DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-18 were filed with the amendment on 12/22/2025.
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 11/07/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 132 (“I/O block” is missing in Fig 6, see also page 7, line 11).
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. 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 Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, the phrase “in an reclaim mode” should be changed to in [[an]] a reclaim mode” to correct a typographical error. Appropriate correction is required.
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 12, 14, 15, and 16 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 12 recites the limitation "the first pressure" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 12 depends from claim 1. It is not clear if claim 12 should be construed as if it is written as “a first pressure” or if claim 12 should be changed to depend from claim 10 (see claim 10, line 7). For purposes of examination, the phrase will be considered to be “a first pressure.”
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the second pressure" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 12 depends from claim 1. It is not clear if claim 12 should be construed as if it is written as “a second pressure” or if claim 12 should be changed to depend from claim 10 (see claim 10, line 10). For purposes of examination, the phrase will be considered to be “a second pressure.”
With regard to claim 14, the phrase “the pressurizing outlet” in line 3 renders the claim indefinite and confusing. Claim 14 introduces a “further pressurizing outlet” in line 2. It is not clear if line 3 is referring to the newly introduced further pressurizing outlet or to the pressurizing outlet introduced in claim 1. As best understood, claim 14 will be construed as if line 3 states: “the further pressurizing outlet.”
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the purge valve" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the claim will be construed as if it is written as “a purge valve.”
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the step (b)" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 16 depends from claim 14. It is not clear if claim 16 should be changed so that it states: “further comprising operating the compressor” or if claim 16 should be changed to depend from claim 15. For purposes of examination, claim 16 will be construed as if it depends from claim 15.
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.
Claims 1, 3- 7, and 12 (as far as they are definite and understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO2021/083471 (hereinafter “Sinding”).
With regard to claim 1, Sinding discloses a hydrogen pressurizing rig (Fig 2) for pressurizing a storage tank (20a), the hydrogen pressurizing rig comprising: a compressor (19) comprising a compressor inlet (at 17; [0078]) and a compressor outlet (at 8); a supply inlet (at junction of 17 and 5a/5b, see annotated Fig 2) coupled or couplable to a hydrogen source (6a) (para [0078]), the supply inlet (at junction of 17 and 5a/5b, see annotated Fig 2) fluidly coupled or couplable with the compressor inlet (17, see Fig 2); a pressurizing outlet (18a, see annotated Fig 2) for coupling to a storage tank (20a, para [0109]) to be pressurized, the pressurizing outlet (18a) fluidly coupled or couplable with the compressor outlet (8, see Fig 2); a first pressure sensor (14, para [0092] [0103]) disposed for sensing a pressure during pressurizing of the storage tank (20a) and for outputting a first pressure signal based on the sensed pressure (para [0092]), the first pressure signal being indicative of a pressure within the storage tank (because pressure downstream of compressor, it is “indicative of” pressure at storage tank, see fig 2) (para [0038]: “it is advantageous to provide the pressure detection means in the compressor outlet line in that the pressure in this compressor outlet line may be assumed to represent the pressure directly at the outlet of the compressor”); and a controller (9) (para [0017]) coupled to receive the pressure signal (para [0005] [0079]), and being programmed and configured to control operation of the compressor (19) such that, in use, the compressor (19) pumps hydrogen from the supply inlet (at junction of 17 and 5a/5b, see annotated Fig 2) into the storage tank (20a) via the pressurizing outlet (18a, see annotated Fig 2), such that a pressure ramp rate indicated by the pressure signal does not exceed a predetermined pressure ramp rate (para [0040] and see paras [0106]-[0108]).
PNG
media_image1.png
864
880
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 3, Sinding discloses a metering valve (11a) fluidly coupled between the compressor outlet (8) and the pressurizing outlet (18a), the metering valve (11a) being connected for control by the controller (9) so as to modulate a rate at which hydrogen is supplied to the storage tank (20a) (para [0075]: “The controller is configured for controlling the valves and thereby the fluid path from the hydrogen storage module to the dispensing module”).
With regard to claim 4, Sinding discloses a second pressure sensor (additional pressure sensor in 2, not shown, see para [0108]) disposed for sensing a pressure of the hydrogen source (6a/2) to which the supply inlet (at junction of 17 and 5a/5b, see annotated Fig 2) is coupled, and for outputting a second pressure signal based on the sensed pressure (second signal from additional pressure sensor), wherein the controller (9) is configured to control the metering valve (11a) to modulate the rate at which hydrogen is supplied to the storage tank (para [0074]) based at least in part on a difference between the first and second pressure signals (para [0108]: “the pressure level may be determined by pressor sensors (not illustrated) of the storage 2”).
With regard to claim 5, Sinding discloses that the controller (9) is configured to operate the compressor (19) only in the event that a difference between the first pressure signal and the second pressure signal is insufficient to cause hydrogen to flow from the hydrogen source (6a) to the storage tank (20a) at an acceptable rate (see paras [0039] [0040]).
With regard to claim 6, Sinding discloses that the pressurizing outlet (junction of 8 and 12a/12b, see annotated fig 2) comprises a plurality of pressurizing connectors (nozzles 10a, 10b), each of the pressurizing connectors being configured for attachment to a different type of storage tank and/or connector (as so broadly recited and as similar to different connectors of application, nozzles 10a and 10b are configured to attach to different types of storages tanks because they can attach to different vehicles as shown in Fig 2 at 30a, 30b).
With regard to claim 7, Sinding discloses that the supply inlet (at junction of 17 and 5a/5b, see annotated Fig 2) comprises a plurality of supply connectors (5a and 5b connecting to 6a, 6b), each of the supply connectors (at 5a/5b connections to 6a/6b) being configured for attachment to a different type of hydrogen source and/or connector (different types of hydrogen source: 6a is low-pressure tank; 6b is medium-pressure tank, see para [0087]).
With regard to claim 12, as far as it is definite and understood, Sinding discloses that a first pressure is a minimum conditioned operating pressure and/or a second pressure is lower than a minimum in- service rated pressure of the storage tank (as the claim is so broadly recited, second pressure is “threshold value”, see para [0007]).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/083471 (hereinafter “Sinding”) in view of U.S. Pat. No. 10,466,722 (“Mortensen”).
With regard to claim 2, Sinding discloses all the claimed features with the exception of explicitly disclosing a user interface for receiving user input and providing it to the controller, wherein the predetermined pressure ramp rate is selectable by way of the user interface.
Mortensen teaches that it is known in the art to modify a hydrogen pressurizing rig for pressurizing a storage tank (see abstract) to include a user interface (“UI” see col. 11, line 4) for receiving user input and providing it to the controller, wherein the predetermined pressure ramp rate is selectable by way of the user interface (see col. 11, lines 3-12: “a user is initiating a refueling via the user interface UI e.g. by payment which is registered by both the safety controller 12 and the process controller 13. The safety controller 12 then uses information from e.g. from a valve positioners 18b to determine when starter pressure is obtained. In the same way information from valve positioner and pressure sensors 18B can be used to determine when a shift in hydrogen storage (used for the refueling) and when the refueling ends”; selects predetermined pressure ramp rate by selecting a fill option).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to add a user interface, such as taught by Mortensen, in the rig of Sinding for the purpose of allowing a user to control refueling (see col. 11, lines 3-12).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/083471 (hereinafter “Sinding”) in view of WO2010/038069 (hereinafter “Hillier”).
With regard to claim 8, Sinding discloses all the claimed features with the exception of disclosing a frame to which the supply inlet, the pressurizing outlet, and the compressor are mounted, the hydrogen pressurizing rig being portable.
Hillier teaches that it is known in the art to modify a hydrogen pressurizing rig (see abstract), similar to that of Sinding, to include a frame (trailer 1) to which the supply inlet (3), the pressurizing outlet (5), and the compressor (12) are mounted, the hydrogen pressurizing rig being portable (“mobile trailer” – see abstract and Fig 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
548
856
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the hydrogen pressurizing rig of Sinding to be on a mobile/portable frame, such as taught by Hillier, for the purpose of allowing any site to be a hydrogen supply without a big investment as taught by Hillier (see abstract).
With regard to claim 9, (which depends from claim 8) the combination of Sinding and Hillier disclose one or more ground wheels (shown in Fig 1, see annotated Fig 1) mounted to the frame for allowing the hydrogen fueling rig to be wheeled over ground (“mobile trailer” see abstract).
Claims 10, 11, 15, and 16 (as far as claim 16 is definite and understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/083471 (hereinafter “Sinding”) in view of U.S. Pat. No. 6,314,981 (“Mayzou”).
With regard to claim 10, Sinding discloses all the claimed features with the exception of disclosing a purge valve fluidly coupled with the pressurizing outlet and controllable by the controller, the hydrogen fueling rig being configured to operate in a mode for purging of a storage tank that contains a gas other than hydrogen, in which the controller is configured to:(a) control the purge valve so as to partially purge a storage tank to which the pressurizing outlet is coupled, such that a pressure indicated by the pressure signal does not fall below a first pressure; and(c) repeat steps (a) and (b) a plurality of times; wherein either or step (a) or step (b) may be performed first.
Sinding does disclose that the valves are controlled by the controller (9) (para [0006]) and that the (b) controller partially fill the storage tank (20a) with hydrogen from a hydrogen source (6A) to which the supply inlet is coupled, such that a pressure indicated by the pressure signal does not rise above a second pressure (threshold, para [0007]);
Mayzou teaches that it is known in the art to modify a hydrogen (col. 3, lines 45-48) pressurizing rig, similar to that of Sinding, to include a purge valve (V2) fluidly coupled with the pressurizing outlet (at 9), the hydrogen fueling rig being configured to operate in a mode for purging of a storage tank that contains a gas other than hydrogen (impurities, col. 2, lines 58-67), in which the controller is configured to:(a) control the purge valve (V2) so as to partially purge a storage tank (B) to which the pressurizing outlet (at 9, see fig) is coupled, such that a pressure indicated by the pressure signal (at 10) does not fall below a first pressure (col. 3, lines 1-27; 48-63; col. 4, lines 8-18).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to utilize a purge mode with a purge valve, such as taught by Mayzou, in the rig of Sinding for the purpose of removing unwanted impurities (col. 3, lines 11-15).
The combination of Sinding and Mayzou discloses all the claimed features with the exception of explicitly disclosing repeat steps (a) and (b) a plurality of times; wherein either or step (a) or step (b) may be performed first.
It would have been a matter of obvious design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to duplicate the steps of (a) and (b) for filling and purging the gas in order to arrive at a desired purity level and fill level, and because repeating the steps does not appear to provide any unexpected results.
With regard to claim 11, the combination of Sinding and Mayzou as set forth above for claim 10 discloses that the step (b) comprises operating the compressor (19 in Sinding).
With regard to claim 15, Sinding discloses a hydrogen pressurizing rig (1) comprising: a compressor (19); a first pressure sensor (14) disposed downstream of the compressor (19) for sensing a pressure of gas within a storage tank (20a) and for outputting a first pressure signal based on the sensed pressure (para [0092]), the first pressure signal being indicative of a pressure within the storage tank (because pressure downstream of compressor, it is “indicative of” pressure at storage tank, see fig 2) (para [0038]: “it is advantageous to provide the pressure detection means in the compressor outlet line in that the pressure in this compressor outlet line may be assumed to represent the pressure directly at the outlet of the compressor”), the first pressure signal being indicative of that pressure; and a controller (9) coupled to receive the pressure signal ((para [0017]) coupled to receive the pressure signal (para [0005] [0079]); and that the rig is configured to operate in a mode where the (b) controller partially fill the storage tank (20a) with hydrogen from a hydrogen source (6A) to which the supply inlet is coupled, such that a pressure indicated by the pressure signal does not rise above a second pressure (threshold, para [0007]).
Sinding discloses all the claimed features with the exception of disclosing the hydrogen pressurization rig being configured to operate in a purge mode for purging of a storage tank that contains a gas other than hydrogen, in which the controller is configured to: (a) control the purge valve so as to partially purge a storage tank to which the hydrogen fueling rig is coupled, such that a pressure indicated by the pressure signal does not fall below a first pressure; (b) partially fill the storage tank with hydrogen from a hydrogen source to which the hydrogen fueling rig is coupled, such that a pressure indicated by the pressure signal does not rise above a second pressure; and (c) repeat steps (a) and (b) a plurality of times; wherein either or step (a) or step (b) may be performed first.
Mayzou teaches that it is known in the art to modify a hydrogen (col. 3, lines 45-48) pressurizing rig, similar to that of Sinding, to include a purge valve (V2) fluidly coupled with the pressurizing outlet (at 9), the hydrogen fueling rig being configured to operate in a mode for purging of a storage tank that contains a gas other than hydrogen (impurities, col. 2, lines 58-67), in which the controller is configured to:(a) control the purge valve (V2) so as to partially purge a storage tank (B) to which the pressurizing outlet (at 9, see fig) is coupled, such that a pressure indicated by the pressure signal (at 10) does not fall below a first pressure (col. 3, lines 1-27; 48-63; col. 4, lines 8-18).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to utilize a purge mode with a purge valve, such as taught by Mayzou, in the rig of Sinding for the purpose of removing unwanted impurities (col. 3, lines 11-15).
The combination of Sinding and Mayzou discloses all the claimed features with the exception of explicitly disclosing repeat steps (a) and (b) a plurality of times; wherein either or step (a) or step (b) may be performed first.
It would have been a matter of obvious design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to duplicate the steps of (a) and (b) for filling and purging the gas in order to arrive at a desired purity level and fill level, and because repeating the steps does not appear to provide any unexpected results.
With regard to claim 16, (as far as it is definite and understood – as set forth above in the 35 USC 112b rejection, claim 16 is construed as if it depends from claim 15), the combination of Sinding and Mayzou as set forth above for claim 15 discloses that the step (b) comprises operating the compressor (19 in Sinding).
Claims 13, 14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/083471 (hereinafter “Sinding”) in view of EP 1850060 (hereinafter “Liegeois”).
With regard to claim 13, Sinding discloses all the claimed features with the exception of disclosing the rig being operable in a reclaim mode in which the controller controls the compressor such that it extracts hydrogen from a storage tank to which it is coupled, the storage tank storing hydrogen for fueling a vehicle.
Sinding discloses storage tanks (20a, 20b) for storing hydrogen (see abstract).
Liegeois teaches that it is known in the art to modify a gaseous pressurizing rig (similar to that of Sinding) to include the rig being operable in a reclaim mode in which the controller controls the compressor (7, para [0035]) such that it extracts fuel gas from a storage tank to which it is coupled, the storage tank storing fuel gas for fueling a vehicle (see para [0025]: “purging the CNG tank of the first vehicle 10 is implemented to directly supply the CNG tank of a second vehicle 20”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to utilize a reclaim mode, such as taught by Liegeois, in the rig of Sinding for the purpose of permitting a purge of the fuel gas without releasing a significant amount of the fuel gas into the atmosphere and to allow for easy recover of the fuel gas (see paras [0004] [0005]).
With regard to claim 14, Sinding discloses a further pressurizing outlet (18b) for coupling to a storage tank (20b) to be pressurized (see Fig 2), the further pressurizing outlet fluidly (18b) coupled or couplable with the compressor outlet (8, see Fig 2); at least one valve (11a or 11b) controllable by the controller (9) for reconfiguring a fluid connection to at least one of the pressurizing outlets (18a or 18b) such that it is fluidly connected to the compressor inlet (17).
Sinding discloses all the claimed features with the exception of disclosing that hydrogen can be reclaimed from a storage tank through the reconfigured pressurizing outlet, and used by the compressor to pressurize a storage tank through one of the pressurizing outlets that is not reconfigured.
Liegeois teaches that it is known in the art to modify a gaseous pressurizing rig (similar to that of Sinding) to include the rig being operable in a reclaim mode in which hydrogen can be reclaimed from a storage tank through the reconfigured pressurizing outlet (see para [0025]) , and used by the compressor (7, para [0035]) to pressurize a storage tank through one of the pressurizing outlets that is not reconfigured (see para [0025]: “purging the CNG tank of the first vehicle 10 is implemented to directly supply the CNG tank of a second vehicle 20”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to utilize a reclaim mode, such as taught by Liegeois, in the rig of Sinding for the purpose of permitting a purge of the fuel gas without releasing a significant amount of the fuel gas into the atmosphere and to allow for easy recover of the fuel gas (see paras [0004] [0005]).
With regard to claim 17, the combination discloses that the controller (9 in Sinding) is configured to control the compressor (19) such that a pressure ramp rate indicated by the pressure signal does not exceed a predetermined pressure ramp rate (para [0040] and see paras [0106]-[0108]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/083471 (hereinafter “Sinding”).
With regard to claim 18, Sinding discloses a first hydrogen pressurizing rig according to claim 1 that outputs hydrogen at a first pressure (inherently provides at a pressure).
Sinding discloses all the claimed features with the exception of disclosing a second hydrogen pressurizing rig according to any one of the preceding claims; wherein the second hydrogen pressurizing rig further compresses the hydrogen and outputs it at a second pressure that is higher than the first pressure.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to make a second hydrogen pressurizing ring according to claim 1 as the mere duplication of parts has not patentable significant and does not provide an unexpected result. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the second hydrogen pressurizing rig output hydrogen at any suitable pressure, such as a pressure higher than the first pressure, in order to provide the hydrogen at a desired pressure and output for a particular use or for a different recipient.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2013/0014854 discloses a hydrogen pressurizing rig.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA CAHILL whose telephone number is (571)270-5219. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 6:30 to 3:00.
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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-60073607 or Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
/JESSICA CAHILL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753