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.
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: “a fuel flow rate command value calculation unit configured to calculate a fuel flow rate command value” and “a fuel flow rate control unit configured to control a flow rate of fuel” 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 3-12 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 3-12 recite “The gas turbine startup control device according to claim [X]”. Base claim 1 recites “A gas turbine control device”. It is not clear if this limitation is intended to refer to the gas turbine control device of base claim 1, a different device or add in the requirement that the device of claim 1 is used for startup. Clarification is required. For purposes of examination this limitation is assumed to refer to the gas turbine control device of claim 1.
Claim 8 recites “the second fuel flow rate command value”. It is not clear if this refers to the fuel flow rate command value recited in base claim 1 or an additional element. Clarification is required. For purposes of examination this is assumed to refer to the fuel flow rate command value recited in base claim 1.
Claims dependent thereon inherit the deficiencies of the respective base 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-5, 8-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Kishi et al. (US 2013/0147208).
Regarding claim 1, Kishi discloses a gas turbine control device (Figure 1, 44) comprising:
a fuel flow rate command value calculation unit (50) configured to calculate a fuel flow rate command value (paragraph 47) by proportional integral control (paragraph 52) based on a deviation between a rotation speed of a gas turbine and a target rotation speed, or a deviation between an output of the gas turbine and a target output load (paragraph 12 describes calculating the deviation of generator output, i.e. gas turbine output and a generator output set value, i.e. target load output); and
a fuel flow rate control unit (Figure 1, Lower Value Selection Section) configured to control a flow rate of fuel (via valve 42) to the gas turbine based on the fuel flow rate command value (Figure 1 shows the fuel flow rate command value is an input into the Lower Value Selection Section),
wherein the fuel flow rate command value calculation unit calculates the fuel flow rate command value such that the output of the gas turbine increases at a first change rate in a first output band (Annotated figure 4 shows there is a first rate of change in the first band to the left of the dashed arrow), and calculates the fuel flow rate command value such that the output of the gas turbine increases at a second change rate (Annotated figure 4 shows there is a second rate of change in the second band to the right of the solid arrow) smaller than the first change rate in a second output band (Figure 4 shows the second change rate has a shallower slope than the first change rate, i.e. it is smaller than the first change rate), which is an output band higher than the first output band (Figure 4 shows the second band is in a higher gas turbine output range), and
an integral gain of the proportional integral control in the first output band is smaller than an integral gain of the proportional integral control in the second output band (Figure 3 shows the integral gain is smaller in the lower GT output, i.e. first output band, and higher in the higher GT output, i.e. second output band).
PNG
media_image1.png
512
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Kishi discloses wherein the fuel flow rate command value calculation unit includes
a first fuel flow rate command value calculation unit (Figure 1, 52) for calculating a first fuel flow rate command value which is the fuel flow rate command value in the first output band (Each of 50, 52 and 54 calculate the fuel flow rate over all rating operations, so 52 necessarily calculates the fuel flow rate command value in the first band, which is delivered to the Lower Value Selection Section), and
a second fuel flow rate command value calculation unit (Figure 1, 50) for calculating a second fuel flow rate command value which is the fuel flow rate command value in the second output band (Each of 50, 52 and 54 calculate the fuel flow rate over all rating operations, so 50 necessarily calculates the fuel flow rate command value in the second band, which is delivered to the Lower Value Selection Section).
Regarding claim 3, Kishi discloses wherein the first fuel flow rate command value calculation unit includes a proportional controller (paragraph 12) that calculates the first fuel flow rate command value based on the deviation between the rotation speed and the target rotation speed (paragraph 47).
Regarding claim 4, Kishi discloses wherein the second fuel flow rate command value calculation unit includes a proportional integral controller (paragraph 12) that calculates the second fuel flow rate command value based on the deviation between the output of the gas turbine and the target output (paragraph 47).
Regarding claim 5, Kishi discloses further comprising: a low value selection unit configured to select a smaller one of the first fuel flow rate command value and the second fuel flow rate command value as the fuel flow rate command value (Figure 1 shows the Lower Value Selection Section as the fuel flow rate control unit).
Regarding claim 8, Kishi discloses wherein when the output of the gas turbine is switched from the first output band to the second output band, the second fuel flow rate command value is tracked to the fuel flow rate command value (See 112 section above. The second fuel flow rate command value is the fuel flow rate command value).
Regarding claim 9, Kishi discloses wherein, in the proportional integral control, the integral gain is variable based on a gas turbine state quantity correlated with the output of the gas turbine (paragraph 11).
Regarding claim 11, Kishi discloses wherein the integral gain is calculated based on a function defining a relationship between the gas turbine state quantity and the integral gain (paragraph 53).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7, 10 and 12 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 prior art of record fails to anticipate and/or render obvious, either alone or in combination, tracking values as described in claims 6 and 7, an integral gain set to zero as described in claim 10 or wherein the first change rate is five times or more the second change rate as described in claim 12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Katheryn Malatek whose telephone number is (571)272-5689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 9 am - 6 pm.
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.
/KATHERYN A MALATEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights