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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Claim 7 requires an auxiliary power platform spaced from the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine. Therefore, the auxiliary power platform spaced from the two wind turbines must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: auxiliary power unit in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 2, 6, 8-13 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.
Claims 2, 6, 8, 10 and 13 recite unclear language such as “in particular …”. It is unclear if the limitations after “in particular” is limiting or not limiting.
Claims 9 and 11-12 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) by virtue of their claim dependency.
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) 1-3, 6 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Altenschulte (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2009/0134625).
As per claim 1, Altenschulte discloses a wind turbine park (1; figure 2) , comprising at least a first wind turbine (10) and a second wind turbine for generating a power product (four wind turbines 10 shown; figure 2), a main line (102) connecting the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine for transporting the power product (as shown; figure 2), an auxiliary power line (104) being connected to the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine (as shown; figure 2) , wherein the auxiliary power line is configured for transporting auxiliary power for a wind turbine maintenance or standby operation to at least one of the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine (low voltage cable 104 transports low voltage current and fed into the auxiliary electrical network which provides power to elevator, lights or other tools; paragraphs [0015], [0018]), an auxiliary power unit (18) for generating the auxiliary power to the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine (auxiliary transformer 18 providing the expected low voltage power; paragraph [0017]), wherein the auxiliary power unit (18) is connected to the auxiliary power line (104).
As per claim 2, Altenschulte discloses the wind turbine park according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the auxiliary power line is configured for transmitting less than less than 1MW, more particularly less than 500 kW, in particular less than 150 kW (claim language does not recite a minimum power, i.e., low voltage cable 104 having power rating of 600 VAC capable of transmitting power less than 150kW; paragraph [0017]).
As per claim 3, Altenschulte discloses the wind turbine park according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the power product is electrical power, wherein the main line is an electrical power line for transporting the generated electrical power (medium voltage wires 102 feeding medium voltage current (power product); paragraph [0017]).
As per claim 6, Altenschulte discloses the wind turbine park according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the auxiliary power unit (18) is mounted to the first wind turbine (auxiliary transformer 18 is located in the tower of wind turbine 10; paragraph [0017]), wherein in particular the second wind turbine is free of a further auxiliary power unit.
As per claim 15, Al;tenschulte discloses a method of operating a wind turbine park according to one of the claims 1, the method comprising generating a power product by at least one of the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine (via generator 14), transporting the power product by the main line (102), generating auxiliary power by the auxiliary power unit (18), transporting by the auxiliary power line (104) auxiliary power for a maintenance or standby operation to at least one of the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine (providing electrical power in the wind turbine 10 during maintenance works; paragraph [0019]).
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) 4, 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altenschulte in view of Kinsella (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2021/0404439).
As per claims 4-5, Altenschulte discloses the wind turbine park according to claim 1. Altenschute does not explicitly teach wherein the power product is a power fluid, in particular a liquid or a gas, wherein the main line is a fluid pipe for transporting the generated power fluid (claim 4) and wherein at least one of the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine comprises an electrolyzer unit for generating hydrogen and/or oxygen as power fluid (claim 5).
Kinsella (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2021/0404439) is a related prior art in that it deals with a wind turbine generator. Kinsella teaches wherein the power product is a power fluid, in particular a liquid or a gas, wherein the main line is a fluid pipe for transporting the generated power fluid (plurality of units 100 (wind turbine) connected to manifold (fluid pipe) to allow transporting hydrogen gas; paragraph [0014]) and wherein at least one of the first wind turbine (100) and the second wind turbine (two wind turbines 100 shown; figure 4) comprises an electrolyzer unit for generating hydrogen and/or oxygen as power fluid (electrolysis unit 160; figure 3). Kinsella teaches this system allows to utilize wind power without the cost of high voltage switchgear/transformers and energy losses associated with electrical transmission through undersea cables (paragraph [0017]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Altenschulte’s main power generation to incorporate Kinsella’s electrolysis unit to generate and transport hydrogen because as Kinsella teaches the electrolysis system allows to utilize wind power without the cost of high voltage switchgear/transformers and energy losses associated with electrical transmission through undersea cables (paragraph [0017]).
As per claim 7, Altenschulte discloses the wind turbine park according to claim 1. Altenschute does not explicitly teach wherein the auxiliary power unit is mounted to an auxiliary power platform being spaced apart from the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine (claim 7).
Kinsella teaches platforms spaced from the wind turbine to mount auxiliary devices (columns 116 (platform) to mount auxiliary devices; figure 3). Kinsella teaches the devices mounted on the columns permit replacement of the device in lieu of on-site maintenance (paragraph [0015]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Altenschulte’s auxiliary power unit to incorporate Kinsella’s containerized construction mounted on a column because as Kinsella teaches, this configuration allows to easily replace the device in lieu of on-site maintenance (paragraph [0015]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altenschulte in view of Abeyasekera (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2022/0364546).
As per claim 8, Altenschulte discloses the wind turbine park according to claim 1. Altenschulte does not explicitly teach wherein the auxiliary power unit is a battery, wherein the battery is in particular chargeable by electrical power generated by at least one of the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine and/or, wherein the auxiliary power unit is a fuel cell being operated by the power product.
Abeyasekera is related prior art in that it deals with auxiliary power system for a wind turbine grid. Abeyasekera teaches wherein the auxiliary power unit is a battery, wherein the battery is in particular chargeable by electrical power generated by at least one of the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine and/or, wherein the auxiliary power unit is a fuel cell being operated by the power product (generate power using internal storage system having a battery energy storage system and/or fuel cell to provide power supply to the auxiliary system; paragraph [0127] and figure 14). Abeyasekera teaches the battery allows to enable black start which restores part or all of electrical grid following a partial or complete shutdown (paragraphs [0040], [0127]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Altenschulte’s auxiliary power unit to incorporate Abeyasekera’s battery as it allows to black start.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altenschulte in view of Bodewes (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2014/0225369).
As per claim 14, Altenschulte discloses the wind turbine park according to claim 1. Altenschute does not explicitly teach wherein the wind turbine park is decoupled from a power grid.
Bodewes (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2014/0225369) is related prior art in that it deals with a wind turbine generator system having an auxiliary power. Bodewes teaches a system having a main switch and a redundant secondary switch to allow electrical isolation from the grid as a protective measure by severing electrical connection in the grid (paragraph [0049]). Altenschulte is also concerned with danger of an electrical shock to a technician during maintenance (paragraph [0020]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Altenschulte’s wind turbine park to incorporate Bodewes’ main switch and secondary switch that decouples the wind turbine park from the grid as it severs the electrical connection in the grid thereby allowing electrical isolation from the grid as a protective measure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 9 contains allowable subject matter an auxiliary power controller configured for controlling the auxiliary power provided to the first wind turbine and to the second wind turbine, wherein the auxiliary power controller is configured for determining a maintenance or standby operation of the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine.
In the closest prior art, Rosenvard (U.S. Patent No. 8,841,796) teaches a wind turbine farm having an auxiliary power controller (44; figure 3). However, Rosenvard’s auxiliary power controller does not control power to two turbines and is not configured for determining a maintenance or standby operation of the first wind turbine and the second wind turbine.
No relevant prior art of record sufficiently teaches the allowable subject matter in such a way that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the prior arts to create the claimed invention.
Claims 10-13 also contain allowable subject matter by virtue of their dependency on claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sorensen (EP 3,760,860 A1) teaches a wind turbine having a hydrogen producing device. However, in this prior art, Sorensen fails to teach a main line between two wind turbines for transporting the hydrogen.
Dincan (U.S. Patent No. 12,410,775) teaches an off-grid wind turbine having an electric generator and an electrolyzer.
Oohara (U.S. Patent No. 7,667,343) teaches a wind turbine having an electrolytic hydrogen producing system connected to a pipe line.
Sorensen (U.S. Patent No. 12,305,815) is a non-prior art that teaches a wind park connected a fluid pipeline as well as electrical power lines.
Sorensen (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2022/0003336) is a non-prior art that teaches a cable having a fluid line as well as an electrical line.
Lund (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2025/0163593) is a non-prior art that teaches an auxiliary unit having a hydrogen production device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at (571)270-3508. 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.
/SANG K KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745