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 .
Status of Claims
The status of the claims as filed in the submission dated 6/4/2024 are as follows:
Claims 1-14 are pending and are being examined.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
Line 3 recites “to store 5 heat”, wherein it’s unclear if 5 should be in parenthesis or deleted.
Line 7 recites “to produce 0 electrical energy”, wherein it’s unclear if the 0 is supposed to be there or should be deleted.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Currently no claim limitation invokes 112(f).
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Apte (US2018/0187597A1, as cited in the IDS).
Re Claim 1. Apte teaches a system for storing and using thermal energy, the system comprising:
a first closed-loop cycle arrangement comprising a first tank (161) and a second tank (160), wherein the first tank is arranged to store heat-storage fluid at a first temperature, wherein the second tank is arranged to store heat-storage fluid at a second temperature, the second temperature being higher than the first temperature (Figure 31; Paragraph 196), wherein the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is configured to flow heat-storage fluid from the first tank to the second tank in a first operating condition and to flow heat-storage fluid from the second tank to the first tank in a second operating condition (Figure 31; Paragraph 196-198);
a second thermodynamic cycle arrangement configured to heat heat-storage fluid flowing from the first tank to the second tank by consuming first electrical energy, the electrical energy being input to the system (Figure 31; Heat pump mode as recited in paragraph 198); and
a third thermodynamic cycle arrangement configured to produce second electrical energy by cooling heat-storage fluid flowing from the second tank to the first tank, the second electrical energy being output from the system (Figure 31; Motor mode, discharging condition as recited in paragraph 198),
wherein the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement comprises a first heat exchanger configured to be fluidly coupled to the first tank and the second tank when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the first operating condition (Figure 31, upper and lower heat exchangers in the power subunits 140; Paragraphs 197-198; Paragraph 198 further explains that the power subunits 140 are shown in Figures 2, 3, 6, 7, 13-16, 20-25, 27, and 28. As one example, Figure 2 illustrates hot heat exchanger 2 and cold heat exchanger 4 for heat exchanger with the thermal tanks. See paragraphs 71-78), and
wherein the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement comprises a second heat exchanger configured to be fluidly coupled to the first tank and the second tank when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the second operating condition (Figure 31, upper and lower heat exchangers in the power subunits 140; Paragraphs 197-198; Paragraph 198 further explains that the power subunits 140 are shown in Figures 2, 3, 6, 7, 13-16, 20-25, 27, and 28. As one example, Figure 2 illustrates hot heat exchanger 2 and cold heat exchanger 4 for heat exchanger with the thermal tanks. See paragraphs 71-78).
Re Claim 2. Apte teaches the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement and the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement are fluidly coupled (Figure 31 illustrates the cycles fluidly coupled by piping; Paragraphs 197-202).
Re Claim 3. Apte teaches the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement and the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement share the first heat exchanger and the second heat exchanger (Figure 31; Figures 2, 3, 6, 7, 13-16, 20-25, 27, and 28 illustrates the first and second heat exchangers; Paragraphs 197-202).
Re Claim 4. Apte teaches the first heat exchanger is configured to transfer heat from the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement to the first closed-loop cycle arrangement when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the first operating condition, and wherein the second heat exchanger is configured to transfer heat from the first closed-loop cycle arrangement to the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the second operating condition (Figure 31; Paragraphs 197-202).
Re Claim 5. Apte teaches the first heat exchanger is configured to flow a first fluid stream and to transfer heat from the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement to the first fluid stream when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the second operating condition, and wherein the second heat exchanger is configured to flow a second fluid stream and to transfer heat from the second fluid stream to the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the first operating condition (Figure 31; Paragraphs 197-202).
Re Claim 6. Apte teaches a third heat exchanger (2 or 4 in Figure 22) fluidly coupled to the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement, and a fourth heat exchanger (2 or 4 in Figure 22) fluidly coupled to the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement, wherein the third heat exchanger is fluidly coupled to a third fluid stream and is configured to transfer heat from the third fluid stream to the second closed-loop cycle arrangement when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the first operating condition, and wherein the fourth heat exchanger is fluidly coupled to a fourth fluid stream and is configured to transfer heat from the third closed-loop cycle arrangement to the fourth fluid stream when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the second operating condition (Figures 22, 24, and 25 illustrate four heat exchangers; Paragraphs 150-161; Figure 31, Paragraphs 197-202).
Re Claim 7. Apte teaches the first closed-loop cycle arrangement comprises further a first valve (one of 142a-d) and a second valve (another of 142a-d), wherein the first valve and the second valve are configured to switch alternatively between an open configuration and a closed configuration, wherein the first valve is in the open configuration and the second valve is in the closed configuration when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the first operating condition, and wherein the first valve is in the closed configuration and the second valve is in the open configuration when the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the second operating condition (Figure 31; Paragraphs 197-202).
Re Claim 8. Apte teaches the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement and the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement are arranged to circulate a same working fluid (Figure 31; Paragraphs 197-202).
Re Claim 9. Apte teaches the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement further comprises: a compressor configured to generate a pressure increase upstream the heating of the heat-storage fluid; and a throttle valve configured to generate a pressure drop downstream the heating of the heat-storage fluid, wherein the compressor is configured to be mechanically couplable to an electric motor arranged to consume the first electrical energy and transform electrical energy into mechanical energy (Figure 31; Paragraphs 197-202).
Re Claim 10. Apte teaches the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement further comprises: a pump (1) configured to generate a pressure increase downstream the cooling of the heat-storage fluid; and an expander (3) configured to generate a pressure drop upstream the cooling of the heat-storage fluid, wherein the expander is configured to be mechanically couplable to an electric generator (11) arranged to transform mechanical energy into electrical energy and to produce the second electrical energy (Figures 6 and 31; Paragraphs 88-89, 197-202).
Re Claim 11. Apte teaches the second thermodynamic cycle arrangement and the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement share a valve arrangement (19a-d), wherein the valve arrangement comprises three-way valves arranged to switch the first closed-loop cycle arrangement between the first operating condition and the second operating condition (Figures 24, 31; Paragraphs 156-160, 197-202).
Re Claim 12. Apte teaches a heat unit configured to be fluidly coupled to the third heat exchanger, wherein the heat unit is configured to transfer heat to the third fluid stream when the first closed loop arrangement is in the first operating condition (Paragraph 62 teaches heat units to receive or reject thermal power).
Re Claim 13. Apte teaches a second closed loop cycle arrangement comprising a third tank and a fourth tank, wherein the third tank is arranged to store another heat-storage fluid at a third temperature, wherein the fourth tank is arranged to store another heat-storage fluid at a fourth temperature, the fourth temperature being higher than the third temperature, the fourth temperature being lower than the second temperature, wherein the first closed-loop cycle arrangement is configured to flow another heat-storage fluid from the fourth tank to the third tank in a first operating condition and to flow another heat-storage fluid from the third tank to the fourth tank in a second operating condition and; wherein the third tank and the fourth tank are fluidly coupled to the third heat exchanger when the second closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the first operating condition (Figure 22 illustrates four heat exchangers and four tanks; Paragraphs 150-153; Figure 31, Paragraphs 197-202).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Apte (US2018/0187597A1, as cited in the IDS) in view of Kreuger (US9845998B2, as cited in the IDS).
Re Claim 14. Apte teaches four heat exchangers (as discussed above) but fails to specifically teach a fifth heat exchanger, wherein the fifth heat exchanger is configured to transfer heat from the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement to the second closed loop cycle arrangement, and wherein the third tank and the fourth tank are fluidly coupled to the fifth heat exchanger when the second closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the second operating condition.
However, Kreuger teaches a fifth heat exchanger (615, 1444), wherein the fifth heat exchanger is configured to transfer heat from the third thermodynamic cycle arrangement to the second closed loop cycle arrangement, and wherein the third tank and the fourth tank (tanks 1268, 1269) are fluidly coupled to the fifth heat exchanger when the second closed-loop cycle arrangement is in the second operating condition (Figures 2 and 23; Column 25 line 38-61).
Therefore, in view of Kreuger's teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to add a fifthe heat exchanger to the third thermodynamic cycle of Apte in order to recuperate additional waste heat, thereby improving the thermal efficiency of the system. The use of recuperator heat exchangers is well-known and understood in the mechanical arts to improve efficiencies.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 for other relevant prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS C RUBY whose telephone number is (571)270-5760. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/TRAVIS RUBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763