6ETAILED 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 .
Responsive to correspondence
This office action is in response to correspondence filed on 08/21/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 08/21/2024, 10/30/2024 were filed before the first action on the merits. This submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Accordingly, the IDSs have been fully considered by the Office.
Abstract
The abstract filed 08/21/2024 appears to be acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2020/125868 A1 to VOLKMER (VOLKMER).
Re: Claim 1;
VOLKMER discloses:
A system for stabilization of an electricity grid (¶0002: “method and a device for stabilizing a power network") , the system comprising:
a gas generator for a gaseous fuel (See Fig. 1: see "store current withdrawal" from the power network, thus "K4 electrolysis" to "hydrogen", and "methane synthesis" and storage in the "natural gas network"), the gas generator being fed from the electricity grid ( See Fig.1: gas generator is fed from power network as shown); and
a connection pipe (¶0030: connection pipes are implied) that leads into a cavern ( See Fig.1: ¶0030: energy storage NGN as shown) , wherein energy is stored by introducing the gaseous fuel (See Fig. 1: see "store current withdrawal" from the power network, thus "K4 electrolysis" to "hydrogen", thus "methane synthesis" and storage in the "natural gas network") generated by the gas generator (as shown in figure 1) into the cavern (See Fig.1: : "synth. natural gas" with arrow to natural gas network) via the connection pipe[[ (4)]], and
wherein the gaseous fuel is withdrawn from the cavern (See Fig.1: "natural gas" with arrow to "K1-GuD-KW") for extraction of energy, wherein the connection pipe (See Fig.1: connection pipe from “NGN to K1-GuD-KW” to NGN is typically dual directional since the gas is fed into NGN and exits from the NGN to "K1-GuD-KW" ) is configured as a dual-directional conduit leading into the cavern , and comprises a filling conduit (See Fig.1: "synth. natural gas" with arrow to natural gas network) and a withdrawal conduit (See Fig.1: "natural gas" with arrow to "K1-GuD-KW").
Re: Claim 2;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, wherein the dual-directional conduit [[ (5)]] is configured for continuous feeding (See Fig.1: "synth. natural gas" with arrow to natural gas network), independently the withdrawing of gaseous fuel, and/or for continuous withdrawal , independently of the continuous feeding (See Fig.1: "natural gas" with arrow to "K1-GuD-KW").
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/125868 A1 to VOLKMER (VOLKMER) as applied to claim 1 above combined with the following reasons.
Re: Claim 3;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, wherein multiple different use units for the gaseous fuel withdrawn from the cavern are connected to the withdrawal conduit. VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1including use of withdrawal conduit, further withdrawing fuel from cavern for multiple uses is simply an intended use of fuel via a junction conduits/pipes, which is merely a matter of design option in a system to supply fuel to multiple locations from a fuel storage. It would have been therefore, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to withdraw fuel from fuel storage via a junction manifold of conduits/pipes to deliver fuel to multiple locations. Furthermore, it has been held that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” (see MPEP 2114 II).
Re: Claim 16;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, VOLKMER discloses wherein a distance between the filling conduit and the withdrawal conduit is between three times and thirty times; the diameter of the filing conduit and the withdrawal conduit.
Although VOKMER discloses filling conduit and a withdrawal conduit , however does not discloses a specific distance between three times and thirty times the diameter of the filing conduit and the withdrawal conduit, however such sizes and dimensions are specific to the system requirement, and merely a matter of design choices, it would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to opt for different sizes and dimensions of filling and withdrawal conduits deepening on the system requirement. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144 II A).
Claim(s) 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/125868 A1 to VOLKMER (VOLKMER) as applied to claim 1 above , and further in view of U.S Publication number 2022/0010931 A1 to PRATT et a. (PRATT).
Re: Claims 4-6;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 3, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 3, and further discloses multiple conduits for multiple different use units, although VOLKMER is silent regarding specific system as claimed “wherein the multiple different use units are connected to the withdrawal conduit via at least one switchable gas manifold, wherein the gaseous fuel withdrawn flows to one of the multiple different use unit according to a switching state of the at least one switchable gas manifold” (as claimed in claim 4), “wherein the at least one switchable gas manifold is configured for switching of sub-streams of the withdrawn gaseous fuel” as claimed in claimed in claim 5, and “wherein the at least one switchable gas manifold is switchable during continuous withdrawal of the gaseous fuel” as claimed in claim 6.
However, such a switchable gas manifold is well known in the art, such that gas manifold supplies gas to multiple users selectively to different multiple users, such a system is explicitly taught by U.S Publication number 2022/0010931 A1 to PRATT et a. (PRATT: See Fig.1: ¶0037-¶0038) which explicitly teaches that gas supply from gas storage may be supplied selectively , further regarding continuous withdrawal is merely an option of “selectively” depending upon user/system requirement. It would have been therefore, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure VOLKMER to withdraw fuel from fuel storage via a junction manifold of conduits/pipes to deliver fuel to multiple locations selectively depending on the user requirement as explicitly taught by PRATT.
Re: Claim 7;
VOLKMER modified by PRATT discloses:
The system of claim 4, modified VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and wherein one of the multiple different use units (see rejection of claims 3-6 above) is an apparatus for reconversion of the withdrawn gaseous fuel to power, and wherein the apparatus is a fuel cell or combined heat and power plant that generates electrical power (PRATT: See Fig.1: ¶0014: One or more of the pressure zones may be in fluid communication with a fuel gas end use device such as a fuel cell, motor, engine, reformer, burner, or the like) and releases [[it]] the electrical power to an output conduit for connection to the electricity grid (VOLKMER: See Fig.1: electrical power is supplied to electric grid from stored SNG ) or a consumer.
Re: Claim 8;
VOLKMER modified by PRATT discloses:
The system of claim 4, modified VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and wherein one of the multiple different use units is a methanation plant configured to synthesize methane by means of hydrogen.
The modified VOLKMER discloses all the structural limitations of claims 4, claim 8 is merely directed to intended use of the apparatus of claim 4 as claimed. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” (see MPEP 2114 II). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure modified VOLKMER deliver fuel gas from storage to different users for putting the fuel gas to work. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure modified VOLKMER deliver fuel gas from storage to different intended users for putting the fuel gas to work.
Re: Claim 9;
VOLKMER modified by PRATT discloses:
The system of claim 4, modified VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 4, and that multiple user units may be positioned to be supplied with the fuel gas, as regards wherein one of the multiple different use units is a transfer point to a natural gas grid wherein the gaseous fuel withdrawn is released to the natural gas grid which is merely an intended use of the claimed apparatus of claim 4.
The modified VOLKMER discloses all the structural limitations of claims 4, claim 9 is merely directed to intended use of the apparatus of claim 4 as claimed. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” (see MPEP 2114 II). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure modified VOLKMER deliver fuel gas from storage to different intended users for putting the fuel gas to work.
Claim(s) 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/125868 A1 to VOLKMER (VOLKMER) as applied to claim 1 above , and further in view of U.S Publication number 2022/0010931 A1 to PRATT et a. (PRATT).
Re: Claim 12;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, VOLKMER is silent regarding:
wherein a switchable bypass conduit is connected to the filling conduit between the gas generator and the cavern , and wherein the switchable bypass conduit connects the gas generator and the cavern to the withdrawal conduit.
However, PRATT teaches:
wherein a switchable bypass conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: switchable bypass conduit via 198) is connected to the filling conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: filling conduit 187) between the gas generator (PRATT: See Fig. 1: ¶0015: the gas supply 102 may include fuel gas generator such as a reformer or an electrolyzer) and the cavern (PRATT: See Fig. 1: 166) , and wherein the switchable bypass conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: switchable bypass conduit via 198) connects the gas generator (PRATT: See Fig. 1: ¶0015: the gas supply 102 may include fuel gas generator such as a reformer or an electrolyzer) and the cavern (PRATT: See Fig. 1: 166) to the withdrawal conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: 191) .
It would have been therefore, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure VOLKMER to withdraw fuel from fuel storage via a junction manifold of conduits/pipes to deliver fuel to multiple locations more efficiently transport a fuel gas at a high pressure as taught by PRATT (PRATT: ¶0039).
Re: Claim 13;
VOLKMER modified by PRATT discloses:
The system of claim 1, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and that grid is connected to gas generator which is fed by the grid for electric needs of the system, VOLKMER is silent regarding a buffer accumulator (15) is fed by the electricity grid[[ (91)]] connected to the gas generator[[ (2)]] and is designed for rapid supply, power release, and/or power uptake.
However, it is well known in the art that battery/buffer accumulator may be employed as a buffer accumulator to stores electricity as a buffer and use such stored electricity at time of need as a buffer to keep operating the system, such a buffer accumulator is explicitly taught by U.S Publication number 2009/0048716 A1 to MARHEOFER which discloses a buffer accumulator/battery 106 to store electricity from grid 128 (MARHOEFER: ¶0057, 0059, ¶0060), configured to use electricity immediately when required. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure VOLKMER as explicitly taught by MARHEOFER, because MARHEOFER teaches that provision of such a buffer which stores electricity generated by renewable energy sources or acquired from the grid when the market price is low (MARHEOFER: ¶0054) which is cost effective and would have yielded similar benefits in the system of VOLKMER.
Re: Claim 14;
VOLKMER modified by PRATT discloses:
The system of claim 1, wherein the filling conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: filling conduit 187) and the withdrawal conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: 191) are connected to the cavern (PRATT: See Fig. 1: 166) with a spacing (PRATT: See Fig. 1: as shown there is a space between 187 and 192) between the filling conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: filling conduit 187) and the withdrawal conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: 191).
Re: Claim 15;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, VOLKMER is silent regarding:
wherein the filling conduit and the withdrawal conduit are adjacent .
However, PRATT teaches:
wherein the filling conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: filling conduit 187) and the withdrawal conduit (PRATT: See Fig. 1: 191) are adjacent .
It would have been therefore, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure VOLKMER to withdraw fuel from fuel storage via a junction manifold of conduits/pipes to deliver fuel to multiple locations more efficiently transport a fuel gas at a high pressure as taught by PRATT (PRATT: ¶0039).
Claim(s) 17-, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/125868 A1 to VOLKMER (VOLKMER) as applied to claim 1 above , and further in view of U.S Publication number 2011/0080035 A1 to BISHOP (BISHOP).
Re: Claim 17;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, VOLKMER is silent regarding:
wherein the filling conduit and the withdrawal conduit are connected to the cavern in a common drill shaft.
However, it is well known in the art that filling conduits and withdrawal conduits are positioned in a common drill shaft, such a common drill shaft is explicitly taught by U.S Publication number 2011/0080035 A1 to BISHOP (BISHOP: See Fig. 2: filling conduit 52 and withdrawal conduit 54 are within common drilled shaft B4 as shown in figure 2).
It would have been therefore, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure VOLKMER to provide filling and withdrawal conduits in a common drilled shaft as explicitly taught by BISHOP, since BISHOP discloses concentric well string serves as a pipe-in-pipe heat exchanger, which provides advantages--the production brine tends to retain its relatively warm temperature, which minimizes salting out in the production tubing (BISHOP: ¶0027).
Re: Claim 19;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, VOLKMER is silent regarding:
wherein the cavern is formed in a salt dome and/or is configured for an operating pressure of at least 40 bar.
Although VOLKMER is silent regarding wherein the cavern is formed in a salt dome and/or is configured for an operating pressure of at least 40 bar.
However, it is well known in the art that filling conduits and withdrawal conduits are formed in a salt dome and further discloses a pressure , such a system is explicitly taught by U.S Publication number 2011/0080035 A1 to BISHOP (BISHOP: See Fig. 2: ¶0029: salt dome M), further discloses a pressure, however does not disclose specific pressure of 40 bar, as regards pressure , the specific pressure is merely a matter of design choice depending on the system requirement which does not carry any patentable weight , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144 II A).
It would have been therefore, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure VOLKMER to provide a cavern in a salt dome having a pressure as explicitly taught by BISHOP, since BISHOP discloses an advantage that the production brine tends to retain its relatively warm temperature, which minimizes salting out in the production tubing (BISHOP: ¶0027).
Re: Claim 20;
VOLKMER modified by BISHOP discloses:
The system of claim 19, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 19, and
wherein the cavern is configured for an operating pressure of up to 200 bar. further discloses a pressure in a cavern, however does not disclose specific pressure of 200 bar in a cavern, the specific pressure is merely a matter of design choice depending on the system requirement which does not carry any patentable weight , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144 II A).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/125868 A1 to VOLKMER (VOLKMER) as applied to claim 1 above , and further in view of “Overview of Compressed Air Energy Storage Technology Development” to JIDAI et al. (JIDAI) or U.S Publication number 2021/0293221 A1 to HEWITT et al. (HEWITT).
Re: Claim 21;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, wherein the gaseous fuel is hydrogen.
VOLKMER is silent regarding:
wherein the gaseous fuel is hydrogen.
However, it is well known in the art that energy storage can be organized into several categories based on nature of the operation of a system and storage medium, such as primary fuel (such as coal, oil storage, etc.), intermediate fuel (such as gas, hydrogen, etc.), such a system is explicitly taught by “Overview of Compressed Air Energy Storage Technology Development” to JIDAI et al. (JIDAI: See page 2 of 22 lines 5-10 and table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ hydrogen gas in a cavern to be used as a fuel which would have yielded predictable results in the system of VOLKMER.
U.S Publication number 2021/0293221 A1 to HEWITT et al. also discloses use of hydrogen in a cavern and using the hydrogen as a fuel (HEWITT: See Fig. 1: ¶0014: cavern 13, Some or all of the hydrogen produced by the hydrogen production process may be used in at least one of the following ways: output externally of the energy storage system; output to an industrial process; output for bottling; used to form ammonia; used in another chemical process; used for one or more fuel cells ).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/125868 A1 to VOLKMER (VOLKMER) as applied to claim 1 above , and further in view of U.S Publication number 2022/0251935 A1 to VINEGAR et al (VINEGAR).
Re: Claim 18;
VOLKMER discloses:
The system of claim 1, VOLKMER discloses all the limitations of claim 1, VOLKMER is silent regarding:
wherein the filling conduit and the withdrawal conduit reach into the cavern] to different depths , and wherein the filling conduit reaches deeper into the cavern.
However, it is well known in the art that filling conduits and withdrawal conduits may be positioned at different heights are positioned in a common drill shaft, such a common drill shaft is explicitly taught by U.S Publication number 2022/0251935 A1 to VINEGAR et al (VINEGAR: See Fig. 2 A: ¶0083-¶0084-¶0086 filling conduit 112, 113 are deeper that withdrawal conduits 111 and 114 are within).
It would have been therefore, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure VOLKMER to provide filling conduit deeper that withdrawal conduits as explicitly taught by VINEGAR which would have yielded predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 10 contains an allowable subject matter because the prior art of record failed to disclose or teach “a controller for control power wherein the controller has an inlet for a signal for negative control power and is configured to actuate the gas generator such that a power corresponding to the negative control power is drawn from the electricity grid for production of gaseous fuel, and wherein the gaseous fuel is introduced into the cavern” in combination with the limitations of base claim and intervening claims.
Claim 11 is allowable by virtue its dependency on allowable claim 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAFIQ A MIAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4925. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am to 6:30 pm (Monday thru Thursday).
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, MARK LAURENZI can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/SHAFIQ MIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
July 9, 2026
Prosecution Insights