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 .
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because of the coloring of drawings making drawing interpretation difficult, such as in fig 2-4b and 9-12. Furthermore, drawings contain small writing which is difficult to read, such as in drawings 6-8c and 14a-18b Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 9, 12, 14, and 15 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 2 and 5, “natural gas” and “vaporized liquified natural gas” appear to refer to the same thing. Furthermore, claim 12, line 3 “boil-off gas” and claim 14, line 1, “a fuel source” appears to refer to the same thing as the above two despite all using different terminology.
Claim 9 and 10, “configurable” should read “configured”, as configurable appears to refer to a structural redesign, rather than being able to achieve the function through its current structure.
Claim 12, line 3, “one or more LNG storage tank” should read “one or more LNG storage tanks”.
Claim 15, line 1, “the system” should read “the power generation system”.
Claim 15, line 5, “at least one remote power sink” should read “the at least one remote power sink”.
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 3, 4, 5, 16, 17, 19, and 23 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 3 and 16 recite the limitation "the position" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4, 17, and 18 recite the limitation "the load drawn" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 17 and 19 recite the limitation "the first threshold power load". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 5, 19, and 23 recite the limitation "the second electrical power generating capacity". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 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.
Claims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (9771824) in view of Freund (US-Pub 2012/0000200).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses a power generation system (100, fig 1), comprising: a gas turbine (108, fig 1) to generate electrical power from combustion of natural gas; a generator (116, 136, fig 1) to generate electrical power from heat recovery; a gas supply line (line from 104 to 108 and 106, fig 1) for supplying vaporized liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the gas turbine (BOG in fig 1 stands for boil off gas, which is LNG which has vaporized into natural gas); a power supply subsystem (114, fig 1) to receive electrical power from at least one of the gas turbine or the generator and to supply power to at least one remote power sink (one of ship service load, hotel load, and propulsion load, fig 1); and a damper (120, fig 1) which, in a first position allows the gas turbine and the generator to operate together, and in a second position allows the gas turbine and generator to operate independently of each other (when 120 directs exhaust to 116 it powers the generator by supplying heat, when in a second position it delivers air to 126 where it they operate independently).
Park does not disclose an organic Rankine cycle (ORC) generator.
Freund discloses uses an organic Rankine cycle generator (16, fig 1) to produce power from the heat generated from a gas turbine exhaust gas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the steam powered waste heat recovery system disclosed by Park by using an organic Rankine cycle generator based on the teachings of Freund. Doing so would increase efficiency of heat recovery at lower grade heat from the exhaust due to its lower critical temperature relative to water (par. 0022), as suggested by Freund.
Regarding claim 2, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein the ORC generator has a first electrical power generation capacity and the gas turbine has a second electrical power generation capacity that is higher than the first electrical power generation capacity (col 8, lines 8-31, the total power available is 28.5 mw, while the total power available via just the generator is 8.5 MW, meaning that the gas turbine produces 20 MW which is more than the 8.5 generated by the generator).
Regarding claim 3, Park discloses a controller (122, fig 1) configured to control the position of the damper at either the first position or the second position (col 6, lines 37-47), in response to variation of a load drawn by the at least one remote power sink, (col 7, lines 24-26, the system of what is running includes controlling the damper settings which are controlled by overall power requirements).
Regarding claim 4, Park discloses wherein the controller is configured to position the damper at the first position when the load drawn by the at least one remote power sink is at or above a first threshold power load (fig 2, mode 2, when the power output is too much for mode 3 where the generator is not running the turbine directs gas to the generator meaning the damper would need to position the damper to allow that to happen) and to position the damper at the second position when the load drawn by the at least one remote power sink is below the first threshold power load (mode 3 the generator is bypassed meaning the damper would need to be moved while switching between the positions to allow it to do so).
Regarding claim 5, Park discloses wherein the first threshold power load corresponds to the second electrical power generation capacity (the mode shifts when the power requirement gets too high for the turbine, thus the threshold would be the second electrical power generation capacity).
Regarding claim 6, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein the gas turbine is arranged in selective fluid communication with a) an exhaust stack (126, fig 1) and b) the ORC generator (via heating unit 116, fig 1), whereby in the first position of the damper, a fluid flow path from the gas turbine to the exhaust stack is closed to gases exiting the gas turbine, and a fluid flow path from the gas turbine to the ORC generator is open, allowing the gases exiting the gas turbine to flow into the ORC generator (flowpath shown in fig. 1 with the arrows).
Regarding claim 7, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein in the second position of the damper, the fluid flow path from the gas turbine to the exhaust stack is open to permit the gases exiting the gas turbine to enter the exhaust stack, and the fluid flow path from the gas turbine to the ORC generator is closed to the gases exiting the gas turbine (the damper can close off the path 128 so that all flow exits the exhaust 126 which meets the claim).
Regarding claim 8, Park discloses wherein the damper comprises at least one air sealed damper (the damper prevents the flow of air; thus it would be an air sealed damper).
Regarding claim 9, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein the ORC generator includes a fresh air firing stack (air inlet of combustor 106, fig 1) and is configurable to generate electrical power from heat recovered from exhaust gases exiting the gas turbine and/or from gases entering the ORC generator via the fresh air firing stack (both dampers 120 and 132 can open to 128 so they can both power the generator).
Regarding claim 10, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein the ORC generator is configurable to generate electrical power from gases entering the ORC generator via the fresh air firing stack when a load drawn by the at least one remote power sink is below a second threshold power load (mode 4, the fresh air firing stack runs to the generator while the gas turbine is shut down).
Regarding claim 11, Park discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the fresh air firing stack is positioned downstream of the gas turbine. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the fresh air firing stack be downstream of the turbine rather than parallel, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 12, Park as modified by Freund discloses a supplementary burner (106, fig 1) arranged downstream of the fresh air firing stack and in fluid communication with at least one storage tank (arrow from 102 to 106, fig 1) to receive boil-off gas from one or more LNG storage tank; wherein the supplementary burner is adapted to burn the boil-off gas to generate supplemental heat for operation of the ORC generator (BOG is boil off gas, fig 1).
Regarding claim 13, Park as modified by Freund discloses a heat exchanger (116, fig 1, Park, which relates to 40 of Freund in the combination) configured to receive heated gases from the supplemental burner and for heating a working fluid of the ORC generator (modes 4-6, fig 2).
Regarding claim 14, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein a fuel source of the gas turbine generator and the ORC generator is LNG (col 1, lines 17-30).
Regarding claim 15, Park discloses the power system being installed on a vessel (col 1, lines 17-20), the vessel including a vessel frame, a hull around the vessel frame and defining fore and aft sections, and a deck supported by the vessel frame (these are all standard parts of a vessel and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the vessel to have these core components); wherein the power supply subsystem is configured to supply power to at least one remote power sink that is away from the vessel (due to the language configured to be, Park must merely be capable of preforming the claimed function, as the power generated is flexible, it would be capable of producing something away from the vessel, even as simple as running an extension cord to dock).
Regarding claim 16, Park as modified by Freund discloses controlling the position of the damper to be in either the first position allowing the gas turbine and the ORC generator to operate together (mode 3, fig 2), or in the second position allowing the gas turbine and ORC generator to operate independently of each other (mode 3, fig 2).
Regarding claim 17, Park discloses wherein the damper is positioned in the first position when the load drawn by the at least one remote power sink is at or above the first threshold power load (mode 3 produces more power than the first threshold, thus would be used when power above the first threshold is required).
Regarding claim 18, Park discloses wherein the damper is positioned in the second position when the load drawn by the at least one remote power sink is below a first threshold power load (mode 3 produces less power than the first threshold, thus would be used when power less than the first threshold is required).
Regarding claim 19, Park discloses wherein the first threshold power load corresponds to the second electrical power generation capacity (the second electrical power generation capacity is the power produced by the gas turbine, thus one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize when more power than what the turbine can produce is required, the secondary generator would turn on).
Regarding claim 20, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein the power generation system is controlled to operate either the gas turbine or the ORC generator in response to a power load drawn by the at least one remote power sink (col 7, lines 24-27).
Regarding claim 21, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein the power generation system is controlled to operate the gas turbine and not the ORC generator when the power load drawn is above a second threshold power load and below a first threshold power load (mode 3, fig 2, the mode is determined based on power col 7, lines 24-27 and since the gas turbine produces nearly 3x the power as the generator, between a first and second threshold of more than the generator can produce and lower gas turbine powers before it can fully power the generator it would run purely off the turbine).
Regarding claim 22, Park as modified by Freund discloses wherein the power generation system is controlled to operate the ORC generator and not the gas turbine when the power load drawn is within the second threshold power load (mode 4, fig 2, just the generator runs with the turbine off at very low power outputs as one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that gas turbines are prone to flame outs and damage at very low outputs).
Regarding claim 23, Park discloses wherein the second threshold power load corresponds to the first electrical power generation capacity and the first threshold power load corresponds to the second electrical power generation capacity (as the second generation capacity is the gas turbine output and the first power capacity is the generator output, this aligns with the rejection of the claims above where the first and second thresholds are set at the generation capacity of the generator and the gas turbine respectively).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN V MEILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-9229. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-5pm.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at 571-272-7118. 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.
/SEAN V MEILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights