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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Currently, no claim limitation is being interpreted as invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
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.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7, 9-12, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 9,291,309 to Gupta et al. (Gupta).
Regarding claim 1, Gupta discloses a gas supply device (title/abstract) comprising: a first pressure vessel (100) in which liquefied gas is stored (liquid hydrogen is stored in vessel 100); a second pressure vessel (102) configured to generate gas by vaporizing the liquefied gas supplied from the first pressure vessel (col. 2, lines 58-63); a liquefied gas supply path (106) configured to allow the liquefied gas to selectively flow from the first pressure vessel toward the second pressure vessel (col. 2, lines 47-51) ; and a gas supply path (108) configured to allow the gas generated in the second pressure vessel to selectively flow (see col. 3, lines 32-33; device to control flow in line 108) toward a gas utilization unit (104).
Regarding claim 2, Gupta discloses the second pressure vessel includes a second A pressure vessel (the first vessel 102 where the system includes multiple vessels 102; see col. 2, line 52) and a second B pressure vessel (second vessel 102), the liquefied gas supply path includes a first liquefied gas supply path (path to liquid inlet of the first vessel 102) connecting the first pressure vessel and the second A pressure vessel and a second liquefied gas supply path (path to the liquid inlet of the second vessel 102) connecting the first pressure vessel and the second B pressure vessel, and the gas supply path includes a first gas supply path (path for gas from the outlet of the first vessel 102) configured to allow the gas generated in the second A pressure vessel to flow toward the gas utilization unit and a second gas supply path (path for gas from the outlet of the second vessel 102) configured to allow the gas generated in the second B pressure vessel to flow toward the gas utilization unit.
Regarding claim 5, Gupta discloses a heat input unit configured to input heat to the second pressure vessel (col. 2, lines 52-63 and col. 3, lines 9-18).
Regarding claim 7, Gupta discloses a first heat input unit configured to input heat to the second A pressure vessel (col. 2, lines 52-63 and col. 3, lines 9-18); and a second heat input unit configured to input heat to the second B pressure vessel (col. 2, lines 52-63 and col. 3, lines 9-18; each of the vessels 102 includes a heat input).
Regarding claim 9, Gupta discloses the first pressure vessel is disposed at a position higher than the second pressure vessel in a vertical direction (col. 3, lines 45-47).
Regarding claim 10, Gupta discloses the first pressure vessel is disposed at a position higher than the second A pressure vessel and the second B pressure vessel in a vertical direction (col. 3, lines 45-47).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Gupta discloses a vent path (110) configured to allow part of the gas generated in the second pressure vessel to selectively flow toward a gap inside the first pressure vessel (col. 3, lines 36-44), wherein a first step of causing the liquefied gas to flow from the liquefied gas supply path toward the second pressure vessel and causing the gas stored in the second pressure vessel to flow via the vent path (liquid hydrogen first flows into vessel 102, then gaseous hydrogen from vessel 102 can flow to vessel 100), and a second step of supplying the gas toward the gas utilization unit via the gas supply path while generating the gas by vaporizing the liquefied gas stored in the second pressure vessel are executed in sequence (gas is supplied from vessel 102 to dispenser 104 which occurs while liquids hydrogen in vessel 102 is being vaporized, if so requested from the dispenser).
Regarding claim 16, Gupta discloses a gas supply method (title/abstract) for supplying, to a gas utilization unit (104), gas obtained by vaporizing liquefied gas (in vessel 102), the gas supply method comprising: a first step of supplying the liquefied gas (liquid hydrogen in vessel 100) to a second pressure vessel (102) from a first pressure vessel (100) in which the liquefied gas is stored; and a second step of, subsequent to the first step, supplying the gas toward the gas utilization unit (104) while generating the gas by vaporizing the liquefied gas stored in the second pressure vessel (liquid hydrogen fed to vessel 102 is vaporized to gaseous hydrogen which can be fed to dispenser 104 while the gas is being generated, if requested by the dispenser).
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.
Claims 3-4, 6, 8, 13-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta.
Regarding claim 3, Gupta discloses the gas supply device according to claim 1 (see above), further comprising: a liquefied gas supply valve (112) provided midway in the liquefied gas supply path and configured to switch between start and stop of supply of the liquefied gas supplied from the first pressure vessel; and a gas supply control device (col. 3, lines 32-33) provided midway in the gas supply path and configured to switch between start and stop of supply of the gas to the gas utilization unit. Gupta does not disclose the gas supply control device is a valve. However, valves are well known in the art for controlling the flow of gas through a path. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a valve as the flow control device in the gas path of Gupta as is well known in the art. Such a change requires only using a known device in a known manner.
Regarding claim 4, Gupta discloses the gas supply device according to claim 2 (see above), further comprising: a first liquefied gas supply valve (112) provided midway in the first liquefied gas supply path and configured to switch between start and stop of supply of the liquefied gas supplied from the first pressure vessel; a first gas supply control device (col. 3, lines 32-33 provided midway in the first gas supply path and configured to switch between start and stop of supply of the gas to the gas utilization unit. Gupta does not disclose the gas flow control device is a valve or a second liquefied gas supply valve and a second gas supply valve. However, valves are well known in the art for controlling the flow of gas through a path. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a valve as the flow control device in the gas path of Gupta as is well known in the art. Such a change requires only using a known device in a known manner. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a second liquefied gas supply valve and a second gas supply valve configured for controlling flow into and out of the second pressure vessel, respectively, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B). Providing second valves in the second paths for the second B pressure vessel allows for control of flow into and out of the vessel independent of control of flow into the second A pressure vessel.
Regarding claim 6, Gupta further discloses a heat input unit configured to input heat to the second pressure vessel (col. 2, lines 52-63 and col. 3, lines 9-18).
Regarding claim 8, Gupta discloses a first heat input unit configured to input heat to the second A pressure vessel (col. 2, lines 52-63 and col. 3, lines 9-18); and a second heat input unit configured to input heat to the second B pressure vessel (col. 2, lines 52-63 and col. 3, lines 9-18; each of the vessels 102 includes a heat input).
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Gupta discloses the gas supply device according to claims 2 and 10, respectively (see above), and further comprising: a first vent path (110) configured to allow part of the gas generated in the second A pressure vessel to selectively flow toward a gap inside the first pressure vessel (col. 3, lines 36-44); and a second vent path (the path from the second vessel 102 to the head space of vessel 100) configured to allow part of the gas generated in the second B pressure vessel to selectively flow toward a gap inside the first pressure vessel (col. 3, lines 36-44), wherein a first A step of causing the liquefied gas to flow from the first liquefied gas supply path toward the second A pressure vessel and causing the gas stored in the second A pressure vessel to flow via the first vent path (liquid hydrogen flows from vessel 100 to first vessel 102 and gas flows from vessel 102 to vessel 100), a second A step of, subsequent to the first A step, supplying the gas toward the gas utilization unit via the first gas supply path while generating the gas by vaporizing the liquefied gas stored in the second A pressure vessel (gas is supplied from vessel 102 to dispenser 104 which occurs while liquids hydrogen in vessel 102 is being vaporized, if so requested from the dispenser), a first B step of, causing the liquefied gas to flow from the second liquefied gas supply path toward the second B pressure vessel and causing the gas stored in the second B pressure vessel to flow via the second vent path (liquid hydrogen flows from vessel 100 to second vessel 102 and gas flows from vessel 102 to vessel 100), and a second B step of, subsequent to the first B step, supplying the gas toward the gas utilization unit via the second gas supply path while generating the gas by vaporizing the liquefied gas stored in the second B pressure vessel are executed (gas is supplied from vessel 102 to dispenser 104 which occurs while liquids hydrogen in vessel 102 is being vaporized, if so requested from the dispenser). Gupta does not disclose the first B step occurs while the second A step is being executed. However, there are only 3 possible options (either B occurs before A, while A is occurring, or after A). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the system of Gupta such that the first B step occurs while the second A step is being executed so that gas is being generated (and supplied, as needed) simultaneously in both vessels 102 to meet the demand of the utilization unit. Such a change requires only selecting one of a small number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 15, Gupta does not disclose at least two gas supply devices according to claim 1 connected to the gas utilization unit in parallel. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have supplied at least 2 of the gas supply units of claim 1 arranged in parallel to the gas utilization device, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B). Providing additional gas supply devices allows for the gas supply to be increased to meet the demand of the utilization device 104.
Regarding claim 17, Gupta discloses a gas supply method (title/abstract) for supplying, to a gas utilization unit (104), gas obtained by vaporizing liquefied gas (liquid hydrogen), the gas supply method comprising: a first A step of supplying the liquefied gas (from vessel 100) to a second A pressure vessel (102) from a first pressure vessel (100) in which the liquefied gas is stored; a second A step of, subsequent to the first A step, supplying the gas toward the gas utilization unit (gas from vessel 102 is supplied to unit 104) while generating the gas by vaporizing the liquefied gas stored in the second A pressure vessel (gas is supplied from vessel 102 to dispenser 104 which occurs while liquids hydrogen in vessel 102 is being vaporized, if so requested from the dispenser); a first B step of, causing the liquefied gas to flow from the second liquefied gas supply path toward the second B pressure vessel and causing the gas stored in the second B pressure vessel to flow via the second vent path (liquid hydrogen flows from vessel 100 to second vessel 102 and gas flows from vessel 102 to vessel 100), and a second B step of, subsequent to the first B step, supplying the gas toward the gas utilization unit via the second gas supply path while generating the gas by vaporizing the liquefied gas stored in the second B pressure vessel are executed (gas is supplied from vessel 102 to dispenser 104 which occurs while liquids hydrogen in vessel 102 is being vaporized, if so requested from the dispenser). Gupta does not disclose the first B step occurs while the second A step is being executed. However, there are only 3 possible options (either B occurs before A, while A is occurring, or after A). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the system of Gupta such that the first B step occurs while the second A step is being executed so that gas is being generated (and supplied, as needed) simultaneously in both vessels 102 to meet the demand of the utilization unit. Such a change requires only selecting one of a small number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. For example, US Patent Application Publication 2024/0003495 and US Patent 12,553,576 each disclose gas supply devices for vaporizing liquid hydrogen and supplying gaseous hydrogen to a gas utilization unit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLAS A ARNETT whose telephone number is (571)270-5062. The examiner can normally be reached M- F, 8AM - 3PM.
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, 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.
/NICOLAS A ARNETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753 June 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights