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 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 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 recites the limitation "the inner wall" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the perimeter" in line 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the hollow passage" in line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the side" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the surrounding rock and soil layers" in line 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the axis" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guo et al. (CN 117090600).
With regards to claim 1, Guo et al. discloses A deep underground hydrogen storage structure (abstract), comprising a concrete lining layer (2), a hydrogen barrier layer (3), a connecting framework (4), and multiple supporting arms (6), wherein: the concrete lining layer has a chamber (1); the hydrogen barrier layer is attached to the inner wall of the chamber; the connecting framework is installed within the concrete lining layer and surrounds the perimeter of the chamber; the multiple supporting arms are spaced apart and installed around the perimeter of the chamber, each supporting arm has a connection end (5) and a geotechnical end, and is provided with a grouting channel that connects the connection end and the geotechnical end (‘grouting steel anchor pipe”), the connection end is located within the concrete lining layer and is connected to the connecting framework; the geotechnical end is located outside the concrete lining layer; the grouting channel has a grout inlet located at the connection end and a grouting port located at the geotechnical end (figure 1-2).
As to claim 2, Guo et al. discloses wherein the supporting arm (6) comprises a hollow anchor bolt and an anchor bolt plate (5); the connection end and the geotechnical end are formed at the two ends of the hollow anchor bolt, and the hollow passage of the hollow anchor bolt constitutes the grouting channel; wherein, the connection end extends through to the side of the connecting framework that is close to the chamber, and the anchor bolt plate is located on the side of the connecting framework (4) that is close to the chamber, connecting the connection end and the connecting framework (figure 1-2; see abstract and claim 8).
As to claim 3, Guo et al. discloses wherein multiple grouting ports (conventional to include grouting ports to connect anchor to surrounding rocks) are provided, which are spaced apart along the circumferential direction and/or the extension direction of the supporting arm (6) (figures 1-2).
As to claim 4, Guo et al. discloses wherein the deep underground hydrogen storage structure further comprises a steel lining (plurality of steel bar net sheet; see claim 1; figure 1), the steel lining is disposed around the perimeter of the chamber and positioned between the concrete lining layer and the hydrogen barrier layer.
As to claim 5, Guo et la. discloses wherein the hydrogen barrier layer (3) comprises multiple sets of hydrogen-resistant arcuate plates, these sets of hydrogen-resistant arcuate plates are arranged sequentially along the axial direction of the chamber; each set comprises multiple hydrogen-resistant arcuate plates, and these plates within the same set are disposed sequentially along the circumferential direction of the chamber (see English translation “the sealing layer is formed by annularly welding a plurality of carbon steel plates with a thickness of 12-15 mm, and the welding line of the sealing layer is staggered with the T-shaped rubber plate”) .
As to claim 9, Guo et al. discloses wherein the connecting framework (4) is a steel cage placed within the concrete lining layer; and/or, the chamber is cylindrical in shape (figure 1).
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(s) 6-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 117090600).
As to claims 6-8, Guo et al discloses wherein the two ends of each hydrogen-resistant arcuate plate along the circumference of the chamber are welding ends (see claim 4). Guo et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Guo et al. is silent about wherein each hydrogen-resistant arcuate plate is provided with a tenon head and a tenon groove at its two ends along the circumference of the chamber, respectively, allowing the tenon head to be inserted into the tenon groove of an adjacent resistant arcuate plate within the same set; wherein the welding ends are inclined from the side farthest from the chamber towards the side closest to the chamber, in the direction towards the other welding end, forming welded sides. when two adjacent welded sides from the same set are spliced together, they form a weld seam with an angle α, where 45º ≤ α ≤ 60º. It would have been within the level of one skilled in the art of underground storage to include arcuate plates with a tenon head and tenon groove as claimed, since it is a well known connection for underground structures. Furthermore, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to modify the shape of the welding seam to be inclined with the angle as claimed, since such a modification would have involve a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of one skilled in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
As to claim 10, Guo et al. discloses a construction method for the deep underground hydrogen storage structure (figure 1), applicable to the deep underground hydrogen storage structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the construction method comprises: excavating soil required for the chamber (1) according to drawing requirements, and installing multiple supporting arms (6) in a circular array around the surrounding rock and soil layers with the axis of the chamber as the center; then, binding and installing the connecting framework (4) according to design requirements, and connecting the connection end (5) to the connecting framework; next, injecting concrete grout into the grouting channel through the grout inlet, allowing the concrete grout to be injected into the surrounding rock and soil layers through the grouting port; according to design requirements, installing a circular support on the inside of chamber, and utilizing this circular support as an internal formwork for pouring concrete to form the concrete lining layer; after the concrete lining layer has been formed, removing the circular support, and polishing and cleaning (not shown but is conventional when finishing the inside of a concrete structure) the inner wall of chamber; subsequently, gluing the hydrogen barrier layer to the inner wall of chamber (figure 1-2 and claim 8; see rejection of claim 1 above).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARIB A OQUENDO whose telephone number is (571)270-7411. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5:30pm.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.
/CARIB A OQUENDO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights