+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 .
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
A double inclusion limitation appears for the following terms that has been cited previously:
In claims 2 and 3, for "gas".
In claim 3, line 2, for “a ventilation fan”.
In claim 3, line 3, for “an exhaust pipe”.
In claims 6-7, for “a flame”, the second occurrence.
In claim 2, the term “it” and in claim 3, the term “them” may not properly refer to the intended limitations.
In claims 1, 5 and 7, the phrase “all of the remote shut off valves” may not properly refer to the shut off valve of each of the individual tank.
In claim 12, “extends is” has typographical error.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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 1-12 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.
Claims 1 and 6 recite the limitation "the sensor apparatus”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Graham (US 2003/0164202).
Regarding claim 1, Graham discloses a gaseous fuel storage system (fig.1-7), comprising: one or more storage tanks (6), each storage tank having a first end and a second end, the first end of each storage tank having a connection fitting (see fig.4a-b); a piping and valving assembly coupled to the connection fitting, wherein each of the one or more tanks is coupled to an outlet line through a remote shut off valve (see fig.2; tanks 6 are connected to pipe 11 and valves 30, 31); a first cabinet surrounding the piping and valving assembly and a portion of the first end of the one or more storage tanks (cabinet around 30, 31); a detector disposed in the first cabinet which is operable to detect the presence of hydrogen gas and generate a signal representative of a concentration of the hydrogen gas ([0024]); and an electronic controller (5) operably connected to the sensor apparatus and to the remote shut off valve, wherein the electronic controller is programmed to close all of the remote shut off valves in response to detection of a first predetermined concentration of hydrogen ([0024], [0026], [0049], [0062]).
Regarding claim 8, Graham discloses the first cabinet is a box structure including an access door (see fig.4-5).
Regarding claim 9, Graham discloses the first cabinet is made from a non- combustible material and joints between cabinet components, gaps, pipe penetrations, and access openings thereof are sealed with fire-resistant materials ([0029], via 18).
Regarding claim 10, Graham discloses the first end of each of the storage tanks is mounted to a first support bracket; and collectively, the first support bracket and the first cabinet define an enclosed space (see fig.4a, lower end of shelf provides a support bracket).
Regarding claim 11, Graham discloses the second end of each of the one or more storage tanks has a connection fitting; and a second cabinet surrounds a portion of the second ends of the one or more storage tanks (see upper portion cabinet in market area 28).
Regarding claim 12, Graham discloses the second end of each of the one or more storage tanks extends is mounted to a second support bracket (upper section of 60 defines a bracket in holding the tanks); and collectively, the second support bracket and the second cabinet define an enclosed space (via 18).
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 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Graham (US 2003/0164202) in view of Fang (CN 113090943 A).
Regarding claims 2-3, Graham is silent in disclosing the first cabinet includes a ventilation fan configured to purge gas from the interior of the first cabinet and exhaust it through an exhaust pipe; and the electronic controller is programmed to start the ventilation fan in response to detection of a second predetermined concentration of hydrogen in the first cabinet, thereby reducing the hydrogen concentration. However, Fang teaches the commonality of having a hydrogen gas fuel storage system with a cabinet includes a ventilation fan configured to purge gas from the interior of the first cabinet and exhaust them through an exhaust pipe (via 22, cabinet 2, and piping shape of 23 above 2); and the electronic controller is programmed to start the ventilation fan in response to detection of a second predetermined concentration of hydrogen in the first cabinet, thereby reducing the hydrogen concentration (via sensor 94 and see attached translation, page 6, ll. 32-38). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the application to modify the ventilation of the first cabinet of Graham as such to include a fan as taught by Fang, in order to improve the safety operation of the gaseous fuel storage system.
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Graham (US 2003/0164202) in view of Lim (US 2020/0208783).
Graham is silent in disclosing a heat detector is disposed in the first cabinet which is operable to sense ambient temperature and generate a signal representative thereof; the electronic controller is programmed to close all of the remote shut off valves in response to detection of an ambient temperature above a predetermined threshold temperature; the sensor apparatus includes a flame detector disposed in the first cabinet which is operable to detect the presence of a flame based on radiant energy emissions, and to generate a signal representative of the presence of a flame; and the electronic controller is programmed to close all of the remote shut off valves in response to detection of the presence of a flame. However, Lim teaches the commonality of a heat detector being disposed in the first cabinet which is operable to sense ambient temperature and generate a signal representative thereof ([0041]); the electronic controller is programmed to close all of the remote shut off valves in response to detection of an ambient temperature above a predetermined threshold temperature ([0033]); the sensor apparatus includes a flame detector disposed in the first cabinet which is operable to detect the presence of a flame based on radiant energy emissions, and to generate a signal representative of the presence of a flame (via 301, [0033], [0045]); and the electronic controller is programmed to close all of the remote shut off valves in response to detection of the presence of a flame (via 301, [0033], [0045]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the application to add a number of sensors as taught by Lim to the gas fuel storage system of Graham, in order to provide a precise safe condition to the gas supply system (see Lim [0058]).
State of the Prior Arts
Regarding claim 1, the prior arts to Graham (US 2003/0164202), Liu (CN 107785596 A), Fang (CN 113090943 A), Chen (CN 115307057 A), Wang (CN 117346067 A), Liu (CN 209415034 U), Kazuno (US 2020/0010966), Garrett (US 4,989,160) and Tom (US 6,406,519) as cited in PTO-892 are also citing significant pertinent structures or features to the applicant’s claimed invention with regard to a gaseous fuel storage system having one or more storage tanks with a first end having connection fitting and a second end, a piping and valving assembly coupled to the connection fitting, each of the one or more tanks is coupled to an outlet line through a remote shut off valve; a first cabinet surrounding the piping and valving assembly and a portion of the first end of the one or more storage tanks; a detector disposed in the first cabinet which is operable to detect the presence of hydrogen gas and generate a signal representative of a concentration of the hydrogen gas; and an electronic controller operably connected to the sensor apparatus and to the remote shut off valve, the electronic controller is programmed to close all of the remote shut off valves in response to detection of a first predetermined concentration of hydrogen. It appears that claim 1 does not provide any inventive concept over the cited prior arts.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bob Zadeh whose telephone number is (571)270-5201. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm E.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at (571) 272-4459. 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.
/BOB ZADEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights