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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8 September, 2024 and 17 January, 2025 are being considered by the examiner, except wherein indicated (see reasoning below).
NPL Reference 2, of the IDS filed on 8 September, 2024, fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(b)(5) which requires “Each publication listed in an information disclosure statement must be identified by publisher, author (if any), title, relevant pages of the publication, date, and place of publication.”.
NPL Reference 8, of the IDS filed on 8 September, 2024, fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(b)(5) which requires “Each publication listed in an information disclosure statement must be identified by publisher, author (if any), title, relevant pages of the publication, date, and place of publication.”.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the:
“a pressurized butane storage tank…comprises a liquid inlet port and a liquid outlet port in fluid communication with the liquid and a gas inlet port and a gas outlet port in fluid communication with the gaseous headspace” of claim 1. Particularly, looking at figure 1, there are three “tanks”, 100, 105, 112, 201. However, none of the disclosed tanks include a liquid inlet port, a liquid outlet port, a gas inlet port, and a gas outlet port, as required by the claimed “pressurized butane storage tank”. Tank (100) only includes a single inlet(connected to valve, 129) and a single outlet (connected to valve, 101). Tank (201) appears to only be connected to a dashed line, seemingly, designating signal transmission related to the CPU (202), Tank(105) includes a single inlet (attachable to line, 104), a liquid outlet ( 106), and an outlet (107, defined related to nitrogen, but not disclosed to be related to a particular phase of gas or liquid). Tank (112) includes an inlet (attached to line, 111) for introduction of gaseous nitrogen and liquid butane, an outlet (114) for discharge of nitrogen, and a liquid outlet (113) for discharge of liquid butane. As such, step a) is not shown in the drawings of the instant application, and steps b) through g) are neither shown, as these steps are reliant upon the tank structure of step a) to produce the streams characterized by the later steps. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“ blending the expelled liquid butane into a tank or stream of finished gasoline or diluent” of claim 2. Liquid butane is discharged via line, 113, but figure 1 fails to provide the step as required. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“the butane storage tank” of claim 3, in view of the claimed invention related to the butane storage tank of claim 1 not being shown. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“the gas inlet port and the liquid inlet port” being “different” as stated in claim 4. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“the gas inlet port and the liquid outlet port” being the “same” as stated in claim 5. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“the gas outlet port and the liquid outlet port” being the “same” as stated in claim 6. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“the gas outlet port and the liquid inlet port” being the “same” as stated in claim 7. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“transmitting the condensed butane to a fuel storage tank which is the same as or different that the butane storage tank” as stated in claim 8, in view of the only tank receiving condensed butane being storage tank, 100, which is defined in claim 1 as “a liquid consisting essentially of butane” (see claim 1, in addition to paragraph 16 of the originally-filed specification). These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“the butane is condensed while maintaining the second pressure of the nitrogen substantially constant” of claim 9, in view of the claimed invention related to the butane storage tank of claim 1 not being shown. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“condensing propane from the nitrogen by reducing the temperature of the nitrogen below the condensation point of propane while maintaining the nitrogen in a gaseous state” of claim 10.These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“wherein the propane and butane are condensed form the nitrogen in the same step” of claim 11. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“wherein the propane and butane are condensed form the nitrogen in different steps” of claim 12. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“wherein the propane and butane are condensed from the nitrogen in different steps without pressurizing the nitrogen between the steps” of claim 13. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“wherein the propane and butane are condensed from the nitrogen at substantially the same pressures” of claim 14. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“condensing ethane from the nitrogen by reducing the temperature of the nitrogen below the condensation point of ethane while maintaining nitrogen in a gaseous state” of claim 15. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“wherein the ethane and propane are condensed from the nitrogen in the same step” of claim 16. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“wherein the ethane and propane are condensed from the nitrogen in different steps” of claim 17. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“wherein the ethane and propane are condensed from the nitrogen in different steps without pressurizing the nitrogen between the steps” of claim 18. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“wherein the ethane and propane are condensed from the nitrogen at substantially the same pressures” of claim 19. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
“a mobile system comprising…a mounting platform and a plurality of wheels rotatably secured thereto” of claim 31. These features must be shown of the feature(s) canceled from the claims(s).
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
With regards to claim 9, it is recited, “the butane is condensed while maintaining the second pressure of the nitrogen substantially constant”, wherein the meaning of “substantially” as employed by the claim, is given reasonable guidance to determine the metes and bounds of the claim. See paragraph 34 of the originally filed specification which provides the meaning is tied to “no loss in pressure other than loss of partial pressure from the butane”.
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:
“means for releasing the gaseous nitrogen at a first pressure” in claim 31. For examination purposes, it is being interpreted as valve, 101, and the equivalents thereof. See paragraph 42 of the originally-filed specification.
“means for returning the condensed butane to the liquid butane tank” in claim 32. For examination purposes it is being interpreted as the solenoid operated valve, 124, and three manual valves (unnumbered), and the equivalents thereof. See paragraph 47 of the originally-filed specification.
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.
Claims 1-32 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.
Regarding claim 1,
the phrase "optionally greater than 30 psig", in lines 10-11, 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 examination purposes, it is being interpreted the claim does not require the limitation.
the phrase "optionally greater than 300 psig", in line 12, 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 examination purposes, it is being interpreted the claim does not require the limitation.
Claims 2-28 depend from rejected claim 1, and thereby, are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Regarding claim 14, the term “substantially” is used to describe the pressures at which butane and propane are condensed from the nitrogen, wherein “substantially” is a relative term. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The specification fails to provide any examples or teachings to measure a degree without a precise numerical measurement. See MPEP § 2173.05(b). For examination purposes, it is being construed the step occurs at the same pressure.
Regarding claim 19, the term “substantially” is used to describe the pressures at which propane and ethane are condensed from the nitrogen, wherein “substantially” is a relative term. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The specification fails to provide any examples or teachings to measure a degree without a precise numerical measurement. See MPEP § 2173.05(b). For examination purposes, it is being construed the step occurs at the same pressure.
Regarding claim 20, the recitation of “the liquid butane comprises greater than 50%, 65%, 80%, 90%, 95%, or 98% n-butane and isobutane” renders the claim indefinite, in view of the, seemingly, controlling definition provided to the term “liquid butane” provided at paragraph 16 of the originally-filed specification. For examination purposes, it is being interpreted the requirements of the claim, as consistent with the specification, are directed to liquid butane comprising greater than 80%, 90%, 95%, or 98% n-butane and isobutane.
Regarding claim 21, the recitation of “the liquid butane comprises greater than 90%, 95%, 98% or 99% n-butane, isobutane, propane, and ethane” renders the claim indefinite, in view of the, seemingly, controlling definition provided to the term “liquid butane” provided at paragraph 16 of the originally-filed specification. For examination purposes, it is being interpreted the requirements of the claim, as consistent with the specification, are directed to liquid butane comprising greater than 90%, 95%, 98% or 99% n-butane and isobutane, with the remaining comprised of propane and ethane.
Regarding claim 22,
the recitation of “the liquid butane comprises: i) greater than 50%, 65%, 80%, 90%, 95%, or 98% n-butane and isobutane; and ii) greater than 90%, 95%, 98% or 99% n-butane, isobutane, propane, and ethane” renders the claim indefinite, in view of the, seemingly, controlling definition provided to the term “liquid butane” provided at paragraph 16 of the originally-filed specification. More so, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, the claim recites the broad recitation “greater than 50%, 65%, 80%, 90%, 95%, or 98% n-butane and isobutane” and the claim also recites “greater than 90%, 95%, 98% or 99% n-butane, isobutane, propane, and ethane” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. For examination purposes, it is being interpreted the requirements of the claim, as consistent with the specification, are directed to liquid butane comprising greater than 90%, 95%, 98% or 99% n-butane and isobutane, with the remaining comprised of propane and ethane.
Regarding claim 29,
the phrase "optionally greater than 30 psig", in lines 3-4, 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 examination purposes, it is being interpreted the claim does not require the limitation.
the phrase "optionally greater than 300 psig", in line 5, 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 examination purposes, it is being interpreted the claim does not require the limitation.
Claim 30 depends from rejected claim 29, and thereby, are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Regarding claim 31,
the phrase "optionally greater than 30 psig", in lines 4-5, 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 examination purposes, it is being interpreted the claim does not require the limitation.
the phrase "optionally greater than 300 psig", in lines 8-9, 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 examination purposes, it is being interpreted the claim does not require the limitation.
Claim 32 depends from rejected claim 31, and thereby, are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-30 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art, when considered as a whole, alone or in combination, fails to reasonably disclose, teach, and/or otherwise suggest the requirements of the claimed inventions set forth in independent claims 1, 29, and 31, and the dependents thereof. Particularly, the prior art fails to reasonably disclose, teach, and/or otherwise suggest, “ a) providing a pressurized butane storage tank comprising a liquid consisting essentially of butane and a gaseous headspace, wherein the tank comprises a liquid inlet port and a liquid outlet port in fluid communication with the liquid and a gas inlet port and a gas outlet port in fluid communication with the gaseous headspace” (claim 1), “removing butane from a gaseous nitrogen headspace in a pressurized butane storage tank…b) compressing the nitrogen to a second pressure optionally greater than 300 psig and a temperature greater than the condensation point of butane at the second pressure; c) condensing butane from the nitrogen by reducing the temperature of the nitrogen below the condensation point of butane at the second pressure while maintaining the nitrogen in a gaseous state” (claim 29), and “removing butane from a gaseous nitrogen headspace in a pressurized butane storage tank…c) a compressor in fluid communication with the means for releasing, capable of increasing the pressure of the gaseous nitrogen to a second pressure optionally greater than 300 psig and a temperature greater than the condensation point of butane at the second pressure; d) a condenser in fluid communication with the compressor, capable of condensing butane from the nitrogen by reducing the temperature of the nitrogen below the condensation point of butane while maintaining the nitrogen in a gaseous state” (claim 31), in addition to the other requirements of the respective independent claims. Absent some teaching, motivation, and suggestion to modify the prior art to meet the requirements of the claimed inventions, a prima facie case of obviousness cannot be established. As such, the prior art neither anticipates nor renders obvious, absent impermissible hindsight reasoning, the claimed inventions for the reasons provided above.
Conclusion
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 6/22/2026
JENNA M. MARONEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights