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 – 11 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.
In claim 1, the statement “generate a torque on the motor in response” is indefinite. It is not clear what device is generating the torque and in it is not clear in response to which element.
In claim 5, the statement “controller articulates” is vague. It is not clear how a controller would be able to “articulate” flow.
Claims 2 – 11 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 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) 1, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krouse (US 2009/0134623) in view of Hobdy (US 2012/0091709).
Krouse discloses, regarding,
Claim 1, A system for use in power generation, the system comprising: one or more flow channels (Figs. 9B, 16), wherein the one or more flow channels are shaped by human activity in order to magnify a flow of water into the one or more flow channels (see Fig. 13, venturi shape of flow channel) ;one or more hydrokinetic turbines positioned in the one or more flow channels and configured to be turned by the flow of water to generate a torque (see Fig. 13); one or more shafts coupled to the one or more hydrokinetic turbines (see Fig. 13);a hydraulic fluid storage vessel configured to store a hydraulic fluid under pressure [0036]; a hydraulic motor 124 including a motor output configured to receive the hydraulic fluid stored under pressure and generate a torque on the motor output in response (See Fig. 14); and a generator 126 operatively coupled to an output shaft and the motor output, wherein the generator produces electrical power in response to at least one of rotation of: the output shaft, the torque of the motor output, or both (see abstract; Fig. 14; [0035]).
The problem to be solve appears to add a flywheel into the system. Such modification would have been easily accomplished by someone having ordinary skill in the art. For example, Hobdy discloses a hydropower system in which a hydraulic fluid is stored in a reservoir 142 and it is used for driving a hydraulic motor 152 which in turn is connected to one or more flywheels 506 coupled to the one or more shafts 518 and the motor output which is used for driving a generator 512 (see Fig. 6).
Krouse further discloses, regarding,
Claim 11, the one or more flow channels include a venturi in a section thereof, and wherein the one or more hydrokinetic turbines are positioned within the venturi (see Fig. 13).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the system as disclosed by Krouse and to modify the invention per the limitations disclosed by Hobdy for the purpose of reducing maintenance costs.
Claim(s) 2, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krouse and Hobdy as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mathers (US 2018/0298881).
The combined system discloses all of the elements above. However, the combined system does not disclose the elements below.
On the other hand, Mathers discloses, regarding,
Claim 2, one or more power split transmission (see abstract) couplings configured to transmit the torque to the output shaft at an adjustable torque ratio (see Figs. 3, 4) and divert the hydraulic fluid in response to the output shaft exceeding a threshold power [0041].
Claim 3, an electronic controller coupled to the one or more power split transmission couplings, wherein the electronic controller is configured to control the one or more power split transmission couplings to pulse to change a rotational speed of at least one of the one or more flywheels and the one or more hydrokinetic turbines (see Figs. 6, 2; [0041]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the combined system as disclosed above and to modify the invention per the limitations disclosed by Mathers for the purpose of improving the power captured in different fluid flow speeds.
Claim(s) 12, 14, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krouse and Hobdy as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Storer (US 4,241,283).
The Prior Art discloses, regarding
Claim 14, the one or more flow channels are shaped by human activity in order to magnify a flow of water into the one or more flow channels (Krouse, Fig. 13).
Claim 15, the one or more flow channels include a venturi in a section thereof, and wherein the turbine is positioned within the venturi (Krouse, Fig. 13).
Claim 12, A method for operating a turbine for power generation using a flow of water of an ocean tidal region (Krouse, Fig. 1; [0015 – 0028]), the method comprising: positioning the turbine within the one or more flow channels formed along the ocean tidal region (Krouse, Fig. 1), wherein the one or more flow channels divert an amount of the flow from a main flow (Krouse, Figs. 77, 80); and generating power by passing at least part of the flow of the one or more flow channels across the turbine (Krouse, Fig. 1). It is noted that Krause discloses implicitly terraforming (modifying a land to accommodate or construct a channel) in order to divert a fluid flow (Figs. 16, 17B, 18) and adjusting or making a square shape next to the body of water (Figs. 61, 64) and also adjusting or making changes to the earth in order to place the turbines (Figs. 77, 64)
Storer is being cited for explicitly showing that it is well-known in the field to make modifications to a shore (terraforming) in order to form one or more flow channels there along (see Figs. 1, 2).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the combined system/method as disclosed above and to modify the invention per the limitations disclosed by Storer for the purpose of reducing the cost of a power system.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krouse, Hobdy and Storer as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Mathers (US 2018/0298881).
The combined system/method discloses all of the elements above. However, the combined system does not disclose the elements below.
On the other hand, Mathers discloses, regarding,
Claim 13, adjusting a power split transmission coupling to transfer substantially all torque from a turbine rotor to a generator by working a hydraulic fluid (see abstract), wherein the generator 116 converts mechanical power to electrical power; diverting the hydraulic fluid at high pressure from the power split transmission coupling in response to the electrical power produced by the generator exceeding a threshold to maintain the electrical power produced by the generator at or below the threshold (see Figs. 5, 6); storing the hydraulic fluid diverted from the power split transmission coupling under high pressure in a storage vessel (see Fig. 11); and introducing the hydraulic fluid stored at high pressure to a hydraulic motor in response to the generator producing below threshold electrical power (Figs. 8, 9), the hydraulic motor operatively coupled to the generator and configured to transmit mechanical power to the generator for electrical power generation (see Figs. 6, 2; [0041]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the combined system/method as disclosed above and to modify the invention per the limitations disclosed by Mathers for the purpose of improving the power captured in different fluid flow speeds.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 – 10 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 and overcoming the 112 rejection noted above.
The cited prior art of record fails to disclose the structural description of the system as specifically described in claims 4, 10.
Claims 5 – 9 are dependent on claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Julio C. Gonzalez whose telephone number is (571)272-2024. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Abdullah Riyami can be reached at 5712703119. 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.
/Julio C. Gonzalez/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2831
December 9, 2025