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 . Claims 1-18 of the amended claim set received 3/31/2026 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li (US 2012/0227372).
Regarding Claim 1, Li discloses in Fig. 3, a power generation system including a gas turbine 30, the power generation system comprising:
a steam supply system 39 including a high-temperature high pressure superheater (boiler, i.e. heater, within HRSG 39 supplying high pressure steam 9) and a high-temperature intermediate pressure reheater (boiler, i.e. heater, within HRSG 39 supplying intermediate pressure steam 10);
a steam turbine assembly including a non-condensing steam turbine 27, a high-pressure steam turbine section 24, and an intermediate-pressure steam turbine section 25; and,
a control system including a controller (comprising the component or components necessarily present to actuate valves 38, 29, 41 as discussed, e.g., in para. 0047) communicatively coupled to a plurality of valves 38, 29 included in the steam supply system and to the steam turbine assembly (valve 41 being a component of the steam turbine assembly), the control system configured to:
selectively control a supply of reheat steam 10 to the non-condensing steam turbine 27 and to the intermediate-pressure steam turbine section 25, via at least one 38 of the plurality of valves (controlling the intermediate pressure/reheat steam through valve 38 as discussed in para. 0047 will control the supply of the intermediate pressure/reheat steam to the intermediate-pressure turbine 25 by providing an amount of the steam to the non-condensing steam turbine 27); or
selectively control a supply of high pressure superheated steam to the non-condensing steam turbine and high-pressure steam turbine section, via at least one of the plurality of valves.
Regarding Claim 2, wherein the steam turbine assembly further includes a low-pressure steam turbine section 28, and wherein the control system comprises a first control valve 29 to selectively control flow to the non-condensing steam turbine 27, a second control valve 38 to selectively control flow to the intermediate-pressure steam turbine section 25, and a third control valve 41 to selectively control a supply of steam to the low-pressure steam turbine section 28 from the steam supply system 39.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not disclose or form a reasonable combination teaching the following in combination with the independent and intervening claim limitations –
Regarding Claim 3, “wherein the control system further comprises an overload valve coupled in parallel with the second control valve to selectively control flow to the intermediate-pressure steam turbine section, wherein the first, second and third control valves and the overload valve are each in a fully open state at a base load of the power generation system.”
Regarding Claim 8, “wherein the non-condensing steam turbine receives the supply of high pressure superheated steam from the high pressure superheater via the first control valve, and the high-pressure steam turbine section receives the supply of high pressure superheated steam from the high pressure superheater via a main steam control valve, wherein the control system further comprises an overload valve coupled in parallel with the second control valve to selectively control flow to the intermediate-pressure steam turbine section, wherein the second control valve, third control valve, main steam control valve and the overload valve coupled in parallel with the second control valve are each in a fully open state at a base load of the power generation system.”
Claims 4-7 and 9-18 are allowable at least by dependency on one of the claims discussed above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues the §102 rejection over Li, with the position that “the citation of one and the same boiler within the HRSG 39 of Li is unreasonable” since two different heating sources are claimed. First, it is noted that the rejection does not point to the same boiler. The rejection points to two different boilers, i.e. heaters, the claimed high-pressure (HP) heater corresponding to the component within the heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) 39 which supplies the HP steam 9 and the claimed intermediate-pressure (IP) reheater corresponding to the component within HRSG which supplies the IP steam 10. Although not specifically discussed, the output HP steam 9 is produced by a water heater/boiler including at least a pipe and in which a water supply 13 is heated, this first water heater corresponding to the claimed superheater. The HRSG further requires a second water heater/boiler including at least a pipe to produce the output IP steam 10, this second water heater corresponding to the claimed reheater. The only reason water or steam is sent into a HRSG is to heat the fluid and two distinct outputs 9 and 10 at different pressures, HP and IP, require distinct delivery apparatuses, i.e. heaters. US Pat. 6,101,982 (Fig. 1) and US Pat. 6,178,734 (Fig. 2) each depict HRSGs showing the internal structures one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect to be within Li. The references show schematically a superheater supplying HP steam to an HP turbine, returning the spent HP steam to the HRSG, and a reheater supplying an IP steam to an IP turbine, the superheater and reheater correlating to those of Li used in the rejection.
Applicant further argues the claim 1 rejection, stating that “the high-pressure live steam 9 of Li is not provided to the turbine 27 as alleged in the office action.” This is not alleged by the office action. It is believed that Applicant may be arguing the second function of the control system, i.e., the control system configured to “selectively control a supply of high pressure superheated steam to the non-condensing steam turbine and high-pressure steam turbine section, via at least one of the plurality of valves.” This function is not anticipated by Li or alleged so in the prior action. It is noted that the claim as written requires only one of the two functions be enabled by making use of the word “or” and the rejection is written to show that the first function is anticipated. The full recitation of the control system being –
a control system including a controller communicatively coupled to a plurality of valves included in the steam supply system and to the steam turbine assembly, the control system configured to:
[first function] selectively control a supply of reheat steam to the non-condensing steam turbine and to the intermediate-pressure steam turbine section, via at least one of the plurality of valves; or
[second function] selectively control a supply of high pressure superheated steam to the non-condensing steam turbine and high-pressure steam turbine section, via at least one of the plurality of valves.
The Applicant further argues the rejection of claim 1, stating that “The valve 38 described in paragraph [0047] of Li controls the intermediate pressure steam 10 provided to the turbine 27, but there is no valve to control a supply of the intermediate pressure steam 10 to the intermediate pressure steam turbine 25 of Li [as essentially claimed].” As explained in the rejection and can be seen looking at Fig. 3, controlling the intermediate pressure/reheat steam through valve 38 as discussed in para. 0047 will control the supply of the intermediate pressure/reheat steam to the intermediate-pressure turbine 25 by providing an amount of the steam to the non-condensing steam turbine 27. As a specific example, if valve 38 is fully closed, flow of the IP steam 10 to non-condensing steam turbine 27 is terminated and all of the IP steam 10 is provided to IP turbine 25 as one would understand looking at Fig. 3.
The Applicant finally argues the §102 rejection of Claim 2 over Li, writing that the control valve 29 of Li “does not selectively control flow to the intermediate pressure steam turbine 25.” However, this is not the valve that was cited as providing this function. It is the (second) valve 38 which selectively controls flow steam 10 to the IP steam turbine section 25 as written in the previous rejection and as explained in the rejection of claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the attached Notice of References Cited.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENE D FORD whose telephone number is (571)272-8140. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached on (571) 272-7118. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/R.D.F/Examiner, Art Unit 3741 /PHUTTHIWAT WONGWIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights