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.
The following limitation(s) is/are 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 means or a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the means or generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
“positioning mechanism” includes the generic/nonce term “mechanism” coupled with the function of “positioning”. A return to the specification provides a guide rail and follower (30A and 30B; [0033]). Therefor the limitation is interpreted as the same or equivalents thereof.
“elevating device” includes the generic/nonce term “device” coupled with the function of “elevating”. A return to the specification provides hoist, winch, or the like ([0036]). Therefor the limitation is interpreted as the same or equivalents thereof.
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) 1-8, 11, 15, and 22-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Auchter et al (US 4,174,791).
Regarding claim 1, Auchter discloses a power feeding apparatus for supplying electric power to a submersible pump used to deliver liquefied gas, comprising:
a first electrical contact (14) secured to the submersible pump (4) and electrically coupled to an electric motor of the submersible pump;
a second electrical contact (13) configured to contact the first electrical contact, at least a part of the second electrical contact being located in a pump column (2) in which the submersible pump is arranged; and
a power cable (15) electrically coupled to the second electrical contact.
Regarding claim 2, Auchter discloses the first electrical contact (14) and the second electrical contact (13) are movable relative to each other in a longitudinal direction of the pump column while the first electrical contact and the second electrical contact are in contact with each other (4:40-49).
Regarding claim 3, Auchter discloses an entirety of the second electrical contact (13) is located in the pump column, and at least a part of the power cable is located in the pump column.
Regarding claim 4, Auchter discloses a part of the second electrical contact is located outside the pump column, and an entirety of the power cable is located outside the pump column (the power cable 15 is outside of the column as shown in at the figures, the second electrical contact 13 is regarded as inclusive of connection to power cable 15 for the purposes of interpretation here, thus a portion of the second electrical contact is outside of the column).
Regarding claim 5, Auchter discloses a positioning mechanism (11 and 12)configured to determine relative positions of the first electrical contact and the second electrical contact in a circumferential direction of the submersible pump.
Regarding claim 6, Auchter discloses the power cable (15) is secured to an inner surface or an outer surface of the pump column (figures show power cable 15 secured to an outer surface of the pump column).
Regarding claim 7, Auchter discloses the power cable (15) has structural resistance to a low temperature below a boiling point of the liquefied gas (the power cable is submerged in cryogenic liquid as disclosed and thus has structural resistance to withstand the environment in which it is used).
Regarding claim 8, Auchter discloses a spring configured to press the first electrical contact against the second electrical contact (4:45); and a support structure that movably supports the first electrical contact (support structure for first contact 14 shown in figure 1c), a horizontal gap being formed between the first electrical contact and the support structure.
Regarding claim 11, Auchter discloses a spring configured to press the second electrical contact against the first electrical contact (4:45); and a support structure that movably supports the second electrical contact support structure for second contact 13) shown in figure 1c), a horizontal gap being formed between the second electrical contact and the support structure.
Regarding claim 15, Auchter discloses the power cable (15) comprises a metal interconnect embedded in an inner surface of the pump column, and a power feeding line electrically coupled to the metal interconnect (connection from 15 to 13 includes portion embedded within column).
Regarding claim 22, Auchter discloses: a submersible pump (4) for delivering liquefied gas; a pump column (2) in which the submersible pump is arranged; and the power feeding apparatus according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 23, Auchter discloses a liquefied-gas tank facility comprising: a liquefied-gas storage tank (1) for storing liquefied gas therein; a pump column (2) arranged in the liquefied-gas storage tank; a submersible pump (4) for delivering the liquefied gas, the submersible pump being arranged in the pump column; and the power feeding apparatus according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 24, Auchter discloses a power feeding method for supplying electric power to a submersible pump used to deliver liquefied gas, comprising:
lowering the submersible pump in a pump column by an elevating device (7);
bringing a first electrical contact (14) into contact with a second electrical contact (13), the first electrical contact being secured to the submersible pump and electrically coupled to an electric motor of the submersible pump, at least a part of the second electrical contact being located in the pump column (2); and
supplying electric power from a power cable to the electric motor via the second electrical contact and the first electrical contact, the power cable being electrically coupled to the second electrical contact.
Regarding claim 25, Auchter discloses the first electrical contact is brought into contact with the second electrical contact when the submersible pump is lowered to an operating position within the pump column (4:30-39).
Regarding claim 26, Auchter discloses the first electrical contact is separated from the second electrical contact when the submersible pump is elevated from the operating position by the elevating device (7; 3:68 “lifting and lowering device”).
Regarding claim 27, Auchter discloses the liquefied gas has an electrical insulating property (electrical insulation and conduction is a material property).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 9, 10, 12, 13, and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Auchter et al (US 4,174,791).
Regarding claims 9 and 12, Auchter discloses the power feeding apparatus according to claim 1, but lacks a taper and corresponding reverse taper connection. The examiner takes official notice that tapered electrical connections are old and well known. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Auchter with a taper and corresponding reverse taper connection in order to aid in alignment.
Regarding claims 10 and 13, Auchter discloses a positioning mechanism (11 and 12) configured to determine relative positions of the first electrical contact and the second electrical contact in a circumferential direction of the submersible pump, the positioning mechanism including a combination of a guide rail and a guide follower. Auchter is silent concerning a relative horizontal gap size. The examiner takes official notice that it is known to have a small gap for alignment/guiding structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Auchter with a small gap between the guide and follower relative to the support structure in order to maintain the system within an acceptable alignment tolerance.
Regarding claims 19-21, Auchter discloses the power feeding apparatus of claim 1, but is silent concerning a specific shape of the electrodes. The examiner takes official notice that electrical rails and bars are old and well known electrical connection types. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Auchter with an electrical bar or rail in order to provide sufficient electrical contact to enable power transfer ensuring proper pump operation.
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Auchter et al (US 4,174,791) in view of Shaw et al (US 2002/0050361).
Regarding claim 16, Auchter discloses a suspension structure extending in a vertical direction along the pump column, the suspension structure being removably arranged, the second electrical contact being held by the suspension structure (Auchter discloses a suspension arrangement for the power cable and second electrical contact). Auchter lacks the suspension structure being within the column. Shaw discloses a submersible pump powering arrangement including a suspension structure (17) of a power cable (31) and second electrical contact (49) within the pump column (16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Auchter with a suspension structure within the pump column in order to protect the components from the bulk cryogenic fluid within the tank.
Regarding claim 17, Auchter and Shaw disclose the suspension structure (17 of Shaw) extends from an upper portion to a lower portion of the pump column.
Regarding claim 18, Auchter and Shaw disclose the suspension structure has a guide groove or a guide rail with which a guide follower is engaged, the guide follower being mounted to the submersible pump (11 and 12 of Auchter provided a guide and follower, in combination with Shaw it follows to apply that structure to the suspension structure in order to maintain rotational alignment, thus this structure is maintained in the modification above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is 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:
Claim 14 includes all features of preceding claim 1 as well as a plural pulley and an endless power cable arrangement. This arrangement is shown in instant figures 14-17.
Auchter as detailed above is regarded as the closest prior art of record. Auchter is directed to making electrical contact with an electrode permanently fixed within the bottom of a pump column.
No known reference, whether alone or in proper combination, would yield the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hall et al (US 7,201,240) downhole data transmission
Ricco et al (US 7,071,416) LPG fuel tank electrical connection
Meijer et al (US 7,510,003) downhole connection system
Carter (US 3,652,186) pump electrical cable
Chen (US 8,641,446) coaxial electrical probe
Semple et al (US 11,674,518) submersible pump power connection
Zebhauser (US 9,865,954) plug connection
Staley (US 2,082,986) protected terminal
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R ZERPHEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5965. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-4:00 PM.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 5712707740. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R ZERPHEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799