DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Final Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Remarks/Amendments filed on 4 November, 2025. The amendments have been entered.
Disposition of Claims
Claims 1-10 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
The claims are no longer interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), in light of the amendments to the claims to include sufficient structure for the “device for measuring a temperature of the exhaust gas” and “temperature measuring device” within claim 1 and “measuring a temperature of the exhaust gas with a device” within claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GIBSON (US 8,474,273 B2 – published 2 July, 2013), in view of SHAMOUN (US 2012/0145279 A1 – published 14 June, 2012).
As to claim 1, GIBSON discloses a delivery apparatus (1) for delivering liquid cryogen to a chilling application (col.3, lines 1-4), comprising:
a liquid cryogen feed tank (11; col.3, lines 4-6 and 29-30);
a liquid cryogen conduit (14, 27, 44; col.3, lines 50-52 and col.4, lines 44-55) in fluid communication between the liquid cryogen feed tank and the chilling application (figure 1);
a flow control valve (22) in communication with the liquid cryogen conduit for controlling a speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen to the chilling application (col.3, line 64 – col. 4, line 17);
wherein the chilling application uses the liquid cryogen to produce an exhaust gas (col.5, lines 4-12, which is supplied at the exhaust stack);
a device for measuring a temperature of the exhaust gas (36; col. 5, lines 4-12), the temperature measuring device selected from the group consisting of a thermocouple and a resistance temperature detector (RTD) (col.4, lines 59-65), and in operative communication with a controller (23; col. 4, lines 56 – 59);
wherein the controller is in communication with the temperature measuring device and the flow control valve (col. 3, lines 52-54), and the controller is configured to receive a signal corresponding to the temperature of the exhaust gas from the temperature measuring device to regulate the flow control valve to vary the speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen through the liquid cryogen conduit to the chilling application in response to the temperature of the exhaust gas without changing the heat transfer rate of the chilling application (col.5, lines 4-63).
However, GIBSON does not disclose a flowmeter in communication with the liquid cryogen conduit for controlling a quantity of liquid cryogen to be delivered from the liquid cryogen feed tank to the chilling application through the liquid cryogen conduit.
SHAMOUN is within the field of endeavor provided a delivery apparatus (100) for delivering liquid cryogen to a chilling application (par. 15). SHAMOUN teaches a liquid cryogen feed tank (par. 17 – pressurized bulk storage tank), a liquid cryogen conduit (108, at least) in fluid communication between the liquid cryogen feed tank and the chilling application (figure 1, wherein liquid cryogen is supplied via conduits, 108, to the application; par. 26). SHAMOUN, further, teaches it is a known method to provide a flowmeter (120) in communication with the liquid cryogen conduit (figure 1) for controlling a quantity of liquid cryogen to be delivered from the liquid cryogen feed tank to the chilling application through the liquid cryogen conduit (par. 22 and 26). This is strong evidence that modifying GIBSON as claimed was well within the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art and would produce predictable results to one skilled in the art, (i.e., controlling the delivery of the liquid to the at least one application by manipulating or adjusting the master feed valve (par. 35)). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, to modify GIBSON by SHAMOUN such that the delivery apparatus included a flow meter in communication with the liquid cryogen conduit for controlling a quantity of liquid cryogen to be delivered from the liquid cryogen feed tank to the chilling application through the liquid cryogen conduit, since all claimed elements were known in the art, and one having ordinary skill in the art could have modified the prior art as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of controlling the delivery of the liquid cryogen to the at least one chilling application by manipulating or adjusting the master feed valve (par. 35).
As to claim 3, GIBSON, as modified by SHAMOUN, further discloses the controller (23)is configured to vary a rate of delivery of the liquid cryogen through the liquid cryogen conduit to correspond to a pressure of the liquid cryogen being delivered to the chilling application (col. 3, lines 52-54; col. 3, line 61 – col.4, line 17).
As to claim 4, GIBSON, as modified by SHAMOUN, further discloses wherein the liquid cryogen conduit comprises a plurality of conduit sections (14, 27, 44) for the liquid cryogen to be fed to the chilling application (figure 1).
As to claim 5, GIBSON, as modified by SHAMOUN, further discloses the chilling application comprising a bottom injection apparatus (148) selected from the group consisting of a mixer and a blender (figure 5;col. 6, lines 26-43 and col.7, lines 45-57, wherein the fluid jetted from the bottom injection apparatus, 148, mixes and/or blends, so as to act as a mixer or blender).
As to claim 6, GIBSON discloses a method (MPEP § 2112.02) for supplying liquid cryogen to a chilling application (col.3, lines 1-4), the chilling application using the liquid cryogen and producing an exhaust gas (col.5, lines 4-12, which is supplied at the exhaust stack), the method comprising:
supplying liquid cryogen from a liquid cryogen feed tank (11; col.3, lines 4-6 and 29-30) to a liquid cryogen conduit (14, 27, or 44; col.3, lines 50-52 and col. 4, lines 44-55) in fluid communication between the liquid cryogen feed tank and the chilling application (figure 1);
controlling a speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen to the chilling application (col.3, line 64-col. 4, line 17) with a flow control valve (22);
producing an exhaust gas from the liquid cryogen in the chilling application (col.5, lines 4-12, which is supplied at the exhaust stack);
measuring a temperature of the exhaust gas (col. 5, lines 4-12) with a device (36) in operative communication with the exhaust gas (col. 5, lines 4-12), the temperature measuring device selected from the group consisting of a thermocouple and a resistance temperature detector (RTD) (col.4, lines 59-65); and
providing communication between the temperature measuring device and the flow control valve for regulating (via the controller, 23) the speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen by the flow control valve configured to configured for varying the speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen in response to the temperature of the exhaust gas without changing a heat transfer rate of the chilling application(col. 5, lines 4-63).
However, GIBSON does not disclose controlling a flow and therefore a quantity of the liquid cryogen with a flowmeter to be delivered from the liquid cryogen feed tank to the chilling application through the liquid cryogen conduit.
SHAMOUN is within the field of endeavor provided a delivery apparatus (100) for delivering liquid cryogen to a chilling application (par. 15). SHAMOUN teaches a liquid cryogen feed tank (par. 17 – pressurized bulk storage tank), a liquid cryogen conduit (108, at least) in fluid communication between the liquid cryogen feed tank and the chilling application (figure 1, wherein liquid cryogen is supplied via conduits, 108, to the application; par. 26). SHAMOUN, further, teaches it is a known method to provide a flowmeter (120) for controlling a quantity of liquid cryogen to be delivered from the liquid cryogen feed tank to the chilling application through the liquid cryogen conduit (par. 22 and 26). This is strong evidence that modifying GIBSON as claimed was well within the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art and would produce predictable results to one skilled in the art, (i.e., controlling the delivery of the liquid to the at least one application by manipulating or adjusting the master feed valve (par. 35)). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, to modify GIBSON by SHAMOUN such that the method includes controlling the flow, and therefore, the quantity of liquid cryogen, by a flowmeter, to be delivered from the liquid cryogen feed tank to the chilling application through the liquid cryogen conduit, since all claimed elements were known in the art, and one having ordinary skill in the art could have modified the prior art as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of controlling the delivery of the liquid cryogen to the at least one chilling application by manipulating or adjusting the master feed valve (par. 35).
As to claim 7, GIBSON, as modified by SHAMOUN, further discloses comprising pulsing flow of the liquid cryogen to the chilling application (col.3, line 50 – col.4, line 17; col. 5, lines14-63 – wherein the opening and closing of the valve, 22, causes pulsing of the flow of the liquid cryogen to the chilling application).
As to claim 8, GIBSON, as modified by SHAMOUN, discloses further comprising varying a rate of the speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen through the liquid cryogen conduit corresponding to a pressure of the liquid cryogen being delivered to the chilling application (col. 3, lines 52-54; col. 3, line 61 – col.4, line 17).
As to claim 9, GIBSON, as modified by SHAMOUN, discloses further comprising feeding the liquid cryogen from the liquid cryogen conduit (14, 27, or 44) through a plurality of conduit sections into the chilling application (at least two which do not define the liquid cryogen conduit ,14, 27, and/or 44).
As to claim 10, GIBSON, as modified by SHAMOUN, further discloses the chilling application comprising a bottom injection apparatus (148) selected from the group consisting of a mixer and a blender (figure 5;col. 6, lines 26-43 and col.7, lines 45-57, wherein the fluid jetted from the bottom injection apparatus, 148, mixes and/or blends, so as to act as a mixer or blender).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GIBSON (US 8,474,273 B2 – published 2 July, 2013), in view of SHAMOUN (US 2012/0145279 A1 – published 14 June, 2012) and JOHNSON (US 5,394,704 – published 7 March, 1995).
As to claim 2, GIBSON, as modified by SHAMOUN, further discloses comprising an actuated valve (15; col. 3, lines 17-19) associated with the liquid cryogen conduit(figure 1).
However, GIBSON, as modified, does not further disclose the actuated valve being in communication with the controller, the actuated valve configured to receive another signal from the controller in response to the temperature of the exhaust gas to pulse a flow of the liquid cryogen to the chilling application.
JOHNSON, however, is within the field of endeavor provided a delivery apparatus (figure 1A) for delivering liquid cryogen (col. 5, lines 65-66) to a chilling application (col. 6, lines 15-19). JOHNSON teaches an actuated valve (34) in communication (figure 1A; col. 9, lines 31-35) with the controller (58). The actuated valve (34) is taught to receive another signal from the controller (col. 9, lines 31-35) in response to the temperature of the exhaust gas of the chilling application (col.2, lines 56-65; col. 7, line 14-30) to pulse a flow of the liquid cryogen to the chilling application (col. 6, lines 1-4, in view of col.5, line 67 – col. 6, line 6, col. 6, lines 20-25, and col. 9,lines 27-28). Particularly, JOHNSON teaches the actuation of the actuated valve for the purpose of preventing overheating and/or overcooling of the chilling application (col. 7, lines 14-16). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill within the art, prior to the date the invention was effectively filed, to modify GIBSON, in view of the further teachings of JOHNSON, to include the actuated valve, as required by the claims, for this purpose.
More so, in doing so, it would be evident that the valve (15) of GIBSON would be modified to be in communication with the controller (22) that receives temperature signals of the exhaust gas (col.5, lines 4-12, which is supplied at the exhaust stack) to provide control (i.e., pulsing flow of liquid cryogen in view of the opening/closing/modulation of the valve) thereof based on temperature being outside of a desired range (as taught by GIBSON and JOHNSON). As such, the combination set forth teaches the requirements of the claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant's arguments filed 4 November, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
At pages 9-10, Applicant argues against the teachings of GIBSON. Applicant alleges, “The valve 22 therefore regulates the flow rate and pressure of the cryogen to the mixing zone, not to the vessel 50. Gibson therefore replenishes the cryogen to the mixing zone 35 in an amount sufficient to return to the set point temperature, regardless or not the product (such as food product, 6:61) continues to require that amount of cryogen to be chilled or frozen effectively with not more than the necessary amount of cryogen used. In contrast, amended independent claims 1 and 6 include subject matter claimed to regulate the liquid cryogen delivery so that the heat transfer rate at the chilling application does not change, i.e., the liquid cryogen delivery is not regulated to resume an original flow to arrive at a desired set point.”. However, the evidence of record supports the conclusion that GIBSON teaches the requirements, in combination with SHAMOUN, of amended independent claims 1 and 6. First, as correctly stated within the Applicant’s Amendments/Remarks, “The valve 22 is used to regulate the temperature of the cooling gas that is supplied to the vessel 50 (3:61-63)” , which is consistent in providing the requirement of the claims to require “the controller is configured to receive a signal corresponding to the temperature of the exhaust gas from the temperature measuring device to regulate the flow control valve to vary the speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen through the liquid cryogen conduit to the chilling application in response to the temperature of the exhaust gas” ( claim 1) and “providing communication between the temperature measuring device and the flow control valve for regulating the speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen to the chilling application by the flow control valve configured for varying the speed of delivery in response to the temperature of the exhaust gas” (claim 6). More so, GIBSON within col. 5, lines 4-63 states,
“ Operation of the cryogenic coolant delivery system 1 begins by determining a target or set point temperature for the vessel 50. The value of the set point temperature, as well as how and where it is measured, will depend upon the process being performed in the vessel. For example, the set point temperature could be a desired air temperature within the vessel 50, a desired air temperature in an exhaust stack (not shown) of the vessel 50, or a desired surface temperature of a product as it enters or exits the vessel 50.
In this embodiment, the desired set-point temperature is entered into the user panel 24 by an operator and the set-point temperature is communicated to the PLC 23. In this embodiment, the set-point temperature can range from between about -240 degrees F. to about 85 degrees F. (-151 degrees C. to 29 degrees C.). In alternate embodiments, the set-point temperature could be fixed or non-user adjustable. In such embodiments, the set-point temperature could simply be part of the programming of the PLC 23.
During operation of the cryogenic coolant delivery system 1, if the temperature in the vessel 50, as measured by the thermocouple, deviates from the set-point, the PLC 23 is programmed to adjust the proportional valve 22 in order to bring the temperature in the vessel 50 back to the set-point temperature by adjusting the flow rate of the cryogen. Given that the composition, and therefore temperature, of the coolant gas is dependent, at least in part, on the pressure differential between the supply gas and the cryogen at the mixing zone 35, it is preferable that the flow rate (and pressure) at which the supply gas is supplied to the mixing zone 35 be as constant as possible.
In other embodiments, multiple temperature probes 36 could be used. In this case, deviation from the set-point could be determined a number of different ways. For example, the PLC 23 could be programmed to adjust the cryogen flow rate if any of the temperature probes 36 deviate sufficiently from the set-point, or the PLC 23 could be programmed to adjust the cryogen flow rate based on the average of the temperature probes 36.
A flow chart showing an example of a method used by the PLC 23 to control coolant gas temperature is shown in FIG. 3. When the PLC 23 receives a temperature reading from the thermocouple, it determines the difference between the measured temperature and the set-point temperature and compares the difference to the predetermined range (see step 60). If the difference is not greater than the predetermined range, no adjustment of the proportional valve 22 is made by the PLC 23 (see step 61).
If the difference is greater than the predetermined range, the PLC 23 determines if the measured temperature is greater than the set-point temperature (see step 62). If so, the PLC 23 begins adjusting the proportional valve 22 to increase the flow rate of the cryogen (see step 64) until the measured temperature of the coolant gas drops to the set-point temperature (see step 66). If not, the PLC 23 adjusts the proportional valve 22 to decrease the flow rate of the cryogen (see step 68) until the measured temperature of the coolant gas rises to the set-point temperature (see step 70). When the measured temperature is equal to the set-point temperature, adjustment of the proportional valve 22 is stopped (see step 72).” (GIBSON at col. 5, lines 4-63).
Further, figure 1 of GIBSON provides wherein the valve is positioned along the conduit supplying the cryogen to the chilling application, at vessel 50, regardless of there being a mixing zone, such that the valve, as noted by GIBSON in the above passage, is used to regulate the speed of delivery of the liquid cryogen to the chilling application (i.e., the mixing zone, 35, does not impede the ability of the valve to regulate the speed of the liquid cryogen delivery to the chilling application at the vessel, 50). It will be noted, Applicant asserts, “wherein the flow rate is as constant as possible (5:23-40)”, which is a mischaracterization of the teachings of GIBSON. The supply gas, not the liquid cryogen, is provided at a constant flow rate. See above passage of GIBSON above which clearly states this, in addition to column 3, line 61 – column 4, line 17 of GIBSON.
Second, GIBSON provides wherein the purpose is to necessarily provide the regulation and control of the flow of the cryogen “without changing a heat transfer rate of the chilling application” by providing the adjustment of the flow control valve to achieve operation within a desired temperature range. See GIBSON at the above passage corresponding to column 5, lines 4-63. More so, the heat transfer rate based on the flow of a moving fluid (like a liquid or gas) is known to be given by
Q
˙
=
m
˙
C
p
∆
T
, wherein m is the mass flow rate of the fluid,
C
p
is the specific heat capacity of the fluid, and
∆
T
is the temperature difference of the fluid. Further, mass flow rate of the fluid is provided by the equation
m
˙
=
ρ
Q
, wherein
ρ
is the density of the fluid and
Q
is the volumetric flow rate. This provides the following equation,
Q
˙
=
ρ
Q
C
p
∆
T
. It will further be noted, the density of the fluid and the specific heat capacity are constants of the fluid. More so, GIBSON provides in column 5, lines 4-63 wherein the overarching goal is to provide no deviation between the setpoint temperature and the temperature measured. Therefore, the
∆
T
is intended to be zero (e.g., no change between the measured temperature of the exhaust gas and the desired setpoint temperature, col. 5, lines 4-12 of GIBSON). As such, regardless of the volumetric flow rate of the fluid, the heat transfer rate would necessarily be intended to be zero (i.e., multiplication of a value and zero). For these reasons, the arguments are not persuasive, in light of the teachings of GIBSON, at least.
At pages 10-11, Applicant argues against the characterization of element, 120, of SHAMOUN being a flowmeter, and the flow meter of SHAMOUN is associated with gas conduit 114, not a liquid conduit, and the flow meter of SHAMOUN is element, 136. However, the claimed invention recites, “a flow meter in communication with the liquid cryogen conduit for controlling a quantity of liquid cryogen to be delivered from the liquid cryogen feed tank to the chilling application through the liquid cryogen conduit”, which necessarily requires the flow meter of the prior art to at least be capable of controlling a quantity of liquid cryogen. Element, 136, of SHAMOUN is not capable of providing such features and merely measures the flow of gas leaving the at least one feed tank 102 (SHAMOUN at par. 21). However, as understood through the claims, in light of the specification, element, 120, of SHAMOUN necessarily provides the structure and functional requirements of the flow meter claimed. See paragraph 26 of SHAMOUN, in addition to wherein a valve is known within the ordinary skill of the art to provide control of quantity of liquid cryogen to be delivered (further, see par. 35 of SHAMOUN which proffers such evidence). For these reasons, the arguments are not persuasive, in light of the teachings of SHAMOUN, at least.
At pages 11-12, Applicant argues against the combination of prior art, and more specifically the teachings of JOHNSON with regards to curing the deficiencies of GIBSON and SHAMOUN with regards to the amendments to independent claim 1. GIBSON teaches the further requirements of independent claim 1, as discussed above, and SHAMOUN teach the flow meter of independent claim 1, as discussed above. As such, JOHNSON is neither relied upon or necessary to set forth the case of prima facie obviousness of independent claim 1, and thereby, the arguments are not persuasive.
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 JENNA M MARONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-8588. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7AM to 4PM, EST.
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, Len Tran can be reached at (571) 272-1184. 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.
/JENNA M MARONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763 11/18/2025
JENNA M. MARONEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3763