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 .
Election/Restrictions
The applicant’s response dated 12/22/2025 to the restriction requirement is acknowledged. The applicant has elected, without traverse, Species A (figure 1) drawn to pending claims 1-7, 11-15 and 21-28. The restriction is deemed proper and made final.
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 6, 15 and 21-28 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.
Regarding claims 6, 15 and 23: these claims recite, “wherein the open regions are non-identical in configuration.” The scope of this claim is unclear because the specification nor the claim defines what “non-identical in configuration” means or what any particular open region is non-identical in relation to. Does this claim require that every open region be a different shape than every other open region? Does it require that the open regions for the inlet/outlet ports be a different shape than the open regions for the mounting members? Can some open the open regions have the same shape so long as they are in a different location? The applicant is required to provide clarification and/or correction.
Regarding claim 21: the claim recites an inlet port and an outlet port and a first open region extending about the mounting members. As the claim is written, a single open region must surround both the inlet and outlet ports. However, this is not commensurate with the disclosed invention which shows an open region for each of the inlet and outlet ports. See for example figure 1 which shows an open region for the inlet and a second open region for the outlet. The wording of the claim seems to contradict the rest of the disclosure. Accordingly, it is not clear what the applicant considers to be their claimed invention.
For the purposes of applying art, the examiner shall treat the claim as requiring an open region for each of the inlet and outlet openings. This interpretation is consistent with the specification and drawings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 11-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cousigne (US 2018/0259125).
Regarding claim 11: Cousigne discloses a high-pressure tank for a vehicle (title, abstract, fig 1), the high-pressure tank comprising: a tank body (liner 110, fig 1) including a plurality of functional attachments (e.g., pins 132, 132’ and ; figs 1 and 5) and a bolster (i.e., fiber reinforced layer 120, figs 1 and 2) wound about the tank body (fig 1, ¶0027) to increase strength of the high-pressure tank, wherein the bolster is applied to the tank body so as to define open regions (i.e., the openings that allow pins 132,132’ to pass through layer 120; figs 1-2, ¶0040) that extend about the functional attachments (see fig 2) such that the functional attachments are exposed from the bolster (as shown in figs 1 and 2, ¶0040).
Regarding claim 12: Cousigne discloses wherein the tank body includes: a main body portion (M, fig 1); a first end cap (P1, fig 1) connected to the main body portion at a first end thereof, and a second end cap (P2, fig 1) connected to the main body portion at a second end thereof.
Regarding claim 13: Cousigne discloses wherein the tank body is unitary in construction such that the main body portion, the first end cap, and the second end cap are formed from a single piece of material (Fig 1 depicts this arrangement of the liner 110).
Regarding claim 15: see the above §112 discussion. Cousigne discloses wherein the open regions are non-identical in configuration (the opening regions for 132 and 132’, respectively, are located in different regions of the tank and therefore “non-identical”).
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) 1-3, 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tatsushima (US 2022/029916) in view of Cousigne (US 2018/0259125).
Regarding claim 1: Tatsushima discloses a high-pressure tank for a vehicle (title, abstract, ¶0003, fig 1), the high-pressure tank comprising: a tank body (liner 12, fig 1) defining a longitudinal axis and including: a main body portion (at lead line 18, fig 1); a first end cap (20a, fig 1) connected to the main body portion at a first end thereof, wherein the first end cap includes an inlet port (16a, fig 1) capable of allowing compressed air to enter the high-pressure tank (see fig 1, ¶0025); and a second end cap (16b, fig 1, ¶0025) connected to the main body portion at a second end thereof, wherein the second end cap includes an outlet port configured to allow compressed air to exit the high-pressure tank (fig 1, ¶0025); and a bolster (i.e., reinforcing layer 14, fig 1, ¶0029) wound about the tank body (¶0033) to increase strength of the high-pressure tank, wherein the bolster is applied to the tank body so as to define open regions (i.e., openings around 16a and 16b, fig 1) that extend about, the inlet port, and the outlet port such that, the inlet port, and the outlet port are exposed from the bolster (see fig 1).
Tatsushima does not disclose the main body portion including a plurality of mounting members configured to connect the high-pressure tank to the vehicle; open regions in the bolster that extend about the mounting members; and that the mounting members are exposed from the bolster.
Cousigne discloses a similar high-pressure tank for a vehicle (title, abstract, fig 1), the high-pressure tank comprising: a tank body (liner 110, fig 1) with a main body portion (M, fig 1) including a plurality of mounting members (e.g., pins 132, 132’ and ; figs 1 and 5) configured to connect the high-pressure tank to the vehicle (¶0002) and a bolster (i.e., fiber reinforced layer 120, figs 1 and 2) wound about the tank body (fig 1, ¶0027) to increase strength of the high-pressure tank, wherein the bolster is applied to the tank body so as to define open regions (i.e., the openings that allow pins 132,132’ to pass through layer 120; figs 1-2, ¶0040) that extend about the mounting members (see fig 2) such that the mounting members are exposed from the bolster (as shown in figs 1 and 2, ¶0040).
Cousigne teaches that the mounting members is an easy and compact way of for vehicle integration of a pressure vessel (¶0005). Before the claimed invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tatsushima to include mounting members, as taught by Cousigne, because they provide for an easy and compact means of integrating a pressure vessel within a vehicle.
Regarding claim 2: Tatsushima discloses that the tank body is unitary in construction such that the main body portion, the first end cap, and the second end cap are formed from a single piece of material (this arrangement is clearly depicted in figure 1).
Regarding claim 3: the combined teachings of the references, discloses wherein the mounting members, the inlet port, and the outlet port are integrally formed with the tank body (see fig 1 of Tatsushima and fig 1 of Cousigne). The examiner noting the “integrally formed” does not require that the elements be molded or formed from a single, unitary piece of material.
Regarding claim 6: see the above §112 discussion. The combined teachings of the references disclose all of the claimed limitations including that the open regions are non-identical in configuration. The opening regions for 132, 132’, 16a and 16b, respectively, are located in different regions of the tank and therefore “non-identical”.
Regarding claim 7: Tatsushima discloses wherein the bolster includes at least one filament (¶0029).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cousigne, as applied to claim 12, in further view of Tatsushima.
Regarding claim 14: Cousigne discloses wherein the main body portion includes a plurality of mounting members (e.g., pins 132, 132’; figs 1 and 5) configured to connect the high-pressure tank to the vehicle (title, ¶0002); first end cap includes an inlet port (O, fig 1) configured to allow compressed air to enter the high-pressure tank.
Cousigne does not disclose the second end cap includes an outlet port configured to allow compressed air to exit the high-pressure tank. Tatsushima discloses a very similar pressure vessel for a vehicle that includes a first inlet port (16a, fig 1) and second outlet port (16b, fig 1) in the second end cap. Before the claimed invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Cousigne to include a second outlet port, as taught by Tatsushima, so that stored material could be filled/empty from multiple ends of the container.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 21-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tatsushima (US 2022/029916) in view of Cousigne (US 2018/0259125) and Yavorsky (US 4,619,374).
Regarding claims 21, 26: Tatsushima discloses a high-pressure tank for a vehicle (title, abstract, ¶0003, fig 1), the high-pressure tank comprising: a tank body (liner 12, fig 1) defining a longitudinal axis and including: a main body portion (at lead line 18, fig 1); a first end cap (20a, fig 1) connected to the main body portion at a first end thereof, wherein the first end cap includes an inlet port (16a, fig 1) capable of allowing compressed air to enter the high-pressure tank (see fig 1, ¶0025); and a second end cap (16b, fig 1, ¶0025) connected to the main body portion at a second end thereof, wherein the second end cap includes an outlet port configured to allow compressed air to exit the high-pressure tank (fig 1, ¶0025); and a bolster (i.e., reinforcing layer 14, fig 1, ¶0029) wound about the tank body (¶0033) to increase strength of the high-pressure tank, wherein the bolster is applied to the tank body so as to define open regions (i.e., openings around 16a and 16b, fig 1) that extend about, the inlet port, and the outlet port such that, the inlet port, and the outlet port are exposed from the bolster (see fig 1).
Tatsushima does not disclose the main body portion including a plurality of mounting members configured to connect the high-pressure tank to the vehicle; open regions in the bolster that extend about the mounting members; and that the mounting members are exposed from the bolster.
Cousigne discloses a similar high-pressure tank for a vehicle (title, abstract, fig 1), the high-pressure tank comprising: a tank body (liner 110, fig 1) with a main body portion (M, fig 1) including a plurality of mounting members (e.g., pins 132, 132’ and ; figs 1 and 5) configured to connect the high-pressure tank to the vehicle (¶0002) and a bolster (i.e., fiber reinforced layer 120, figs 1 and 2) wound about the tank body (fig 1, ¶0027) to increase strength of the high-pressure tank, wherein the bolster is applied to the tank body so as to define open regions (i.e., the openings that allow pins 132,132’ to pass through layer 120; figs 1-2, ¶0040) that extend about the mounting members (see fig 2) such that the mounting members are exposed from the bolster (as shown in figs 1 and 2, ¶0040).
Cousigne teaches that the mounting members is an easy and compact way of for vehicle integration of a pressure vessel (¶0005). Before the claimed invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tatsushima to include mounting members, as taught by Cousigne, because they provide for an easy and compact means of integrating a pressure vessel within a vehicle.
Tatsushima does not disclose a drain port configured to facilitate drainage of the high-pressure tank, an open region extending about the drain port.
Yavorsky discloses a pressure vessel (title, abstract, fig 1) that includes an inlet port (18a, fig 2), an outlet port (20, fig 2) and a drain port (18b, fig 2) to facilitate drainage of the high-pressure tank, an open region extending within bolster layer (44, fig 2) extending about the drain port. Before the claimed invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the pressure vessel of Tatsushima to include a drain port configured to facilitate drainage of the high-pressure tank, an open region extending about the drain port so that a user could drain the tank without having to disconnect the tank from the vehicle inlet/outlet conduits.
Regarding claim 22: the combined teachings of the references, discloses wherein the mounting members, the inlet port, the outlet port and drain port are integrally formed with the tank body (see fig 1 of Tatsushima; fig 1 of Cousigne; fig 2 of Yavorsky). The examiner noting the “integrally formed” does not require that the elements be molded or formed from a single, unitary piece of material.
Regarding claim 23: see the above §112 discussion. The combined teachings of the references disclose all of the claimed limitations including that the open regions are non-identical in configuration. The opening regions for 132, 132’, 16a, 16b, respectively, are located in different regions of the tank and therefore “non-identical”.
Regarding claim 24: Tatsushima discloses wherein the bolster includes a filament (¶0029).
Regarding claim 25: Tatsushima discloses wherein the bolster is wound (¶0033) about the tank body to increase strength of the high-pressure tank.
Regarding claim 27: Tatsushima discloses that the tank body is unitary in construction such that the main body portion, the first end cap, and the second end cap are formed from a single piece of material (this arrangement is clearly depicted in figure 1).
Regarding claim 28: Tatsushima discloses wherein the end caps are hemispherical in configuration (figure 1).
Regarding claims 4 and 5: Tatsushima does not disclose a drain port configured to facilitate drainage of the high-pressure tank, an open region extending about the drain port.
Yavorsky discloses a pressure vessel (title, abstract, fig 1) that includes an inlet port (18a, fig 2), an outlet port (20, fig 2) and a drain port (18b, fig 2) to facilitate drainage of the high-pressure tank, an open region extending within bolster layer (44, fig 2) extending about the drain port. Before the claimed invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the pressure vessel of Tatsushima to include a drain port configured to facilitate drainage of the high-pressure tank, an open region extending about the drain port so that a user could drain the tank without having to disconnect the tank from the vehicle inlet/outlet conduits.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DON M ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4923. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5, Monday-Friday.
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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
/DON M ANDERSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733