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 Status
Claim 11 has been canceled. Claims 1-10 and 12-13 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 8 provides an optional element, “an optional secondary membrane,” see last three lines of claim 8. Claim 8 will be interpreted broadly as not including the secondary membrane.
Vacuum pressure is any pressure under atmospheric and doesn’t represent a complete or total vacuum if any such complete vacuum could be deemed obtainable.
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 1-10 and 12-13 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.
Claim 1, first three lines fails to properly provide a preamble because the preamble does not properly designate the beginning of the body of claim 1 by stating “the tank comprising:” The preamble ends with a colon rather abruptly.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the corrugations" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The previous reference to “a corrugation” in line 17 doesn’t support more than one corrugation. Suggestion: Introduce corrugations in each interstitial space between the areas. The interpretation is that there are at least three areas and at least two corrugations.
In lines 16-18, applicant is attempting to differentiate smooth parts or areas 30 from corrugations 31. A corrugation 31 has curved or double curved (where corrugations intersect) shape. Areas of flat, curved or double curved shape doesn’t properly differentiate from the shape of the corrugation. This is not effective because there is no differentiation between the areas and the corrugations. Suggestion: Describe the smooth parts or areas 30 as having diminished variation in height as compared to the corrugations. Claim 1 lacks clarity and is indefinite.
For similar reasons, claim 13 lacks clarity and is indefinite in that line 2-5 attempts to describe the dimensions and shape of the blocks of insulation as matching the shape of the flat, curved or double curved primary membrane areas when the corrugations have curved and double curved shapes.
Regarding claims 6, the phrases “if present” renders the claim indefinite because the claim asks if the structure is required rather than stating the limitation as a requirement and because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See claim 6, line 3. The metes and bounds of claim 6 are not accurately described.
Claim 8 has been written as an independent claim. Claim 8 is a dependent claim and depends from claim 1. Every element introduced in claim 1 should not have been reintroduced in claim 8. In line 1, “a membrane tank” should be “the membrane tank.” In line 3, “an insulation layer” should be “the insulation layer.” The number of elements reintroduced is too numerous to identify each individually.
Many of these rejections are being repeated with no apparent argument provided by applicant. Applicant is not taking the Office’s action and statements seriously.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Ducloy et al. (US 2018/0112823) (Ducloy).
Ducloy discloses a membrane tank, the tank comprising: a primary membrane (7), an insulation layer (5) and an outer structure (carrying structure 3, see Fig. 1, 2, 3); additionally, there is at least one opening (sealed conduit 42) for loading and unloading fluid, the primary membrane comprises areas of flat, curved and double curved shape and corrugations (see cross sections of Fig. 1 and 3 wherein upper ripples in membrane 7 are shown, see corrugations 40, 41 as shown in Fig. 2 providing a grid pattern to upper surface of sheets 39 of membrane 7, the corrugations that are curved and double curved in shape as shown in cross sections of Fig. 1 and 3, a coupling part (conduits 46 and passages 45) connects a vacuum pump to the insulation layer (5), see Fig. 3 and paragraph [95], lines 1-7 indicating that a vacuum or evacuation pump connects to passages 45 to evacuate insulation layer (5). Claim 1 is interpreted insofar as understood.
Re claim 2, the corrugations have a shape, as seen in cross section, of a cosine function or a natural buckling function, resulting in that a minimum of elastic energy is stored in the corrugations by thermally induced contraction when cooling down the membrane tank upon loading cryogenic fluid, resulting in only elastic stresses in the corrugations by the thermally induced contraction.
Re claim 3, the actual stretching delta e and delta f upon cooling of the primary membrane by delta T, with initial corrugation spans e and f at ambient temperature, wherein c and d are dimensions between the respective corrugations, are as follows:
delta e = e-T – e = c – cT = -c alpha delta T, and
delta f = fT – f = -d alpha delta T
wherein alpha is the secant modulus (coefficient) of thermal expansion for the primary membrane.
Re claim 4, the shape of crossing corrugations complies with a superimposed shape of the corrugations, without sharp bends or corners and without double folding, enabling simple die forming.
Re claim 5, further comprising a secondary membrane (4) that is fluid tight, dividing the insulation into two insulation layers (primary barrier 5 and secondary barrier 1), an inner-primary insulation layer 5 and an outer-secondary insulation layer 1, wherein the membranes are identical or different.
Re claim 6, interpreting the claim insofar as understood claim 6 represents the addition of the coupling part for connecting a vacuum pump and arranged for providing vacuum to the inner primary layer 5 as is already the requirement of claim 1.
Re claim 7, comprising membrane sections with corrugations, formed by die pressing or otherwise, with section sides at maximum distance from corrugation crossings, such as in or near the center of the section area, with section sides perpendicular to corrugations extending out through the sides.
Re claim 8, a method of building a membrane tank according to claim 1, comprising: to build an insulation layer, wherein the insulation layer is arranged on an inner side of an outer structure, such as a ship hull or bulkhead or other loadbearing structure on land or at sea to surround the insulation on the outside; to build or arrange at least one opening for loading and unloading of fluid; to build and arrange a primary membrane that is fluid tight on the insulation surface, wherein the outer structure supports the inside insulation and primary membrane and carries the resulting forces thereby, and the membrane is containing for example a cryogenic fluid, wherein the membrane comprises areas of flat, curved or double curved shape, said the areas are fastened to the underlaying insulation, the membrane further comprising a corrugation in between said the areas for taking up thermally induced strain; and wherein the method further comprises to arrange a coupling part for connecting a vacuum pump operatively to the insulation layer, for enabling vacuum in the insulation layer, between the primary membrane and the outer structure or between the primary membrane and an optional secondary membrane, during loading, containment and unloading of cryogenic fluid or other fluid.
Re claim 9, the method wherein the membrane is shaped with corrugations in between areas of flat, curved or double curved shape, said the areas are fastened to the underlaying insulation, wherein the corrugations have a shape, as seen in cross section, of a cosine function or a buckling function, wherein a minimum of elastic energy is stored in the corrugations during forming as well as by thermally induced stretching of the corrugation when cooling down the tank upon loading cryogenic fluid, resulting in a minimum of stress in the corrugations by the stretching.
Re claim 10, the method wherein the primary membrane is formed as plate sections that are joined by welding or otherwise to complete the membrane, wherein crossing corrugations are at the center and/or within the sides of the plate sections, such that plate sections are joined only at maximum distance from crossing corrugations, and the corrugations are preferably formed by plastic die pressing or similar pressing operations, preferably with sides perpendicular to corrugations extending out through the sides, wherein residual stresses from forming of the corrugations may be reduced by appropriate heat and stress relief treatment methods and, geometric shape corrections, before welding or joining otherwise into a complete fluid tight membrane.
Re claim 12, the fluids comprise cryogenic fluid.
Re claim 13, the insulation layer comprises blocks of insulation as shown in Fig. 1, the blocks match the dimensions of the membrane areas. Claim 13 is interpreted insofar as understood.
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ducloy in view of Deletre et al. (US 2022/0373133) (Deletre).
If “if present” (in line 3 of claim 6) is deemed or interpreted to positively describe the presence of an outer-secondary insulation layer and that the coupling part must also connect to said outer-secondary insulation layer, then Ducloy discloses the outer-secondary insulation layer 1 but doesn’t disclose that the coupling part connects to said outer-secondary insulation layer. Deletre teaches in paragraph [97], lines 8-16, the importance of maintaining an inert atmosphere and the creation of a vacuum in the secondary thermally insulating barrier 7. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to extend the coupling part (conduits 46 and passages 45) to the said outer-secondary insulation layer to maintain an inert atmosphere, prevent explosive gas concentration and to increase the insulative effectiveness of said outer-secondary insulation layer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections had an impact on the Office such that the Office further searched the invention to find more pertinent prior art. New grounds of rejection have been made to address the claims.
The previous rejections could have been maintained to address certain claims but the Office’s decision is that more pertinent references would be easier to explain and or rejected a broader spectrum of claims. Applicant’s interpretation of the claim is narrower than the Office’s interpretation.
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 STEPHEN J CASTELLANO whose telephone number is (571)272-4535. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
sjc/STEPHEN J CASTELLANO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Prosecution Insights