which is formed to penetrate a surface of the heat conductor or an inside of the heat conductor, by heat conduction of the heat conductor.
Porter (Figure 5) teaches that when a coil is exchanging heat by being wrapped circumferentially the outer surface the coil is in contact with can be machined to have spiral grooves for holding the coil (paragraph 33).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed for the micro-channel which carries the hydrogen and is in contact with the tube-cylinder as modified to have been in spiral grooves formed in the outer surface of the cylinders of Li as modified based on the teaching of Porter whereby providing the microchannel in the grooves since it has been shown that combining prior art elements to yield predictable results is obvious whereby providing the channel in grooves would provide what would be common knowledge in the art of increasing the heat transfer between the microchannel and the tube by increasing the overall surface contact area which could allow for a reduction in the overall size needed for providing the cooling of hydrogen on the tube.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Baik (KR20200073956A) which teaches a substantial portion of the independent claims except the specifics of the heat transfer unit or heat exchange unit of the heat exchanger.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN M KING whose telephone number is (571)272-2816. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 0800-1700.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 5712726681. 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.
/BRIAN M KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights