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
Claims 1, 4, 6, 16-18 objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 1, lines 6-7 should be amended: “…a plurality of backup emergency electricity generation devices” to correct grammar.
Re claims 4, 6, 16-17, the claims should be amended to consistently refer to “the plurality of backup emergency electricity generation devices” or similar to avoid potential antecedent basis issues. Note claims 16-17 also have grammatical errors with the phrase “the or each” which must be corrected.
Re claim 18, line 9 should be amended: “a plurality of backup emergency electricity generation devices” to correct grammar. The second to last paragraph should also be amended: “wherein each of the backup emergency electricity generation devices is configured…” to correct grammar and provide consistent reference.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 8-11, 18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaudhary (WO2024/146715A1; see attached copy) in view of Reddy (US2022/0069613), further in view of Sasaki (WO2022/030514A1; specific reference is made to attached English machine translation).
Re claim 1. Chaudhary teaches a process for controlling the providing of backup electrical power for hydrogen production and/or ammonia production (see Chaudhary: 17:22-33, Figs. 2-3 regarding hydrogen production devices <7>; note application for hydrogen/ammonia production only recited as intended use though), comprising:
detecting a loss of power condition for a main power system (electrical grid <2>, renewable energy generation facility <3>, see Chaudhary: 17:35-18:12, Figs. 2-3) that meets a pre-selected power loss threshold (see Chaudhary: 18:8-12, 21:37-22:4, 27:16-23, Figs. 3, 7 regarding control unit <20> detecting fault <46> of grid <2> based on voltage deviation below nominal value by a threshold <Th>); and
in response to detecting the loss of power condition, providing backup electricity via a battery energy storage system (BESS) (power storage device <8> comprising battery, see Chaudhary: 21:1-19, 22:14-20, 23:15-24, Figs. 3, 5 regarding power storage <8> using battery to provide backup power in response to fault) or operation of a backup emergency electricity generation device, the at least one backup emergency electricity generation device configured to utilize hydrogen or biofuel for generation of the backup electricity (power storage device <8> comprising fuel cell using hydrogen, see Chaudhary: 21:1-19, 22:14-20, 23:26-24:10, Figs. 3, 6 regarding power storage <8> alternatively using fuel cell to provide backup power in response to fault). See Chaudhary: 17:22-18:12, 21:1-19, 21:37-22:4, 22:14-20, 23:15-24:10, 27:16-23, Figs. 1-4, 6-7.
Although Chaudhary discloses the system may use multiple power storage devices (see Chaudhary: 17:22-33, Fig. 2) and both battery energy storage and hydrogen fuel cells as known power storage means Chaudhary does not explicitly discuss details of operation using multiple types of backup sources according to pre-selected priority power scheme such that hydrogen-based backup emergency electricity generation devices are brought on-line after the backup electricity from the BESS. Reddy, however, teaches that it is known in power distribution systems providing backup power to load in response to loss of primary power source to provide backup electricity via a BESS and/or operation of at least one backup emergency electricity generation device in accordance with a pre-selected priority power scheme so that backup emergency electricity generation devices are brought on-line after the backup electricity has begun to be provided via the BESS (see Reddy: [0014], [0019-0020], [0023], [0054], Fig. 1 regarding selectively providing backup power in response to primary power source outage initially from battery energy storage while fuel cell ramps up output), the at least one backup emergency electricity generation device configured to utilize hydrogen or biofuel for generation of the backup electricity (see Reddy: [0003], [0019], regarding hydrogen fuel cell). One of ordinary skill would appreciate Reddy teaches detailed use of known power sources mentioned by Chaudhary that may equivalently be operated to provide backup power in response to loss of main power. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chaudhary to incorporate the teachings of Reddy by having the backup electricity providing according to pre-selected priority power scheme of both BESS and hydrogen electricity generation device as recited for purposes of providing known power source arrangement for providing backup power in response to loss of main power supply, which further allows use of cleaner hydrogen generator technology while compensating for required start-up time of the fuel cell (see Reddy: [0003], [0023], [0054]).
Although Chaudhary in view of Reddy generally mentions the hydrogen-based backup emergency electricity generation device is brought on-line after the backup electricity has begun to be provided via the BESS (see Reddy: [0023], [0054], Fig. 1), and generally that more than just two backup power sources may be used (see Reddy: [0041], Figs. 1-2), Chaudhary in view of Reddy does not explicitly discuss providing multiple hydrogen-based generation devices brought online at staggered/different times as recited. Sasaki, however, teaches that it is known in the art of power supply systems using hydrogen fuel cells to supply power when a main commercial power supply system fails for the fuel cell power supply source to comprise a plurality of backup emergency electricity generation devices (see Sasaki: [3-4], [10], Fig. 1), and the process comprising: bringing the backup emergency electricity generation devices on-line via a main voltage distribution system (electrical lines connecting power distribution system and also providing starting power to fuel cells, see Sasaki: [16-17], Fig. 1) in a staggered scheme so that each backup emergency electricity generation device is brought on-line at a different time (see Sasaki: [4-6], [17-18], [24-29], [49], Fig. 1 regarding multi fuel cell power supply device starting sequentially or with desired time lag to allow for system to provide power to start up each fuel cell from other fuel cells, to gradually reach overall fuel cell output power capacity). One of ordinary skill would appreciate that Sasaki discloses further considerations and benefits for starting up/ramping up output power of fuel cell power supply systems that are predictably applicable to a system using one or more fuel cells for backup power such as that of Chaudhary in view of Reddy. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chaudhary in view of Reddy to incorporate the teachings of Sasaki by implementing the backup fuel cell power generation device by providing plurality of generation devices with staggered starting as recited for purposes of providing known fuel cell power supply arrangement scaled to desired overall capacity by using multiple units, and to enable starting sequence which allows starting power from other fuel cells to be used to start subsequent fuel cells and ramp up fuel cell power output while reducing required energy storage capacity (see Sasaki: [4-6], [17-18], [24-29], [49], Fig. 1). Note the combination predictably suggests the BESS providing power quickly before fuel cells are able to ramp up output as taught by Reddy, and that ramping up a fuel cell system output involves the staggered starting of fuel cells one at a time as suggested by Sasaki.
Re claim 4. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, teaches the process of claim 1, wherein the providing of the backup electricity includes: transmitting the backup electricity from the BESS and/or the backup emergency electricity generation device to electrolyzer houses of a plant, the electrolyzer houses having electrolyzers operated via the backup electricity to produce hydrogen via electrolysis of water (see Chaudhary: 17:22-18:12, 21:1-19, 22:14-20, Figs. 2-3, regarding the backup power supplied to electrolyzers <18> of hydrogen production plant for producing hydrogen by electrolysis of water).
Re claim 8. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, teaches the process of claim 4, wherein the detecting of the loss of power condition comprises: detecting a loss of main power via the main voltage distribution system, the main power system (see Chaudhary: 18:8-12, 21:37-22:4, 27:16-23, Figs. 3, 7 regarding control unit <20> detecting fault <46> via detection of grid <2> based on voltage deviation below nominal value by a threshold <Th>) and/or an upstream sensor of a renewable power generation system that provides electricity to the main power system as a primary source of electricity. Note limitations recited in the alternative.
Re claim 9. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, teaches the process of claim 8, wherein the detecting of the loss of main power comprises detecting an undervoltage condition in which voltage from the main power system is at or below a first pre-selected low power threshold (see Chaudhary: 18:8-12, 21:37-22:4, 27:16-23, Figs. 3, 7 regarding control unit <20> detecting fault <46> of grid <2> based on voltage deviation below nominal value by a threshold <Th>).
Re claim 10. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, teaches the process of claim 8, wherein the detecting of the loss of main power comprises receiving a low power detection signal from sensor or detector of the renewable power generation system (renewable power generation system recited in the alternative thus further limitation is optional; see also Chaudhary: 18:8-12, 21:37-22:4, 25:34-26:5, 27:16-23, Figs. 3, 7 regarding control unit <20> sensor <27> detecting fault <46> on connection member <5> to which renewable energy generation facility <3> is connected).
Re claim 11. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, teaches the process of claim 1, wherein the providing of backup electricity via the BESS and/or the operation of the backup emergency electricity generation devices in accordance with a pre-selected priority power scheme comprises: operating the backup emergency electricity generation devices to facilitate a shutdown of the hydrogen and/or ammonia production via a pre-defined shutdown scheme (see Chaudhary: 11:16-34 regarding backup power from energy storage provided in response to fault for period of time and then shutting down, i.e. generally facilitating shutdown by pre-defined scheme; note the claim does not recite any further details of how shutdown scheme is carried out). Note also generally other prior art such as Seymour (US2021/0363651) and Schumann (WO2024/227563A1) discuss other potentially relevant details to specific shutdown processes for an electrolysis plant.
Re claim 18. The claim recites a master control device configured to perform essentially the same operations using the same components as recited in claim 1, and is therefore obvious for the same reasoning applied above in view of Chaudhary and Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, (see discussion of claim 1 above regarding details of combination and overlapping limitations). Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, further teaches the method is performed by a master control device for controlling how backup electrical power for hydrogen production and/or ammonia production is provided, comprising: a processor connected to a non-transitory computer readable medium (see Chaudhary: 13:20-14:6 regarding implementation of control system using processor running program stored on memory devices).
Re claims 20, the further recited limitations essentially correspond to the limitations recited in claims 9 or 10, respectively, and are therefore rejected by the same reasoning applied above. See respective claim discussions above.
Claim(s) 2-3, 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, as applied respectively above, further in view of Sweringen (US2013/0264878).
Re claim 2. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, teaches the process of claim 1, wherein the providing of the backup electricity includes a BESS connection to the main voltage distribution system (electrical lines <19>, see Chaudhary: 20:23-25, 21:11-19, Fig. 3). Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, do not explicitly discuss providing connection adjustable between transmission/non-transmission position for the backup sources, but use of switches to selectively control connection of sources is generally well known in the art, as exemplified by Swearingen, which discloses it is known in backup power supply systems wherein the providing of the backup electricity includes adjusting a BESS/backup source connection to a main voltage distribution system to a transmission position (see Swearingen: [0014], [0023-0025], Fig. 3 regarding using controllable relay <48> having non-transmission and transmission positions to selectively connect emergency power sources such as batteries or fuel cells to supply backup power when normal power is unavailable). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, to further incorporate the teachings of Swearingen by providing transmission position adjustable connection/relays for the backup power supply BESS and fuel cells for purposes of providing known means to selectively enable supply of power from backup sources for a desired amount of time and disconnect them when not needed (see Swearingen: [0014], [0023-0025], Fig. 3).
Re claim 3. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, further in view of Swearingen, teaches the process of claim 2, comprising: ramping down electricity provided by the BESS after backup emergency electricity generation devices are brought on-line for transmission of the backup electricity to the main voltage distribution system (see Reddy: [0023], [0054], Fig. 1 regarding providing scaling back power from battery as fuel cell ramps up output).
Re claim 13. Chaudhary teaches an apparatus for providing of backup electrical power for hydrogen production and/or ammonia production (see Chaudhary: 17:22-33, Figs. 2-3 regarding hydrogen production devices <7>; note application for hydrogen/ammonia production only recited as intended use though), comprising:
a main power system (electrical grid <2>, renewable energy generation facility <3>, see Chaudhary: 17:35-18:12, Figs. 2-3);
a battery energy storage system (BESS) (power storage device <8> comprising battery, see Chaudhary: 21:1-19, 22:14-20, 23:15-24, Figs. 3, 5 regarding power storage <8> using battery to provide backup power in response to fault); or a backup emergency electricity generation device (power storage device <8> comprising fuel cell using hydrogen, see Chaudhary: 21:1-19, 22:14-20, 23:26-24:10, Figs. 3, 6 regarding power storage <8> alternatively using fuel cell to provide backup power in response to fault) configured to utilize hydrogen or biofuel for generation of electricity;
a main voltage distribution system (electrical lines <19>, see Chaudhary: 20:23-25, 21:11-19, Fig. 3) connected to the main power system via at least one main power system electrical connection (electrical connection member <5>); and
a master control device (control unit <20>, see Chaudhary: 13:20-14:6, 22:6-20 regarding control units and also general implementation of control system using processor running program stored on memory devices) positioned and configured to detect a loss of power condition for the main power system that meets a pre-selected power loss threshold (see Chaudhary: 18:8-12, 21:37-22:4, 27:16-23, Figs. 3, 7 regarding control unit <20> detecting fault <46> of grid <2> based on voltage deviation below nominal value by a threshold <Th>) and, in response to detecting the loss of power condition, initiate providing of backup electricity via the BESS and/or operation of the at least one backup emergency electricity generation device (see Chaudhary: 21:1-19, 22:14-20, 23:15-24:10, Figs. 3, 5-6 regarding power storage <8> alternatively using battery or fuel cell to provide backup power in response to fault). See Chaudhary: 17:22-18:12, 21:1-19, 21:37-22:4, 22:14-20, 23:15-24:10, 27:16-23, Figs. 1-4, 6-7.
Although Chaudhary discloses the system may use multiple power storage devices (see Chaudhary: 17:22-33, Fig. 2) and both battery energy storage and hydrogen fuel cells as known power storage means Chaudhary does not explicitly discuss details of operation using multiple backup sources according to pre-selected priority power scheme as recited (note the Objection above regarding interpretation). Reddy, however, teaches that it is known in power distribution systems providing backup power to load in response to loss of primary power source to provide backup electricity via a BESS and/or operation of at least one backup emergency electricity generation device in accordance with a pre-selected priority power scheme (see Reddy: [0014], [0019-0020], [0023], [0054], Fig. 1 regarding selectively providing backup power in response to primary power source outage initially from battery energy storage while fuel cell ramps up output), the at least one backup emergency electricity generation device configured to utilize hydrogen or biofuel for generation of the backup electricity (see Reddy: [0003], [0019], regarding hydrogen fuel cell). One of ordinary skill would appreciate Reddy teaches detailed use of known power sources mentioned by Chaudhary that may equivalently be operated to provide backup power in response to loss of main power. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chaudhary to incorporate the teachings of Reddy by having the backup electricity providing according pre-selected priority power scheme of BESS and hydrogen electricity generation device as recited for purposes of providing known power source arrangement for providing backup power in response to loss of main power supply, which further allows use of cleaner hydrogen generator technology while compensating for required start-up time of the fuel cell (see Reddy: [0003], [0023], [0054]).
Although Chaudhary in view of Reddy generally mentions the hydrogen-based backup emergency electricity generation device is brought on-line after the backup electricity has begun to be provided via the BESS (see Reddy: [0023], [0054], Fig. 1), and generally that more than just two backup power sources may be used (see Reddy: [0041], Figs. 1-2), Chaudhary in view of Reddy does not explicitly discuss providing multiple hydrogen-based generation devices brought online at staggered/different times as recited. Sasaki, however, teaches that it is known in the art of power supply systems using hydrogen fuel cells to supply power when a main commercial power supply system fails for the fuel cell power supply source to comprise a plurality of backup emergency electricity generation devices (see Sasaki: [3-4], [10], Fig. 1), and the process comprising: bringing the backup emergency electricity generation devices on-line via a main voltage distribution system (electrical lines connecting power distribution system and also providing starting power to fuel cells, see Sasaki: [16-17], Fig. 1) in a staggered scheme so that each backup emergency electricity generation device is brought on-line at a different time (see Sasaki: [4-6], [17-18], [24-29], [49], Fig. 1 regarding multi fuel cell power supply device starting sequentially or with desired time lag to allow for system to provide power to start up each fuel cell from other fuel cells, to gradually reach overall fuel cell output power capacity). One of ordinary skill would appreciate that Sasaki discloses further considerations and benefits for starting up/ramping up output power of fuel cell power supply systems that are predictably applicable to a system using one or more fuel cells for backup power such as that of Chaudhary in view of Reddy. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chaudhary in view of Reddy to incorporate the teachings of Sasaki by implementing the backup fuel cell power generation device by providing plurality of generation devices with staggered starting as recited for purposes of providing known fuel cell power supply arrangement scaled to desired overall capacity by using multiple units, and to enable starting sequence which allows starting power from other fuel cells to be used to start subsequent fuel cells and ramp up fuel cell power output while reducing required energy storage capacity (see Sasaki: [4-6], [17-18], [24-29], [49], Fig. 1). Note the combination predictably suggests the BESS providing power quickly before fuel cells are able to ramp up output as taught by Reddy, and that ramping up a fuel cell system output involves the staggered starting of fuel cells one at a time as suggested by Sasaki.
Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, do not explicitly discuss providing connection adjustable between transmission/non-transmission position for the BESS and generation device backup sources, but use of switches to selectively control connection of sources is generally well known in the art, as exemplified by Swearingen, which discloses it is known in backup power supply systems wherein the providing of the backup electricity includes adjusting a BESS/backup source connection to a main voltage distribution system to a transmission position (see Swearingen: [0014], [0023-0025], Fig. 3 regarding using controllable relay <48> having non-transmission and transmission positions to selectively connect emergency power sources such as batteries or fuel cells to supply backup power when normal power is unavailable). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, to further incorporate the teachings of Swearingen by providing respective transmission position adjustable connection/relays for the backup power supply BESS and fuel cells for purposes of providing known means to selectively enable supply of power from backup sources for a desired amount of time and disconnect them when not needed (see Swearingen: [0014], [0023-0025], Fig. 3). Note the combination would result in the main voltage distribution system connected to the BESS via at least one BESS electrical connection that is adjustable from a non-transmission position to a transmission position; and the main voltage distribution system connected to the at least one backup emergency electricity generation device via at least one electricity generation device connection that is adjustable from a non-transmission position to a transmission position, given that Reddy suggests providing both fuel cell and battery as backup sources and Swearingen suggests providing corresponding relay for selectively connecting backup source.
Re claims 14-15. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, further in view of Swearingen, teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the master control device is configured to initiate adjustment of the at least one BESS electrical connection from the non-transmission position to the transmission position in response to detecting the loss of power; wherein the master control device is configured to initiate adjustment of at least one electricity generation device connection from the non-transmission position to the transmission position after the backup electricity generation device is started up for operation (see discussion of claim 13 above regarding master control device controlling supply of backup power from BESS and fuel cell started up in response to detecting loss of power; see Swearingen: [0014], [0023-0025], Fig. 3 regarding closing relay of backup sources to transmission positions when supplying backup power from respective source).
Re claim 16. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, further in view of Swearingen, teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the or each one backup electricity generation device comprises at least one hydrogen fuel cell, at least one hydrogen turbine, at least one hydrogen engine, and/or at least one biofuel generator (see discussion of claim 13 above regarding hydrogen fuel cell).
Re claim 17. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, further in view of Swearingen, teaches the apparatus of claim 16, but does not explicitly discuss further backup electricity generation devices using biofuel. Official Notice is hereby taken, however, that it is well-known in the art of backup power supply systems for a plurality of generators to be used as backup sources, and also for generators such as fuel cells to be able to run using processed biofuel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, further in view of Swearingen such that the or each one backup electricity generation device comprises a plurality of biofuel generators for purposes of providing known backup power generating devices that would equivalently be able to provide backup power to components for a period of time in response to an outage.
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, as applied respectively above, further in view of Yang (US2020/0056290).
Re claim 5. Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, teaches the process of claim 4, and providing backup power to hydrogen production equipment (see Chaudhary: 18:8-12), but does not explicitly discuss further equipment of the plant as recited. Yang, however, teaches that it is known that it is known in the art of hydrogen production plants that the plant may further include other equipment requiring electricity, such as an ASU (see Yang: [0033-0034], [0042], Fig. 1 regarding space division device/ASU <3> requiring electricity to operate together with electrolyzer <1> in a combined production plant). One of ordinary skill would appreciate the backup power system of Chaudhary may similarly be applied to other similar hydrogen producing plants which also has other equipment such as ASU requiring electricity to operate and thus would benefit from backup power capabilities in case of outages. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, to apply to a plant having additional production equipment such as ASU and providing of the backup electricity also to the ASU for purposes of adapting the backup power system to be applicable to other similar hydrogen/ammonia producing plants which would similarly have equipment require electric power to operate and predictably benefit from having backup power supply arrangement.
Re claims 6-7, Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, teach the process of claim 4, and Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, further in view of Yang teach the process of claim 5, respectively. Yang teaches that it is known that it is known in the art of hydrogen production plants that the plant may further include other equipment requiring electricity, and can also include other equipment required to function such as support equipment and process fluid driving equipment (see Yang: [0033-0036], [0041-0043], Fig. 1 and discussion of claim 5 above regarding hydrogen and ammonia producing equipment with corresponding support equipment/fluid control equipment). Although explicit disclosure of providing backup power to the plant’s utilities and further equipment is not made, Official Notice was previously taken and hereby made of record that it is generally well-known in the art of backup power supply systems for a building/plant that backup power may be provided to the whole building and its equipment if desired to continue operation during an outage. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki, further in view of Yang, such that the providing of the backup electricity also includes: transmitting the backup electricity from the BESS and/or the at least one backup emergency electricity generation device to utilities of the plant, support equipment of the plant, and process fluid driving equipment of the plant, for purposes of adapting the backup power system to be applicable to other similar hydrogen/ammonia producing plants and provide power to other plant equipment part of the normal operations of the plant desirable to continue to be powered during an outage.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments that Chaudhary in view of Reddy, further in view of Sasaki does not teach the limitations of amended claim 1, the arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant’s statement that Reddy does not disclose use of multiple fuel cells is generally correct (though Reddy: [0041] generally suggests that more than two backup power sources can be provided), but the lack of disclosure does not appear to otherwise prevent or conflict with modifying the system to implement the backup fuel cell system with a plurality of fuel cells as suggested by Sasaki. Applicant’s allegation that modifying Reddy to provide multiple fuel cells would result in all the fuel cells being brought online together appears to be without basis, given the fact that Reddy does not discuss use of multiple fuel cells explicitly as Applicant has stated. There appears to be no teaching or limitation to the system of Reddy that would make staggering activation of fuel cells contrary to the disclosure of Reddy.
Applicant’s arguments also do not appear to consider the relevant teachings of Sasaki presented in the rejection, and the overall combination with Reddy. It is noted that Sasaki does suggest the system operates as a backup system/in response to main power system outage generally (see Sasaki: [4], [24] regarding mention of starting fuel cells when main commercial power supply unavailable) and hydrogen fuel cell power supply systems are relevant to the field of art of Applicant’s own invention. Sasaki also overall provides details and considerations for starting/ramping up a multiple fuel cell power supply system which provides desired power output capacity, and clear benefits to the staggered operation, that are relevant and may be predictably applied to systems such as Chaudhary and Reddy which teach starting up a backup fuel cell power supply system after the BESS (see Sasaki: [4-6], [17-18], [24-29], [49], Fig. 1). Reddy’s teaching that a BESS provides initial faster power during start-up of fuel cells also would appear to be predictably applied in combination. Applicant does not appear to provide any further arguments that address the specific teachings of Sasaki as they are applied in combination with Chaudhary and Reddy.
The reasoning of the prior art rejection of claim 1 similarly applies to the other amended independent claims, and no specific arguments against further features or dependent claims appear to be currently presented.
Applicant is generally advised that the operation of batteries with generators/fuel cells for backup power sources are generally known in the art, with features such as staggered starting of generators appearing known and obvious. The cited prior art of record also appears to suggest that hydrogen production plants with backup power arrangements are generally known in the art and that it would be obvious to generally supply such facility loads if desired. If Applicant believes that a particular manner of operating the backup power sources for specific hydrogen/ammonia production equipment to perform particular operations, such as operation of particular sources and equipment for detailed shutdown procedures, would be distinguished and nonobvious over the prior art, then it is recommended that Applicant ensure the claims explicitly recite all required components, their arrangement, and particular manner of operation with explanation of nonobviousness.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID A SHIAO whose telephone number is (571)270-7265. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571) 272-7492. 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.
/DAVID A SHIAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2836 /REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836