DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final rejection in response to application filed 7/1/25. Claims 1-9 are currently pending.
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 and 7 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 2 and 7 are indefinite as “an average pressure of a supply pressure” is unclear. It is unclear as whether the average is computed between two pressures or is intended to encompass a different combination of the recited pressures.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1,3-6, and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lawson et al. (US 2009/0272096) in view of Woodbury et al. (US 5621164) and further in view of Tapie et al. (US 2015/0107217).
Regarding independent claim 1 and 6, Lawson teaches a plant comprising: a first gas pipe that is connected to a first supply source and a gas utilization device and that is configured to guide a first combustible gas from the first supply source to the gas utilization device (High energy gas delivery system 104 to inlet 112, to shared manifold piping 116 to turbine nozzle outlet 118); a second gas pipe that is connected to a second supply source and the first gas pipe and that is configured to guide a second combustible gas from the second supply source to the gas utilization device through the first gas pipe (low energy gas delivery system 102); a first gas shut-off valve 120 that is disposed in the second gas pipe and that is configured to perform an opening and closing operation; a second gas shut-off valve 124 that is disposed on a second supply source side with the first gas shut-off valve as a reference in the second gas pipe and that is configured to perform an opening and closing operation; a vent pipe 136 that has a first end and a second end.
Lawson teaches a vent pipe 136, but is silent to a vent pipe that has a first end and a second end, in which the first end is connected to a position of the second gas pipe between the first gas shut-off valve and the second gas shut-off valve, and the second end is open to an atmosphere; a vent valve that is disposed in the vent pipe and that is configured to perform an opening and closing operation; and a pressure gauge that is configured to detect a pressure in a vent pressure control pipe, which is a pipe portion that includes a portion of the vent pipe on a second gas pipe side of the vent valve and a portion of the second gas pipe between the first gas shut-off valve and the second gas shut-off valve, wherein, when the first gas shut-off valve and the second gas shut-off valve are in a closed state, the vent valve is configured to operate such that a pressure in the vent pressure control pipe is lower than a first supply pressure, which is a supply pressure of the first combustible gas supplied to the first gas pipe by the first supply source, and a second supply pressure, which is a supply pressure of the second combustible gas supplied to the second gas pipe by the second supply source, and higher than an atmospheric pressure, according to the pressure in the vent pressure control pipe detected by the pressure gauge.
Woodbury teaches a vent pipe 146 that has a first end and a second end, in which the first end is connected to a position of the second gas pipe between the first gas shut-off valve 134 and the second gas shut-off valve 134, and the second end is open to an atmosphere (col. 3, l. 9-10); a vent valve 146 that is disposed in the vent pipe and that is configured to perform an opening and closing operation (col. 3, l. 26-39); and a pressure gauge 180 that is configured to detect a pressure in a vent pressure control pipe, which is a pipe portion that includes a portion of the vent pipe on a second gas pipe side of the vent valve and a portion of the second gas pipe (col. 4, l. 27-45), wherein, when the first gas shut-off valve 134 and the second gas shut-off valve 138 are in a closed state.
Woodbury is silent to a pressure gauge between the first gas shut-off valve and the second gas shut-off valve, and the vent valve is configured to operate such that a pressure in the vent pressure control pipe is lower than a first supply pressure, which is a supply pressure of the first combustible gas supplied to the first gas pipe by the first supply source, and a second supply pressure, which is a supply pressure of the second combustible gas supplied to the second gas pipe by the second supply source, and higher than an atmospheric pressure, according to the pressure in the vent pressure control pipe detected by the pressure gauge.
Tapie teaches a pressure gauge between the first gas shut-off valve and the second gas shut-off valve [0033], and the vent valve is configured to operate such that a pressure in the vent pressure control pipe is lower than a first supply pressure, which is a supply pressure of the first combustible gas supplied to the first gas pipe by the first supply source, and a second supply pressure, which is a supply pressure of the second combustible gas supplied to the second gas pipe by the second supply source, and higher than an atmospheric pressure, according to the pressure in the vent pressure control pipe detected by the pressure gauge [0047-0048].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to modify the plant of Lawson with the vent, valves, and pressure gauge as taught by Woodbury and the control of the vent as taught by Tapie. Woodbury teaches improved simplicity with better detection (col. 2, l. 4-16) and Tapie teaches stability and safety [0010,0049]. It should be noted that neither Woodbury nor Tapie teaches a dual-independent supply system and controls the vent relative to a single supply pressure. Lawson teaches the two independent sources and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the prior art to both supply pressure sources.
Regarding dependent claims 3 and 8, Lawson in view of Woodbury and further in view of Tapie teaches the invention as claimed and discussed. Tapie further teaches wherein the vent valve is configured to perform an opening operation at an upper limit value which is a pressure value lower than the first supply pressure and the second supply pressure and higher than the atmospheric pressure, and to perform a closing operation at a lower limit value which is a pressure value lower than the upper limit value and higher than the atmospheric pressure [0047-0048].
Regarding dependent claim 4, Lawson in view of Woodbury and further in view of Tapie teaches the invention as claimed and discussed. Tapie further teaches wherein an in-pipe diameter of the vent pipe is smaller than an in-pipe diameter of the second gas pipe [0038].
Regarding dependent claim 5, Lawson in view of Woodbury and further in view of Tapie teaches the invention as claimed and discussed. Lawson further teaches further comprising: a gas turbine as the gas utilization device [0012].
Regarding dependent claim 9, Lawson in view of Woodbury and further in view of Tapie teaches the invention as claimed and discussed. Lawson further teaches wherein the second combustible gas has hydrogen gas as a main component [0003].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRAIG SANG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1418. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 3:00 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.
/CRAIG KIM/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights