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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-10, filed on December 2, 2025, with respect to inoperability and lack of utility have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because:
although the claim language has been amended to remove references of a “self-driven” apparatus that “generates excess power”, the specification (which provides the light under which the claims are interpreted; see paragraphs [0001], [0008], [0013], [0014], [0040], [0047], [0052], [0064], [0070], and [0072]) still provides multiple instances in which those references are made;
the basic fluid mechanics (Pascal’s Principle, Force vs. Energy, Example Values, and Analogy: Hydraulic Jack Lifting a Car) information provided by the applicant fails to cure the claim language shortcomings in terms of how the structure is built and how it operates as many of the necessary components are not included; and
the Examiner’s previous description of the system as a “Rube Goldberg” machine is not cured by the claim amendments because said description is based on the use of multiple mechanical stages to obtain a considerably inferior result, not based on the efficiency of the system.
Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection of claims 1-7 has been maintained.
It must be noted that the claimed invention is still, at best, an electrical energy storage or backup machine of the “Rube Goldberg” type because it utilizes a plurality of electricity consuming mechanical means to store, transform, and regenerate energy for later use. It effectively obtains electrical energy from a battery, or solar panel with inverter, or domestic power, or grid power, transforms said electrical energy into mechanical energy for storage using mechanical means (which consumes and dissipates electrical energy), and transforms said stored mechanical energy using additional mechanical means (which consumes and dissipates mechanical energy) back into electrical energy for use.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 12, filed on December 2, 2025, with respect to omitted essential structural cooperative relationship of elements have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph rejections of claims 1-7 have been withdrawn.
Examiner’s Statement of Markush Grouping of Alternatives
Amended independent claim 1 recites:
“the internal power source comprises a battery or an external power source selected from the group consisting of a solar panel with inverter, domestic power, and grid power” (see lines 4-6); and
“the input drive transmission power component is selected from the group consisting of an electric actuator, an electromechanical press, an electric jack, an electric motor, an electric hydraulic pump” (see lines 6-9).
Therefore, amended claim 1 effectively recites 15 different and patentably distinct alternative embodiments as shown in the table below.
Source(s)
Transmission component(s)
Battery
Solar Panel & Inverter
Domestic Power
Grid Power
Actuator
Press
Jack
Motor
Pump
X
x
X
x
X
x
X
x
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the disclosed invention, as recited in the claims and illustrated in Figure 2, is inoperative and therefore lacks utility.
According to the preamble of the claims, the claimed invention is an “electric power generation apparatus”. However, claim 1 recites “the internal power source comprises a battery or an external power source selected from the group consisting of a solar panel with inverter, domestic power, and grid power”. Since each and every one of the recited “internal or external power source” elements/components are the components generating electrical energy, the claimed invention is essentially a battery-, or solar-, or domestic-, or grid-driven device.
Since the “internal or external power source” provides electrical energy (hereinafter IPCe) to an “input drive unit and a control system”. This drive unit and control system consume electrical energy (hereinafter DUe and CSe).
Assuming arguendo that the control system provides electrical energy to the electric motor, said motor will consume electrical energy (hereinafter EMe) to provide mechanical energy to a mechanical reducer (hereinafter MRe), which will provide mechanical energy (at a reduced speed and increased torque) to a rotational to oscillatory or linear motion converter. This converter will also consume mechanical energy (hereinafter R2OorLe) before providing said energy to a first lever mechanism which consumes energy (hereinafter FLe) to operate a hydraulic pump. This hydraulic pump will consume energy (hereinafter HPe) to pressurize and store hydraulic energy (hereinafter HFe) in a hydraulic fluid tank. Said stored hydraulic energy will then operate the paddle wheel which consumes energy (hereinafter PWe) to transform hydraulic fluid energy (HFe) into mechanical energy (PWe) for operating a power transmission shaft. This transmission shaft will consume mechanical energy (hereinafter PTSe) before transmitting said mechanical energy to a generator through “connected gears or pulley belts” for generating electrical energy (hereinafter EGeOutput).
According to the intended operation of the claimed system, the energy equation will be as follows:
IPCe – (DUe + CSe) – Eme – Mre – R2OorLe – Fle – HPe – Hfe – Pwe – PTSe = EGeOutput
The electromagnetic and mechanical (component weight and friction) losses will substantially reduce the initial IPCe energy during the multiple energy transformations.
The claimed invention is not capable of being “An electric power generation apparatus” as claimed because the initial input of the system is already electrical energy and the output of the invention will always be substantially less, if at all possible, than the total energy provided to the system.
Models - 37 CFR § 1.91
The following is a quotation of paragraph(s) (a) and (b) of 37 C.F.R. 1.91:
(a) A model or exhibit will not be admitted as part of the record of an application unless it:
(1) Substantially conforms to the requirements of § 1.52 or § 1.84; or
(2) Is specifically required by the Office.
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, a model, working model, or other physical exhibit may be required by the Office if deemed necessary for any purpose in examination of the application.
The applicant is requested to furnish a working model of the claimed invention for the purpose of demonstrating operability, utility, and patentability.
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 PEDRO J CUEVAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2021. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
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, Jessica Han can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/PEDRO J CUEVAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896 May 3, 2025