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 Amendment
The amendment filed May 05th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5 remain pending in the application. The amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 112(b) rejection previously cited in the Non-Final rejection mailed February 13th, 2026. However, the amendment has raised other issues detailed below.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irie et al. (JP 2005273681), hereinafter Irie in view of Nakamura et al. (JP 2018091391), hereinafter Nakamura.
Regarding claim 1, Irie discloses a hydrogen re-liquefaction system that re-liquefies boil-off gas produced in a liquid hydrogen tank into liquid hydrogen and returns the liquid hydrogen to the liquid hydrogen tank (Fig. 1, low temperature liquefied gas storage system 1, liquefied gas tank 10; Abstract, To provide a low temperature liquefied gas reservoir system suppressing generation of boil off gas by re-liquefying boil off gas), the hydrogen re-liquefaction system comprising:
a delivery passage through which hydrogen flows to be delivered from the liquid hydrogen tank to a supply destination (Fig. 1, pipe 81, pipe 84, pipe 86; Pg. 8, The boil-off gas G8 that is not liquefied by the gas-liquid separator 50 and is sucked into the blower 87 is: They merge at the branch pipe 90, flow through the pipe 86 as the boil-off gas G10, are heated to room temperature by the heater 60, and are sent out of the low-temperature liquefied gas storage system 1);
a re-liquefaction passage through which the boil-off gas flows (Fig. 1, branch pipe 80, pipe 82, pipe 83); and
a re-liquefaction device that cools the boil-off gas flowing through the re-liquefaction passage and condenses the boil-off gas (Fig. 1, first cooling heat exchanger 30, expansion valve 40, gas/liquid separator 50; Pg. 7, The boil-off gas G2 that has flowed into the pipe 82 is compressed by the compressor 20 and becomes high pressure, and the temperature rises. The boil-off gas G3 that has become high pressure and high temperature in the compressor 20 exchanges heat with the cooling boil-off gas G6 flowing through the pipe 84 in the first cooling heat exchanger 30. The cooling boil-off gas 84 substantially maintains the pressure and temperature evaporated in the liquefied gas tank 10, and therefore substantially maintains the saturation temperature of the liquefied gas (20.4 K for liquefied hydrogen). Therefore, the boil-off gas G3 whose temperature has been increased by the compressor 20 is cooled; Pg. 8, The boil-off gas G4, which has become low temperature at high pressure, is squeezed by the expansion valve 40 and then expanded by the gas-liquid separation device 50 immediately below, whereby the pressure decreases and the temperature also decreases. When the saturation temperature is reached, part of the boil-off gas J is liquefied again… The reliquefied boil-off gas L2 is returned to the liquefied gas tank 10 through the pipe 83. When the gas-liquid separator 50 is installed above the liquefied gas tank 10, a reflux means that is automatically configured in this way is configured), wherein:
the re-liquefaction device includes a condenser in the re-liquefaction passage; and a heat dissipator in the delivery passage (See annotated Fig. 1 of Irie below, condenser 30a is located in pipe 82 and heat dissipator 30b is located in pipe 84).
However, Irie does not disclose wherein the re-liquefaction device is a magnetic refrigerator that includes: a condenser in the re-liquefaction passage; and a heat dissipator in the delivery passage;
the condenser cools the boil-off gas by demagnetization; and
the heat dissipator and releases heat generated during magnetization to hydrogen in the delivery passage.
Nakamura teaches wherein the re-liquefaction device is a magnetic refrigerator that includes: a condenser in the re-liquefaction passage; and a heat dissipator in the delivery passage (Fig. 1, magnetic refrigerator 14, magnetic field forming unit 17, magnetic working material 18, cooling unit 22, warm end portion 20);
the condenser cools the boil-off gas by demagnetization (Pg. 3, The magnetic refrigerator 14 cools the BOG with the cooling unit 22 and liquefies it); and
the heat dissipator and releases heat generated during magnetization to provide heat to hydrogen in the delivery passage (Fig. 3; Pg. 3, The magnetic refrigerator 14 includes a magnetic field forming unit 17 that can be excited and demagnetized. The magnetic field forming unit 17 is configured by, for example, a coil that forms a magnetic field by passing an electric current. When a magnetic field is formed by the magnetic field forming unit 17, the magnetic working material 18 existing in the magnetic field generates heat, and when the magnetic field disappears, an endothermic action occurs. The heat Q .sub.H of the magnetic working material 18 generated by applying the magnetic field is stored in the warm end portion 20. Further, the magnetic working material 18 is demagnetized and absorbs the heat Q .sub.L from the cooling unit 22. Thus, heat is stored by the temperature increase of the magnetic working material 18 at the warm end portion 20, and is stored by the temperature decrease of the magnetic working material 18 at the cooling portion 22. In one embodiment, as shown in FIG. 3, in the magnetic refrigerator 14, heat transfer between the magnetic working material 18, the warm end 20, and the cooling unit 22 is controlled by thermal switches 24 and 26).
Irie fails to teach wherein the re-liquefaction device is a magnetic refrigerator that includes: a condenser in the re-liquefaction passage; and a heat dissipator in the delivery passage; the condenser cools the boil-off gas by demagnetization; and the heat dissipator and releases heat generated during magnetization to hydrogen in the delivery passage, however Nakamura teaches that it is a known method in the art of cryogenic boil off gas re-liquefaction to include wherein the re-liquefaction device is a magnetic refrigerator that includes: a condenser in the re-liquefaction passage; and a heat dissipator in the delivery passage; the condenser cools the boil-off gas by demagnetization; and the heat dissipator and releases heat generated during magnetization to provide heat to hydrogen in the delivery passage. This is strong evidence that modifying Irie as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. recovery of thermal energy for the re-liquefaction of a cryogen to improve overall system efficiencies). Specifically replacing the first cooling heat exchanger 30 of Irie with the magnetic refrigerator 14 of Nakamura. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Irie by Nakamura and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of recovery of thermal energy for the re-liquefaction of a cryogen to improve overall system efficiencies. Further, the magnetic refrigerator of Nakamura will maintain the heat transfer direction as described by Irie when modified as described herein.
PNG
media_image1.png
383
443
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Irie
Regarding claim 2, Irie as modified discloses the hydrogen re-liquefaction system according to claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein:
the boil-off gas that is the hydrogen to be delivered from the liquid hydrogen tank to the supply destination flows through the delivery passage (Irie, Fig. 1, pipe 84, pipe 86; Pg. 8, The boil-off gas G8 that is not liquefied by the gas-liquid separator 50 and is sucked into the blower 87 is: They merge at the branch pipe 90, flow through the pipe 86 as the boil-off gas G10, are heated to room temperature by the heater 60, and are sent out of the low-temperature liquefied gas storage system 1); and
the magnetic refrigerator releases the heat to the boil-off gas flowing through the delivery passage via the heat dissipator (Irie, Pg. 11, A part of hydrogen gas G1 (2.7 g / sec) boiled off at atmospheric pressure (saturation temperature of 20.4 K) in the liquefied gas tank 10 is set to a compressor 20 (adiabatic efficiency 60%). To 4 atm (discharged gas temperature 44K). The compression work in the compressor 20 at this time is about 200 W. The compressed hydrogen gas G3 enters the first cooling heat exchanger 30 and is cooled to a saturated liquid state (4 atm, 26.1 K). Subsequently, when adiabatic expansion to 1 atm is performed by the expansion valve 40, 0.6 g / sec of hydrogen corresponding to about 20% of the boil-off gas G1 (2.7 g / sec) is reliquefied. Therefore, 0.1 g / sec of hydrogen gas G8 is separated by the gas-liquid separator 50. The boil-off gas that has not been passed to the compressor 20, that is, the cooling boil-off gas G6 (2.0 g / sec) is introduced into the first cooling heat exchanger 30 as a cooling source, and the cooling boil-off gas G7 is up to 42K. The temperature is raised. The hydrogen gas G8 is sent to the heater 60 together with the cooling boil-off gas G7; Nakamura, Pg. 3, The magnetic refrigerator 14 includes a magnetic field forming unit 17 that can be excited and demagnetized. The magnetic field forming unit 17 is configured by, for example, a coil that forms a magnetic field by passing an electric current. When a magnetic field is formed by the magnetic field forming unit 17, the magnetic working material 18 existing in the magnetic field generates heat, and when the magnetic field disappears, an endothermic action occurs. The heat Q .sub.H of the magnetic working material 18 generated by applying the magnetic field is stored in the warm end portion 20. Further, the magnetic working material 18 is demagnetized and absorbs the heat Q .sub.L from the cooling unit 22. Thus, heat is stored by the temperature increase of the magnetic working material 18 at the warm end portion 20, and is stored by the temperature decrease of the magnetic working material 18 at the cooling portion 22. The magnetic refrigerator 14 cools the BOG with the cooling unit 22 and liquefies it. In one embodiment, as shown in FIG. 3, in the magnetic refrigerator 14, heat transfer between the magnetic working material 18, the warm end 20, and the cooling unit 22 is controlled by thermal switches 24 and 26). Further, the limitations of claim 2 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 3, Irie as modified discloses the hydrogen re-liquefaction system according to claim 2 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 2 above), wherein:
the delivery passage is connected to the liquid hydrogen tank (Irie, Fig. 1, pipe 81; Pg. 5, A pipe 81 for conveying boil-off gas is connected to the upper part of the liquefied gas tank 10);
the re-liquefaction passage is connected to the liquid hydrogen tank via the delivery passage (Irie, Fig. 1, branch pipe 80; Pg. 5, The pipe 81 is bifurcated by a branch pipe 80 as a branch part that divides the flow of the boil-off gas. That is, a pipe 82 that reaches the first cooling heat exchanger 30 through the compressor 20 and a pipe 84 that reaches the first cooling heat exchanger 30 without passing through the compressor 20); and
in the delivery passage, the heat dissipator of the re-liquefaction device is disposed closer to the supply destination than a branch point between the delivery passage and the re-liquefaction passage is (annotated Fig. 1 of Irie depicts the heat dissipator 30b of the first cooling heat exchanger 30 to be located closer to closer to an outlet of the supply destination than to the branch pipe 80; Further, the magnetic refrigerator of Nakamura will maintain the same arrangement when modified as described herein). Further, the limitations of claim 3 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 2 above.
PNG
media_image1.png
383
443
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Irie
Regarding claim 5, Irie as modified discloses the hydrogen re-liquefaction system according to claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein:
the delivery passage includes a first insulation structure that shuts off heat input to the hydrogen (Irie, Pg. 7, In the above description, it has been described that only the liquefied gas tank 10 and the gas-liquid separator 50 are provided with a heat insulating layer or a heat insulating material, but other devices and pipes are also provided with a heat insulating layer or a heat insulating material. The heat insulating layer or the heat insulating material suppresses heat input to the low-temperature liquefied gas in the low-temperature liquefied gas storage system 1, and when a worker or the like contacts a part of the low-temperature liquefied gas storage system 1, The risk of waking up is avoided; Further, the teachings of Irie at least imply the delivery passage includes a first insulation structure that shuts off heat input to the hydrogen since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01));
the re-liquefaction passage includes a second insulation structure that shuts off heat input to the boil-off gas (Irie, Pg. 7, In the above description, it has been described that only the liquefied gas tank 10 and the gas-liquid separator 50 are provided with a heat insulating layer or a heat insulating material, but other devices and pipes are also provided with a heat insulating layer or a heat insulating material. The heat insulating layer or the heat insulating material suppresses heat input to the low-temperature liquefied gas in the low-temperature liquefied gas storage system 1, and when a worker or the like contacts a part of the low-temperature liquefied gas storage system 1, The risk of waking up is avoided; Further, the teachings of Irie at least imply the re-liquefaction passage includes a second insulation structure that shuts off heat input to the boil-off gas since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)); and
in the re-liquefaction device, the condenser has a temperature lower than a saturation temperature of the hydrogen and lower than or equal to 30 K, the heat dissipator has a temperature higher than or equal to 20 K and higher than the temperature of the condenser, and a temperature difference between the heat dissipator and the condenser is lower than or equal to 50 K (Irie, Pg. 11, A part of hydrogen gas G1 (2.7 g / sec) boiled off at atmospheric pressure (saturation temperature of 20.4 K) in the liquefied gas tank 10 is set to a compressor 20 (adiabatic efficiency 60%). To 4 atm (discharged gas temperature 44K). The compression work in the compressor 20 at this time is about 200 W. The compressed hydrogen gas G3 enters the first cooling heat exchanger 30 and is cooled to a saturated liquid state (4 atm, 26.1 K). Subsequently, when adiabatic expansion to 1 atm is performed by the expansion valve 40, 0.6 g / sec of hydrogen corresponding to about 20% of the boil-off gas G1 (2.7 g / sec) is reliquefied. Therefore, 0.1 g / sec of hydrogen gas G8 is separated by the gas-liquid separator 50. The boil-off gas that has not been passed to the compressor 20, that is, the cooling boil-off gas G6 (2.0 g / sec) is introduced into the first cooling heat exchanger 30 as a cooling source, and the cooling boil-off gas G7 is up to 42K. The temperature is raised. The hydrogen gas G8 is sent to the heater 60 together with the cooling boil-off gas G7; Further, the magnetic refrigerator of Nakamura would be responsible for enacting the temperature difference described by Irie to achieve re-liquefaction of the boil off gas). Further, the limitations of claim 5 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irie as modified by Nakamura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tanaka et al. (US 20170291486), hereinafter Tanaka.
Regarding claim 4, Irie as modified discloses the hydrogen re-liquefaction system according to claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Irie as modified does not disclose wherein:
the liquid hydrogen that is the hydrogen to be delivered from the liquid hydrogen tank to the supply destination flows through the delivery passage; and
the re-liquefaction device releases the heat to the liquid hydrogen flowing through the delivery passage via the heat dissipator.
Tanaka teaches wherein:
the liquid hydrogen that is the hydrogen to be delivered from the liquid hydrogen tank to the supply destination flows through the delivery passage (Fig. 3, hydrogen fuel supply system 1A', tank 2, use point 3, supply line 4, pipe 41, heat exchanger 40); and
the re-liquefaction device releases the heat to the liquid hydrogen flowing through the delivery passage via the heat dissipator (Pg. 4, paragraph 43, In this case, for example, as shown in FIG. 3, the heat exchanger 40 which performs heat exchange between the liquid hydrogen having been taken out of the tank 2 in the supply line 4 and the BOG with the pressure having been increased by the compressor 72 in the BOG pressurization line 7 may be provided. In the heat exchanger 40, the liquid hydrogen having been taken out of the tank 2 in the supply line 4 is vaporized, and the BOG with the pressure having been pressurized by the compressor 72 in the BOG pressurization
line 7 is cooled).
Irie as modified fails to teach the liquid hydrogen that is the hydrogen to be delivered from the liquid hydrogen tank to the supply destination flows through the delivery passage; and the re-liquefaction device releases the heat to the liquid hydrogen flowing through the delivery passage via the heat dissipator, however Tanaka teaches that it is a known method in the art of hydrogen fuel supply to include the liquid hydrogen that is the hydrogen to be delivered from the liquid hydrogen tank to the supply destination flows through the delivery passage; and the re-liquefaction device releases the heat to the liquid hydrogen flowing through the delivery passage via the heat dissipator. This is strong evidence that modifying Irie as modified as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. supplying gaseous hydrogen to a supply destination). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Irie as modified by Tanaka and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of supplying gaseous hydrogen to a supply destination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 05th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on Pg. 5-6 (as numbered by the Applicant) of the Remarks, “Nakamura does not overcome the deficiencies of Irie. In the magnetic refrigerator 14 of Nakamura, the warm end portion 20 releases heat generated during magnetization. However, the warm end portion 20 is in the refrigerant circulation path 30 of the refrigerator 16, and exchanges heat with the refrigerator 16. This means that the warm end portion 2 is in the refrigerant circulation path, not the delivery passage and therefore differs from the heat dissipator of claim 1. Tanaka does not overcome the deficiencies of Irie and Nakamura. Therefore claim 1 is patentable over the cited references. Claims 2-5 are patentable because they depend from claim 1 and because of the additional features they recite.” However, this argument is not persuasive as per the previous 112(b) interpretation of “the re-liquefaction device is a magnetic refrigerator that includes: a condenser provided in the re-liquefaction passage; and a heat dissipator provided in the delivery passage, cools the boil-off gas via the condenser by demagnetization, and releases heat generated during magnetization to hydrogen via the heat dissipator” the Examiner was interpreting the claim to have a magnetic refrigerator capable of cooling the boil-off gas via the condenser by demagnetization and releasing heat generated during magnetization to hydrogen via the heat dissipator. See the rejection of claim 1 above.
The rejection of independent claim 1 is maintained. The rejections of dependent claims 2-5 are also maintained for at least the reasons described herein.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DEVON T MOORE whose telephone number is 571-272-6555. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:30-5.
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 571-272-6681. 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.
/DEVON MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 June 24th, 2026
/MARC E NORMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights