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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 3 (Fig. 3) in the reply filed on March 12th, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that “Applicant traverses the requirement to the extent that it implies the operational and logic-based claims are species-specific. Claims 9 and 13-15, for instance, define the method of switching from a turbine expansion to a valve-based back-up expansion. This sequence remains identical whether the catalyst is placed inside the exchanger (Species I & 3) or outside (Species 2). Therefore, these claims are also generic in nature and should be examined on their merits”. The Examiner agrees that claims 1, 5-9, 10-17 are generic claims.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 2 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species 1-2, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on March 12th, 2026.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-4 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3, line 3: “the final expansion turbine with the bypass line thereof” should read “the final expansion turbine with the bypass line of the final expansion turbine”
Claim 4, line 2: “the final expansion turbine and the bypass line thereof” should read “the final expansion turbine and the bypass line of the final expansion turbine”
Claim 15, line 2: “a cycle gas” should read “the cycle gas”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless 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 a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 9, lines 1-2: “control system” draws corresponding structure to the following recitation of the specification, “The control system 25 may for example include an electronic control member comprising a microprocessor (Pg. 12, lines 5-6)”, or equivalents thereof.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 1 and 3-17 are 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the inlet of said final expansion turbine" in lines 12-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the inlet of said final expansion turbine" in lines 12-13 to “an inlet of said final expansion turbine”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the heat exchanger" in line 24. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the heat exchanger" in line 24 to “the at least one of the heat exchangers of the set of heat exchangers” which is given proper antecedent basis in lines 17-18 of claim 1. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the heat exchanger and the at least one of the heat exchangers of the set of heat exchangers to be the same component.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the last exchanger" in line 25. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the last exchanger" in line 25 to “the at least one of the heat exchangers of the set of heat exchangers” which is given proper antecedent basis in lines 17-18 of claim 1. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the last exchanger and the at least one of the heat exchangers of the set of heat exchangers to be the same component.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the end exchanger of the set of exchangers" in lines 27-28. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the end exchanger of the set of exchangers " in lines 27-28 to “the at least one of the heat exchangers of the set of heat exchangers” which is given proper antecedent basis in lines 17-18 of claim 1. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the end exchanger of the set of exchangers and the at least one of the heat exchangers of the set of heat exchangers to be the same component.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the second pass of the two passes" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the second pass of the two passes" in line 4 to “the one pass of the two passes” which is given proper antecedent basis in claim 1. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the second pass of the two passes and the one pass of the two passes to be the same component.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the second end" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the second end" in line 5 to “the downstream end” which is given proper antecedent basis in claim 1. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the second end and the downstream end to be the same component.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the outlet of the final expansion turbine" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the outlet of the final expansion turbine" in line 4 to “an outlet of the final expansion turbine”.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the second end" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the second end " in line 5 to “the downstream end” which is given proper antecedent basis in line 4 of claim 10. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the second end and the downstream end to be the same component.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the second expansion valve" in lines 21-22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the second expansion valve " in lines 21-22 to “a second expansion valve”.
Claim 10, line 26 recites, “a single heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers” which is unclear to the Examiner as to how the single heat exchanger of line 26 of claim 10 relates to the previously claimed heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers of lines 22-23 of claim 10. The Examiner recommends changing “a single heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers” in line 26 of claim 10 to “the heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers”. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the single heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers and the heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers to be the same component.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the upstream and downstream ends of the final expansion turbine" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the upstream and downstream ends of the final expansion turbine" in lines 2-3 to “an upstream end of the final expansion turbine and a downstream end of the final expansion turbine”.
Claim 12, lines 2-3 recite, “in the second operation the cooled feed gas flow is expanded in the first expansion valve or in the second expansion valve” which is unclear to the Examiner as claim 10 from which claim 12 depends requires expansion through both the first expansion valve and the second expansion valve. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to read “in the second operation the cooled feed gas flow is expanded in the first expansion valve and in the second expansion valve” which is consistent with what is required by claim 10 from which claim 12 depends. The Examiner recommends amending the claim to read as interpreted herein.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the outlet of said valve" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the outlet of said valve" in line 4 to “an outlet of the second expansion valve”. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim as recommended herein.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the limitations following the phrase “for example” to be optional limitations of the claims and therefore not required.
Claim 15, lines 1-2 recite, “wherein the feed gas is hydrogen and/or helium” which is unclear to the Examiner as claim 10 from which claim 15 depends requires a method for liquefying hydrogen and would not be a method for liquefying hydrogen if the feed gas were to be helium as suggested by claim 15. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to read “wherein the feed gas is hydrogen” which is consistent with what is required by claim 10 from which claim 15 depends. The Examiner recommends amending the claim to read as interpreted herein.
Claim 15, line 2 recites, “a refrigerator” which is unclear to the Examiner as to how the refrigerator of claim 15 relates to the previously claimed cryogenic refrigerator of claim 10 from which claim 15 depends. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the refrigerator and the cryogenic refrigerator to be the same components. The Examiner recommends changing “a refrigerator” in line 2 of claim 15 to “the cryogenic refrigerator”.
Claim 16, line 3 recites, “a heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers” which is unclear to the Examiner as to how the heat exchanger of claim 16 relates to the previously claimed heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers of claim 10. The Examiner recommends changing “a heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers” in line 3 of claim 16 to “the heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers”. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim as recommended herein.
Claims 3, 5-6, and 8-9 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Claim 4 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 3.
Claim 7 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 6.
Claims 11-13 and 15-17 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 10.
Claim 14 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 13.
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, 3-4, 6-7, 10-15, and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gourmelon et al. (FR 3110222), hereinafter Gourmelon in view of Toscano (US Patent No. 4,267,701), hereinafter Toscano.
Regarding claim 1, Gourmelon discloses an installation for producing liquid hydrogen (Fig. 1-2, installation 1; Pg. 3, The invention may also relate to any alternative device or method comprising any combination of the characteristics above or below within the scope of the claims. Other features and advantages will appear on reading the description below, made with reference to the figures in which: [fig. 1] represents a simplified, schematic and partial view, illustrating the structure and operation of a first embodiment of the invention, [fig.2] represents a simplified, schematic and partial view, illustrating a detail of the structure and operation of a second embodiment of the invention…The installation 1 for refrigerating a fluid at cryogenic temperature, in particular for the production of cooled (in particular subcooled) liquid hydrogen, comprises a circuit 2 of fluid to be cooled. Circuit 2 of fluid to be cooled comprises an upstream end intended to be connected to a source 3 of fluid and a downstream end 4 intended to be connected to a cooled fluid collection member), the installation comprising:
a supply circuit configured to supply a feed gas to be cooled, the supply circuit comprising an upstream end configured to be connected to a gas source and a downstream end configured to be connected to at least one cryogenic store designed to collect and store the liquid hydrogen (Fig. 1-2, circuit 2, source 3, downstream end 4; Pg. 3, The installation 1 for refrigerating a fluid at cryogenic temperature, in particular for the production of cooled (in particular subcooled) liquid hydrogen, comprises a circuit 2 of fluid to be cooled. Circuit 2 of fluid to be cooled comprises an upstream end intended to be connected to a source 3 of fluid and a downstream end 4 intended to be connected to a cooled fluid collection member; Further, the supply circuit 2, upstream end, and downstream end 4 of Gourmelon have the same structure as the claimed supply circuit, upstream end, and downstream end and are capable of functioning in the manner claimed);
a set of heat exchangers in heat exchange with the supply circuit (Fig. 1-2, set of heat exchanger(s) 5, 6, 7, 8; Pg. 4, The refrigeration installation 1 comprises a set of heat exchanger(s) 5, 6, 7, 8 arranged in series in heat exchange with the fluid circuit 2 to be cooled from upstream to downstream. The heat exchangers 5, 6, 7, 8 gradually cool the fluid down to its target temperature),
at least one cooling device in heat exchange with some or all of the set of heat exchangers, the at least one cooling device comprising a cryogenic refrigerator with a cycle gas comprising at least one of the following: helium, hydrogen, neon, nitrogen, oxygen or methane (Fig. 1-2, cooling device 9; Pg. 4, The refrigeration installation 1 comprises a device 9 for cooling in heat exchange with at least part of the set of heat exchanger(s) 5, 6, 7, 8. The cooling device comprises a refrigerator 9 with a refrigeration cycle circuit for a cycle gas such as helium and/or neon and/hydrogen and/or any other suitable gas or mixture. The refrigerator 9 comprises, arranged in series in the refrigeration cycle circuit: at least one member 10 for compressing the cycle gas (compressor), at least one member 5 for cooling the cycle gas (heat exchanger(s), at least one member 11, 12 for expanding the cycle gas (example: turbine(s)) and at least one member 8, 7, 6, 5 for heating the expanded cycle gas (heat exchanger(s))),
a first expansion member disposed downstream of the set of heat exchangers wherein the first expansion member is configured to expand the feed gas that is in liquid state at the inlet of said first expansion member (Fig. 2, first expansion member 13; Pg. 4, The fluid circuit 2 to be cooled comprises, downstream of a (first) heat exchange with the cold downstream end exchanger 8, a first expansion member 13 such as an expansion valve; Further, in addition to structural limitations, claim 1 recites functional limitations drawn toward the intended use or manner of operating the claimed apparatus. The functional limitations are: “configured to expand the feed gas that is in liquid state at the inlet.” When the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus, it will be held that the prior art apparatus is capable of performing all of the claimed functional limitations of the claimed apparatus. The courts have held that: (1) "apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and (2) a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). MPEP § 2114.).
However, Gourmelon does not disclose the first expansion member to include:
a final expansion turbine disposed downstream of the set of heat exchangers, wherein the final expansion turbine is configured to expand the feed gas that is in liquid state at the inlet of said final expansion turbine,
a bypass line of the final expansion turbine fitted with a first expansion valve.
Tuscano teaches the first expansion member to include:
a final expansion turbine disposed downstream of the set of heat exchangers, wherein the final expansion turbine is configured to expand the feed gas that is in liquid state at the inlet of said final expansion turbine (Fig. 1, HX-1 through HX-7, wet expander 20, J/T valve 22; Col. 3, lines 2-9, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency. The less expensive J/T valve 22 is provided as a backup element for continued operation of the system when the wet engine 20 is under repair),
a bypass line of the final expansion turbine fitted with a first expansion valve (see annotated Fig. 1 of Tuscano below, wet expander 20 is bypassed by bypass line A which is fitted with J/T valve 22; Col. 3, lines 2-9, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency. The less expensive J/T valve 22 is provided as a backup element for continued operation of the system when the wet engine 20 is under repair), and
a line designed to recover the fluid at the outlet of the final expansion turbine without passing through a second pass of the two passes through the end exchanger (see annotated Fig. 1 of Tuscano below, line B; Col. 3, lines 13-18, With expansion of the cooled, high pressure helium gas in the wet expander 20, the gas changes to a mixture of liquid and gas. The mixture is fed into a tank 24 where the liquid is collected. The liquid helium may then be used to refrigerate a load, or it may be taken off through a line 26 to a separate storage tank or the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the first expansion member of the installation for producing liquid hydrogen of Gourmelon of claim 1 with a final expansion turbine disposed downstream of the set of heat exchangers, wherein the final expansion turbine is configured to expand the feed gas that is in liquid state at the inlet of said final expansion turbine, a bypass line of the final expansion turbine fitted with a first expansion valve, and a line designed to recover the fluid at the outlet of the final expansion turbine without passing through a second pass of the two passes through the end exchanger as taught by Tuscano. Specifically, resulting an expansion turbine with a first expansion valve in a bypass line replacing the first expansion device 13 of Gourmelon and two exit flow paths for liquid product, one leaving the outlet of the expansion turbine and one leaving the downstream end 4 of Gourmelon for collection in the at least one cryogenic store. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to allow for continued operation when the expansion turbine is under repair (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 7-9) and to allow for sufficiently liquefied product to be taken off for use elsewhere (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 16-18).
Gourmelon as modified further discloses a second expansion valve disposed in series upstream or respectively downstream of the first expansion valve and of the final expansion turbine (Gourmelon, Fig. 2, second expansion member 14; Pg. 4, Then the fluid circuit 2 to be cooled comprises downstream of its second heat exchange with the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end, a second expansion device 14 such as an expansion valve),
an additional heat exchange line configured to exchange heat with at least one of the heat exchangers of the set of heat exchangers when the feed gas is expanded by the first expansion valve via the bypass line (See annotated Fig. 2 of Gourmelon below, additional heat exchange line C; Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end; Further, the additional heat exchanger line C of Gourmelon has the same structure as the claimed additional heat exchange line and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed),
wherein the additional heat exchange line is configured to carry out said heat exchange with said the at least one of the heat exchangers between the expansion carried out by the first expansion valve and the expansion carried out by the second expansion valve, the additional heat exchange line being located upstream or respectively downstream of the expansion carried out by the first expansion valve, and in that the heat exchanger in heat exchange with the additional heat exchange line is the last exchanger of the set of heat exchangers in series, of which an outlet is connected to the inlet of the final expansion turbine (Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end; Further, the modification as described herein results in first expansion member 13 being replaced by the expansion turbine, bypass line, and first expansion valve of Tuscano placing an outlet of the exchanger 8 in connection with an inlet of the expansion turbine), and
wherein the supply circuit forms two successive distinct passes through the end exchanger of the set of exchangers, the additional heat exchange line constituting one pass of the two passes (See annotated Fig. 2 of Gourmelon below, additional heat exchange line C, first pass D; Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end).
PNG
media_image1.png
478
533
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Gourmelon
PNG
media_image2.png
953
573
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Tuscano
Regarding claim 3, Gourmelon as modified discloses the installation according to Claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above),
wherein the supply circuit comprises, disposed in series in this order from upstream to downstream: a first pass of the two passes through the end exchanger, the final expansion turbine with the bypass line thereof fitted with the first expansion valve, the second pass of the two passes through the end exchanger, the second expansion valve, and the second end (See annotated Fig. 2 of Gourmelon below, first pass D, first expansion member 13 (replaced by wet expander 20 and a J/T valve 22 in the bypass line A (See annotated Fig. 1 of Tuscano below), additional heat exchange line C, second expansion member 14, downstream end 4). Further, the limitations of claim 3 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above.
PNG
media_image1.png
478
533
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Gourmelon
PNG
media_image2.png
953
573
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Tuscano
Regarding claim 4, Gourmelon as modified discloses the installation according to Claim 3 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein the supply circuit comprises, between the final expansion turbine and the bypass line thereof on one side and the second pass of the two passes through the end exchanger on the other side, a bypass line designed to recover the fluid at the outlet of the final expansion turbine without passing through the second pass of the two passes through the end exchanger (The modification as described herein to replace the first expansion member 13 with the wet expander 20, a J/T valve 22 in the bypass line A, and a line B which leaves the outlet of the expansion turbine designed to recover the fluid at the outlet of the final expansion turbine without passing through a second pass of the two passes through the end exchanger results in the limitations of claim 4).
Regarding claim 6, Gourmelon as modified discloses the installation according to Claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the supply circuit comprises a third expansion valve disposed in series with the first expansion valve and second expansion valve (Fig. 2 of Gourmelon depicts third expansion member 15 to be disposed in series with the second expansion member 14 and the first expansion member 13 and would remain in this series configuration when modified as described herein; Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end). Further, the limitations of claim 6 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 7, Gourmelon as modified discloses the installation according to Claim 6 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 6 above), wherein the third expansion valve is disposed downstream or upstream of the first expansion valve (Fig. 2 of Gourmelon depicts third expansion member 15 to be disposed downstream of the first expansion member 13 and would remain in this series configuration when modified as described herein; Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end). Further, the limitations of claim 7 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 10, Gourmelon discloses a method for liquefying hydrogen (Fig. 1-2, installation 1; Pg. 3, The invention may also relate to any alternative device or method comprising any combination of the characteristics above or below within the scope of the claims. Other features and advantages will appear on reading the description below, made with reference to the figures in which: [fig. 1] represents a simplified, schematic and partial view, illustrating the structure and operation of a first embodiment of the invention, [fig.2] represents a simplified, schematic and partial view, illustrating a detail of the structure and operation of a second embodiment of the invention…The installation 1 for refrigerating a fluid at cryogenic temperature, in particular for the production of cooled (in particular subcooled) liquid hydrogen, comprises a circuit 2 of fluid to be cooled. Circuit 2 of fluid to be cooled comprises an upstream end intended to be connected to a source 3 of fluid and a downstream end 4 intended to be connected to a cooled fluid collection member): the method comprising the steps of:
providing a production installation comprising a feed gas supply circuit comprising an
upstream end connected to a gas source and a downstream end connected to at least one cryogenic store, the production installation comprising a set of heat exchangers in heat exchange with the supply circuit and at least one cooling device in heat exchange with some or all of the set of heat exchangers, the at least one cooling device comprising a cryogenic refrigerator with a cycle gas comprising at least one of the following: helium, hydrogen, neon, nitrogen, oxygen or methane, the downstream end of the supply circuit comprising, between the set of heat exchangers and the second end, a first expansion member for the liquefied gas (Fig. 1-2, installation 1, circuit 2, source 3, downstream end 4, set of heat exchanger(s) 5, 6, 7, 8, cooling device 9, first expansion member 13; Pg. 3, The installation 1 for refrigerating a fluid at cryogenic temperature, in particular for the production of cooled (in particular subcooled) liquid hydrogen, comprises a circuit 2 of fluid to be cooled. Circuit 2 of fluid to be cooled comprises an upstream end intended to be connected to a source 3 of fluid and a downstream end 4 intended to be connected to a cooled fluid collection member; Pg. 4, The refrigeration installation 1 comprises a set of heat exchanger(s) 5, 6, 7, 8 arranged in series in heat exchange with the fluid circuit 2 to be cooled from upstream to downstream. The heat exchangers 5, 6, 7, 8 gradually cool the fluid down to its target temperature. The refrigeration installation 1 comprises a device 9 for cooling in heat exchange with at least part of the set of heat exchanger(s) 5, 6, 7, 8. The cooling device comprises a refrigerator 9 with a refrigeration cycle circuit for a cycle gas such as helium and/or neon and/hydrogen and/or any other suitable gas or mixture. The refrigerator 9 comprises, arranged in series in the refrigeration cycle circuit: at least one member 10 for compressing the cycle gas (compressor), at least one member 5 for cooling the cycle gas (heat exchanger(s), at least one member 11, 12 for expanding the cycle gas (example: turbine(s)) and at least one member 8, 7, 6, 5 for heating the expanded cycle gas (heat exchanger(s))…The fluid circuit 2 to be cooled comprises, downstream of a (first) heat exchange with the cold downstream end exchanger 8, a first expansion member 13 such as an expansion valve); and
cooling a feed gas flow circulating in the supply circuit by heat exchange with the set of heat
exchangers cooled by the at least one cooling device to a temperature below the critical temperature of the feed gas or below the bubble point temperature of the feed gas (Pg. 5, The degree of subcooling of the produced fluid can be between -0.5 K and -5 K relative to the saturation temperature at the delivery pressure).
However, Gourmelon does not disclose the first expansion member to include:
a final expansion turbine and a bypass line of the final expansion turbine fitted with a first expansion valve and bypassing the final expansion turbine in some modes of operation.
Tuscano teaches the first expansion member to include:
a final expansion turbine and a bypass line of the final expansion turbine fitted with a first expansion valve and bypassing the final expansion turbine in some modes of operation (see annotated Fig. 1 of Tuscano below, wet expander 20 is bypassed by bypass line A which is fitted with J/T valve 22; Col. 3, lines 2-9, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency. The less expensive J/T valve 22 is provided as a backup element for continued operation of the system when the wet engine 20 is under repair).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the first expansion member of the production installation of the method of Gourmelon of claim 10 with a final expansion turbine and a bypass line of the final expansion turbine fitted with a first expansion valve and bypassing the final expansion turbine in some modes of operation as taught by Tuscano. Specifically, resulting an expansion turbine with a first expansion valve in a bypass line replacing the first expansion device 13 of Gourmelon. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to allow for continued operation when the expansion turbine is under repair (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 7-9).
Gourmelon as modified further discloses wherein the method comprises a first mode of operation and a second mode of operation (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 2-9, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency. The less expensive J/T valve 22 is provided as a backup element for continued operation of the system when the wet engine 20 is under repair),
wherein, during the first mode of operation, the method includes the step of expanding said feed gas flow cooled and liquefied in the final expansion turbine to produce a liquid flow at a pressure greater than the saturation pressure or bubble point pressure of said feed gas to produce an entirely liquid phase (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 2-6, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency);
wherein, during the second mode of operation, the method includes the step of expanding said feed gas flow cooled in a first expansion valve and in the second expansion valve bypassing the final expansion turbine, and a cooling by heat exchange with a heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers between the expansions in the first expansion valve and the second expansion valve (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 2-9, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency. The less expensive J/T valve 22 is provided as a backup element for continued operation of the system when the wet engine 20 is under repair; Gourmelon, Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end),
wherein the method further includes two successive passes of the feed gas flow through a single heat exchanger of the set of heat exchangers that is located upstream of the final expansion turbine (See annotated Fig. 2 of Gourmelon below, additional heat exchange line C, first pass D; Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end). Further, the two separate modes of operation required by claim 10 are the result of the modification of references as described herein.
PNG
media_image1.png
478
533
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Gourmelon
PNG
media_image2.png
953
573
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Tuscano
Regarding claim 11, Gourmelon as modified discloses the liquefaction method according to Claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above), wherein, in the first mode of operation, the pressure ratio of the fluid between the upstream and downstream ends of the final expansion turbine is between five and twenty (Gourmelon, Pg. 5, The pressure of the feed fluid to be liquefied can be between 10 and 80 bar. The pressure at the downstream end 4 of the subcooled liquid can be between 1.05 and 5 bar; Further, this provides a pressure ratio at the high end of 16). Further, the limitations of claim 11 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 12, Gourmelon as modified discloses the liquefaction method according to Claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above), wherein, in the second mode of operation, the cooled feed gas flow is expanded in the first expansion valve or in the second expansion valve with a pressure ratio between five and twenty to produce a fluid in the liquid state at the outlet of said valve (Gourmelon, Pg. 5, The pressure of the feed fluid to be liquefied can be between 10 and 80 bar. The pressure at the downstream end 4 of the subcooled liquid can be between 1.05 and 5 bar. The degree of subcooling of the produced fluid can be between -0.5 K and -5 K relative to the saturation temperature at the delivery pressure; Further, this provides a pressure ratio at the high end of 16; As best understood, see 112(b) rejections above). Further, the limitations of claim 11 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 13, Gourmelon as modified discloses the liquefaction method according to Claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above), further comprising switching between the first mode of operation and the second mode of operation, for example as a function of whether the final expansion turbine is running or stopped (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 2-9, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency. The less expensive J/T valve 22 is provided as a backup element for continued operation of the system when the wet engine 20 is under repair; As best understood, see 112(b) rejections above).
Regarding claim 14, Gourmelon as modified discloses the liquefaction method according to Claim 13 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 13 above), further comprising switching from the first mode of operation to the second mode of operation during which the feed gas flow gradually bypasses the final expansion turbine and the supply of cooled feed gas to the final expansion turbine is interrupted and a pressure drop is generated by the second expansion valve (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 2-9, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency. The less expensive J/T valve 22 is provided as a backup element for continued operation of the system when the wet engine 20 is under repair; Gourmelon, Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end). Further, the limitations of claim 14 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 13 above.
Regarding claim 15, Gourmelon as modified discloses the liquefaction method according to Claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above), wherein the feed gas is hydrogen, the cooling device comprising a refrigerator with a cycle gas comprising hydrogen and/or helium (Gourmelon, Pg. 3, The installation 1 for refrigerating a fluid at cryogenic temperature, in particular for the production of cooled (in particular subcooled) liquid hydrogen; Pg. 4, The refrigeration installation 1 comprises a device 9 for cooling in heat exchange with at least part of the set of heat exchanger(s) 5, 6, 7, 8. The cooling device comprises a refrigerator 9 with a refrigeration cycle circuit for a cycle gas such as helium and/or neon and/hydrogen and/or any other suitable gas or mixture; As best understood, see 112(b) rejections above).
Regarding claim 17, Gourmelon as modified discloses the liquefaction method according to Claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above), further comprising an additional isenthalpic expansion step of the feed gas downstream of the final expansion turbine with a pressure ratio between 1.05 and five (Gourmelon, Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end; Pg. 5, The pressure of the feed fluid to be liquefied can be between 10 and 80 bar. The pressure at the downstream end 4 of the subcooled liquid can be between 1.05 and 5 bar. The degree of subcooling of the produced fluid can be between -0.5 K and -5 K relative to the saturation temperature at the delivery pressure; Further, this provides a pressure ratio at the high end of 16). Further, the limitations of claim 17 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Claims 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gourmelon as modified by Tuscano as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, respectively, and further in view of Schwartz et al. (US 8,042,357), hereinafter Schwartz.
Regarding claim 5, Gourmelon as modified discloses the installation according to Claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Gourmelon as modified does not disclose wherein the supply circuit comprises at least one catalysis section designed to convert the ortho-hydrogen into parahydrogen, the catalysis section being located in at least one of the two passes through the end exchanger the end exchanger.
Schwartz teaches wherein the supply circuit comprises at least one catalysis section designed to convert the ortho-hydrogen into parahydrogen, the catalysis section being located in at least one of the two passes through the end exchanger (Fig. 1, cold end heat exchanger 52, catalytic converter 54; Col. 11, lines 53-63, At the same time, the para-rich stream 44 is subjected to catalytic conversion within another lower temperature catalytic converter 54 to produce an ortho-lean stream 56 containing liquid hydrogen that itself contains about 95 percent or greater of the para-species. Catalyst extends the full length of the passages within catalytic converter 54 to essentially extend catalyst bed 50 to lower temperatures because it is assumed that the para-species content of stream 44 is less than the para-species content at equilibrium at the inlet temperature of cold end heat exchanger 52).
Gourmelon as modified fails to teach wherein the supply circuit comprises at least one catalysis section designed to convert the ortho-hydrogen into parahydrogen, the catalysis section being located in at least one of the two passes through the end exchanger, however Schwartz teaches that it is a known method in the art of hydrogen liquefaction to include wherein the supply circuit comprises at least one catalysis section designed to convert the ortho-hydrogen into parahydrogen, the catalysis section being located in at least one of the two passes through the end exchanger. This is strong evidence that modifying Gourmelon as modified as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. ensuring a desired amount of parahydrogen in the liquid product). 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 Gourmelon as modified by Schwartz 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 ensuring a desired amount of parahydrogen in the liquid product.
Regarding claim 16, Gourmelon as modified discloses the liquefaction method according to Claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above).
However, Gourmelon as modified does not disclose wherein the feed gas is hydrogen, the method including a step of converting ortho-hydrogen into para-hydrogen in a heat exchanger of the set of exchangers.
Schwartz teaches disclose wherein the feed gas is hydrogen, the method including a step of converting ortho-hydrogen into para-hydrogen in a heat exchanger of the set of exchangers (Fig. 1, cold end heat exchanger 52, catalytic converter 54; Col. 11, lines 53-63, At the same time, the para-rich stream 44 is subjected to catalytic conversion within another lower temperature catalytic converter 54 to produce an ortho-lean stream 56 containing liquid hydrogen that itself contains about 95 percent or greater of the para-species. Catalyst extends the full length of the passages within catalytic converter 54 to essentially extend catalyst bed 50 to lower temperatures because it is assumed that the para-species content of stream 44 is less than the para-species content at equilibrium at the inlet temperature of cold end heat exchanger 52).
Gourmelon as modified fails to teach disclose wherein the feed gas is hydrogen, the method including a step of converting ortho-hydrogen into para-hydrogen in a heat exchanger of the set of exchangers, however Schwartz teaches that it is a known method in the art of hydrogen liquefaction to include disclose wherein the feed gas is hydrogen, the method including a step of converting ortho-hydrogen into para-hydrogen in a heat exchanger of the set of exchangers. This is strong evidence that modifying Gourmelon as modified as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. ensuring a desired amount of parahydrogen in the liquid product). 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 Gourmelon as modified by Schwartz 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 ensuring a desired amount of parahydrogen in the liquid product.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gourmelon as modified by Tuscano as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Earl et al. (US 12,449,195), hereinafter Earl.
Regarding claim 8, Gourmelon as modified discloses the installation according to Claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Gourmelon does not disclose further comprising a regulating member disposed at the inlet of the final expansion turbine and designed to regulate the pressure, the bypass line of the expansion turbine also bypassing this regulating member.
Earl teaches a regulating member disposed at the inlet of the final expansion turbine and designed to regulate the pressure, the bypass line of the expansion turbine also bypassing this regulating member (Fig. 3, turbo expander 102; Fig. 4, pressure control valve 434, first flow line 422, second flow line 424; Col. 17, lines 59-67, FIG. 4 is another example energy recovery system 400 coupled to and between a wellhead 402 of a well 404 (or multiple wells, in some cases) and a production pipeline 420. This second example energy recovery system 400 is more full featured than the example energy recovery system 300 discussed with respect to FIG. 3. For example, this second example energy recovery system 400 is shown with two electric power generation systems 450, 452, each configured
like energy recovery system 350; Col. 1, lines 51-59, Thereafter, the first flow line 422 includes an isolation valve 432 that can be closed to cease flow into the first flow line 422 and the electric power generation system 450. The first flow line 422 also includes a pressure control valve 434. After the electric power generation system 450 an additional isolation valve 436 is provided to allow the electric power generation system 450 to be completely closed in and prevent backflow to the electric power generation system 450; Col. 20, lines 42-48, In an instance where the flow is split between the first flow line 422 and the second flow line 424, the pressure control valve 426, pressure control valve 434 and flow control valve 428 are controlled to control the amount of flow that flows into the first flow line 422, and thus the turboexpander of the electric power generation system 450).
Gourmelon as modified fails to teach a regulating member disposed at the inlet of the final expansion turbine and designed to regulate the pressure, the bypass line of the expansion turbine also bypassing this regulating member, however Earl teaches that it is a known method in the art of turboexpander flow control to include a regulating member disposed at the inlet of the final expansion turbine and designed to regulate the pressure, the bypass line of the expansion turbine also bypassing this regulating member. This is strong evidence that modifying Gourmelon as modified as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. controlling the amount of flow to the turboexpander (Earl, Col. 20, lines 42-48) to improve overall system efficiencies). 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 Gourmelon as modified by Earl 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 controlling the amount of flow to the turboexpander (Earl, Col. 20, lines 42-48) to improve overall system efficiencies.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gourmelon as modified by Tuscano as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Baik et al. (US 2024031904), hereinafter Baik.
Regarding claim 9, Gourmelon as modified discloses the installation according to Claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), further comprising switching the installation to a first operating mode in which the bypass line is closed and liquefied cryogenic fluid is produced via an expansion in the final expansion turbine (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 2-6, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency), and also switching the installation to a second operating mode in which the bypass line is open and the final expansion turbine is stopped and liquefied cryogenic fluid is produced via a double expansion via the first expansion valve and the second expansion valve and via a pass through the additional heat exchange line (Tuscano, Col. 3, lines 2-9, Precooled gas is further cooled in a final heat exchanger 18 before it is expanded in a wet engine 20 or a Joule-Thomson valve 22. The wet engine is the primary liquefaction element 5 in this system because of its high isentropic efficiency. The less expensive J/T valve 22 is provided as a backup element for continued operation of the system when the wet engine 20 is under repair; Gourmelon, Pg. 4, In the embodiment of the [fig. 2], the fluid to be cooled downstream undergoes a triple expansion with cooling between the expansion stages in the exchanger 8 at the cold downstream end). Further, the first and second operation modes of claim 9 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above.
However, Gourmelon as modified does not disclose a control system configured to switch the installation between the first operating mode and the second operation mode.
Baik teaches a control system configured to switch the installation between the first operating mode and the second operation mode (Fig. 1, control 40; Pg. 5, paragraph 62, Accordingly, the controller 40 may apply a bypass control signal to the valves V1, V2, V3, V 4 in a bypass mode such that hydrogen in the hydrogen pipe 110 bypasses so as not to go through the first O-P converter OP1 and the second O-P converter OP2, thereby producing liquid hydrogen quickly and with high efficiency for short-term storage where liquefied liquid hydrogen is consumed within a few days).
Gourmelon as modified fails to teach a control system configured to switch the installation between the first operating mode and the second operation mode, however Baik teaches that it is a known method in the art of hydrogen liquefaction to include a control system configured to switch the installation between the first operating mode and the second operation mode. This is strong evidence that modifying Gourmelon as modified as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. allowing the system to be electronically switched between operation modes to improve overall user friendliness of the system). 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 Gourmelon as modified by Baik 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 allowing the system to be electronically switched between operation modes to improve overall user friendliness of the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Stockmann et al. (US Patent No. 6,334,334) discloses a similar liquefaction installation with final expansion turbine bypass through an expansion valve.
Madison (US Patent No. 8,683,824) discloses a similar bypass of an expansion turbine for a liquefied gas through an expansion valve, the bypass line also bypassing a regulating member of for controlling flow through the expansion turbine.
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 May 07th, 2026
Prosecution Insights