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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 15 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, regarding claim 1, that Cheng does not explicitly disclose "generated super-rated power is stored in the energy storage system before the generator converts generated super-rated power into electric power." However, cited paragraph 0071 states “Wind power exceeding the capacity limit of the electrical generator of a turbine is generally trimmed off as mechanical spillage (wasted wind power). As described herein, systems, apparatus, and techniques are provided that can convert this mechanical spillage to compress air for storage in an air tank.”, which is storing the super-rated power. And paragraph 0071 further states “The compressed air in the tank can be used to supplement the wind energy, e.g., when the wind energy is not sufficient for the full generation capacity of the turbine and/or is not consistent enough to produce electricity with a desired quality.”, when is converting the stored power to electric power. Inherently the power would have to be stored before it is converted.
Regarding claim 2, as Cheng discloses storing the super-rated power (or ‘spillage’), given the “comprising” language used in the claim, it is interpreted as “all” of the super-rated power is stored, as “all” has not been defined relative to any other value.
Regarding claim 11, the amendment required the new grounds of rejection shown below.
Regarding claim 14, the amendment required the new grounds of rejection shown below.
Regarding claim 16, as stated in the rejection below Cheng clarifies that “fluid” can be a hydraulic cylinder in paragraph 0132, which is a hydraulic energy storage system. Whether Applicant concedes or not, this is explicitly recited in paragraph 0132.
Regarding claim 17, paragraph 0115 of Cheng references region III of Fig. 15. While in region IIIb which is the super-power region, as it increases over the rated power, paragraph 0115 states that blade pitching is active to decrease efficiency (“lowering blade pitch”), while maintaining intake power (“keeping rotor speed constant”), inherently, with both this occurring the torque on the rotor will increase.
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.
Claims 1-3, 14, 16-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cheng et al. ("Cheng"; US 2019/0017494).
Regarding claim 1: Cheng discloses a system for increasing power capture, comprising:
a turbine having a rotor (102);
a generator having a rated power limit (paragraph 0073); and
an energy storage system (100);
wherein, the rotor generates super-rated power (“mechanical spillage” paragraph 0073, region III in Fig. 2) above the rated power limit of the generator and generated super-rated power is stored in the energy storage system before the generator converts generated super-rated power into electric power (paragraph 0071).
Regarding claim 2: Cheng discloses all generated super-rated power is stored in the energy storage system before the generator converts generated super-rated power into electric power (paragraph 0071).
Regarding claim 3: Cheng discloses during operation the rotor has a speed, a pitch, and a torque (inherent).
Regarding claim 14: Cheng disclose a method of controlling a turbine having a rotor, the method comprising the steps of:
decoupling the rotor from a generator (paragraph 0076),
actuating the rotor to generate super-rated power wherein generated super-rated power is above a rated power limit of the generator (paragraph 0074, see region III in Fig. 2),
increasing rotor power until the rotor reaches a set limit (as Fig. 2 has bounds, or limits), and
storing generated super-rated power in an energy storage system (paragraph 0071).
Regarding claim 16: Cheng discloses storing generated super-rated power in an energy storage system further comprises storing generated super-rated power in a hydraulic energy storage system (Cheng repeatedly uses the term “fluid”, see paragraph 0002, which implies it can be air or hydraulic, further, explicitly in paragraph 0132, when describing the variable motor, Cheng teaches it can be pneumatic or hydraulic, thus Cheng explicitly teaches a hydraulic system).
Regarding claim 17: Cheng discloses actuating the rotor to generate super- rated power further comprises: keeping the rotor speed constant, lowering the rotor pitch, and increasing the rotor torque (paragraph 0115, in region III, the blades are pitched as wind speed increases, this inherently keeps the rotor speed the same, or maintains structural integrity, while increasing the torque).
Regarding claim 19: Cheng discloses regenerating generated super-rated power stored in the energy storage system by coupling the energy storage system to the generator (paragraph 0074-0076, via the clutch).
Regarding claim 20: Cheng discloses regenerating generated super-rated power during a period of lower power production (paragraph 0076).
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.
Claims 4, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng, in view of Lafferty (US 2002/0060500).
Regarding claim 4: Cheng discloses the energy storage system but does not explicitly disclose one or more of a battery storage system or a liquid metal battery storage system.
However, Lafferty discloses one or more of a battery storage system or a liquid metal battery storage system (paragraph 0047).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the storage of Cheng to be the battery of Lafferty in order to store electrical energy.
Regarding claim 15: Cheng discloses decoupling the rotor from the generator further comprises the use of a transmission (114) to decouple the rotor from the generator (paragraphs 0071-0076), but does not explicitly disclose a hydraulic transmission.
However, Lafferty discloses a hydraulic transmission (paragraph 0021).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the transmission of Cheng to be the hydraulic transmission of Lafferty in order to better control the system with the hydraulic circuit.
Regarding claim 18: Cheng discloses storing generated super-rated power in an energy storage system, but does not explicitly disclose one or more of a battery energy storage system, a liquid metal battery energy storage system.
However, Lafferty discloses one or more of a battery storage system or a liquid metal battery storage system (paragraph 0047).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the storage of Cheng to be the battery of Lafferty in order to store electrical energy.
Claims 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng and Wang as applied to claim 4, further in view of Ziremidis (DE 20 2018 108 987 U1).
Regarding claim 5: Cheng discloses a tower and wherein the turbine is a wind turbine but does not explicitly disclose the wind turbine is situated on the tower and the generator is situated at a base of the tower.
However, Ziremidis discloses the wind turbine is situated on the tower (Fig. 1) and the generator (122) is situated at a base of the tower.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the generator of Cheng to be at the base of the tower, as disclosed by Ziremidis, in order to allow for easier access.
Regarding claim 6: Cheng discloses the mechanical energy storage system is at least one of a hydraulic system, a hydraulic accumulator system, a flywheel system, a pumped hydro storage system, or a compressed air energy storage system (in this case, compressed air, paragraph 0108, and also teaches a “fluid” system in paragraph 0002, which implies both pneumatic and hydraulic).
Regarding claim 7: Cheng discloses system comprises a hydraulic compressor, hydraulic hoses, and a hydraulic variable motor (108, Fig. 19, hoses inherently connect all, Cheng repeatedly uses the term “fluid”, see paragraph 0002, which implies it can be air or hydraulic, further, explicitly in paragraph 0132, when describing the variable motor, Cheng teaches it can be pneumatic or hydraulic, thus Cheng explicitly teaches a hydraulic system).
Regarding claim 8: Cheng modified by Ziremidis disclose a tower, Ziremidis further discloses generated super-rated power is delivered to the compressor (114) which generates hydraulic power that is transmitted by the hydraulic hoses (at 114b) down to the base of the tower to the variable hydraulic motor (120, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9: Cheng discloses the variable hydraulic motor either creates mechanical energy storage or converts the hydraulic power into electric power through the generator (in this case, both, paragraph 0120).
Regarding claim 10: Cheng discloses the mechanical energy storage is in the form of compressed fluid energy storage (“Underground air storage”, Fig. 19).
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng, in view of Appa (US 2016/0172934).
Regarding claim 11: Cheng discloses a wind turbine comprising:
a tower with a base (Fig. 1);
a rotor (102);
a generator having a rated power limit (paragraph 0073); and
an energy storage system (100);
Cheng does not explicitly disclose a variable hydraulic motor that either creates mechanical energy storage or converts hydraulic power into electric power and the wind turbine is situated on the tower and the generator and the variable hydraulic motor is situated at a base of the tower.
However, Appa discloses disclose a variable hydraulic motor (106) that either creates mechanical energy storage or converts hydraulic power into electric power (via 105), and
the wind turbine (101) is situated on the tower and the generator (105) and the variable hydraulic motor (106) is situated at a base of the tower (paragraph 0034).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the generator of Cheng to include the hydraulic motor of Appa in order to store hydraulic energy and to be at the base of the tower, as disclosed by Appa, in order to allow for easier access.
Regarding claim 12: Cheng discloses the rotor generates super-rated power above a rated power limit of the generator (paragraph 0073, region III in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13: Cheng discloses generated super-rated power is stored in the energy storage system before the generator converts the super- rated power into electric power (paragraph 0071, 0074-0076, as the clutch controls where the generated power goes).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN GUGGER whose telephone number is (571)272-5343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00am - 5:00pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, T.C. Patel can be reached at 571 272 2098. 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.
/SEAN GUGGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834