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 § 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.
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) 1-2, 5, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/).
Onboard Dynamics discloses:
A compressor system comprising: a system inlet adapted to couple with a utility pipe;
PNG
media_image1.png
976
1427
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 1
a compressor in fluid communication with the system inlet to receive a first fluid from the utility pipe;
PNG
media_image2.png
814
1422
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 2
a first fuel bottle in fluid communication with the compressor to receive the first fluid from the compressor;
PNG
media_image3.png
811
1420
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 3
Onboard Dynamics does not disclose a second fuel bottle adapted to receive a second fluid that is different than the first fluid; and a dual-fuel engine coupled with the compressor to provide input power to the compressor, the dual-fuel engine is coupled with the first fuel bottle and the second fuel bottle, wherein the dual-fuel engine is adapted to operate using the first fluid in a first operational mode and the second fluid in a second operational mode.
However, Bryde discloses a second fuel bottle (any of 202-208) adapted to receive a second fluid that is different than the first fluid (fuel in tanks 202-208 is propane as per e.g. the abstract and fuel in 272 is natural gas as per e.g. 0050 to power engine 266); and a dual-fuel engine (266) coupled with the compressor to provide input power to the compressor, the dual-fuel engine is coupled with the first fuel bottle and the second fuel bottle (see e.g. Fig 7), wherein the dual-fuel engine is adapted to operate using the first fluid in a first operational mode and the second fluid in a second operational mode (see e.g. 0051).
Before the effective filing date of eh claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize an additional propane tank as taught by Bryde to power the engine of Onboard Dynamics to gain the benefit of enabling the system to be used to evacuate other gasses such as propane as evidenced by IPS which provides evidence that it is known to evacuate propane via a compressor.
Onboard Dynamics as modified above discloses (all references to Onboard Dynamics unless noted otherwise):
2. The compressor system of claim 1, wherein the first fluid is provided in a form of natural gas
PNG
media_image4.png
800
1419
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 4
and the second fluid is provided in the form of propane (see propane throughout Bryde including the abstract).
5. The compressor system of claim 1, further comprising: an aftercooler in fluid communication with the compressor, the aftercooler adapted to lower the temperature of the first fluid before the first fluid is received in the first fuel bottle.
PNG
media_image5.png
802
1418
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 5
7. The compressor system of claim 1, wherein the system inlet is adapted to couple with a first utility pipe and the system outlet is adapted to couple with a second utility pipe, the compressor system adapted to evacuate the first fluid from the first utility pipe and inject the first fluid into the second utility pipe (This is the purpose of Onboard Dynamics system and the system is structurally capable of being employed in the claimed manner. See MPEP 2114 II.).
PNG
media_image6.png
810
1414
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 6
PNG
media_image7.png
814
1422
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 7
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/) in further view of The Ultimate Guide to Dual Fuel Generators, by Anker, published 2023 (URL: https://www.anker.com/au/story/others/dual-fuel-generators-guide).
Onboard Dynamics discloses:
3. The compressor system of claim 1, further comprising: a controller in electrical communication with the dual-fuel engine,
PNG
media_image8.png
808
1419
media_image8.png
Greyscale
.
Screen capture 8
Onboard dynamics as modified above does not disclose the controller adapted to select an operational mode of the dual-fuel engine based on an availability of the first fluid and the second fluid.
Anker discloses the controller adapted to select an operational mode of the dual-fuel engine based on an availability of the first fluid and the second fluid (see e.g. “Automatic Fuel Detection –Some dual-fuel generators can automatically detect and switch to the appropriate fuel type when one source is depleted”.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to configure the controller to switch from one fuel to another when depletion is detected as taught by Anker in the system of Onboard Dynamics as modified above to gain the benefit of allowing the engine to continue to run when one fuel source is depleted.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/) in further view of RNG Model QRNG 4125 Series Parts Manual, published 2014, (URL: https://engineservicesupply.com/contentonly.aspx?file=pdf/4125NG%20PARTS%20BOOK.pdf).
Regarding claim 4, Onboard dynamics does not disclose the limitations of claim 4.
However, Quincy discloses a single-stage, belt-driven natural gas compressor.
A simple substitution of one known natural gas compressor for another with the predictable result of compressing natural gas has been held obvious as per MPEP 2143 I (B).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize the natural gas compressor of Quincy in the system of Onboard dynamics as modified above as a simple substitution to gain the benefit of using a smaller, less expensive compressor for lower volume / lower pressure applications.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/) in further view of Onboard Dynamics 2, published 2023, (URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEaaLxDt1Sk).
Regarding claim 6, Onboard Dynamics discloses an electronic controller (see e.g. screen capture 8).
It would be understood that Onboard dynamics would include a both a local and remote display to display information. For example, Onboard Dynamics 2 discloses a display unit in electrical communication with a controller,
PNG
media_image9.png
807
1418
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 9
PNG
media_image10.png
807
1417
media_image10.png
Greyscale
See screen capture 10
the display unit is adapted to provide real-time data on a volume of natural gas evacuated and injected, and to generate reports on greenhouse gas emissions savings based on the real-time data.
PNG
media_image11.png
802
1413
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 11
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a display and reports as taught by Onboard Dynamics 2 in the system of Onboard Dynamics as modified above to gain the benefit of allowing relevant information to be displayed.
Claim(s) 8, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Morris US 20100000252.
Onboard Dynamics discloses:
8. A compressor system comprising: a suction bottle designed to receive a fluid from a first utility pipe (see e.g. screen capture 3); a compressor (see e.g. screen capture 2) and inject the fluid into a second utility pipe (see e.g. screen captures 6-7); and a controller (see e.g. screen capture 8) in electrical communication with a sensor, the sensor designed to monitor a volume of the fluid received from or injected into a utility pipe and to send an input to the controller related to the volume of the fluid received and injected,
PNG
media_image12.png
519
905
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 12
wherein the controller generates an output based on the input received from the sensor.
PNG
media_image13.png
513
900
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 13
Onboard dynamics does not disclose in fluid communication with the suction bottle designed to receive the fluid from the suction bottle.
Morris discloses the use of an inlet scrubber bottle 222.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize an inlet scrubber bottle in the system of Onboard Dynamics to gain the benefit of removing water and other undesirable components as taught by Morris in 0073.
Onboard Dynamics as modified above discloses (all reference s to Onboard Dynamics unless noted otherwise):
12. The compressor system of claim 8, further comprising: an aftercooler in fluid communication with the compressor, the aftercooler adapted to lower a temperature of the first fluid before the first fluid is received in a first fuel bottle (see e.g. screen capture 5).
13. The compressor system of claim 8, further comprising: a suction bottle pressure regulator positioned on a system inlet to regulate a pressure of the fluid entering the suction bottle below a first threshold pressure value.
PNG
media_image14.png
809
1420
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 13
With both being located at the inlet of the compressor, the regulator would either be located before or after the scrubber. Those are the only two choices for a person of ordinary skill in the art and thus either choice is obvious as per MPEP 2143 I (E) with the predictable result of regulating the pressure of the inlet area of the compressor.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize the regulator at the inlet of the compressor and the scrubber to gain the benefit of setting a desired pressure in both the compressor inlet and the scrubber.
14. The compressor system of claim 13, wherein the system inlet is adapted to couple with the first utility pipe and a system outlet is adapted to couple with the second utility pipe, the compressor system adapted to evacuate the first fluid from the first utility pipe and inject the first fluid into the second utility pipe (This is the purpose of Onboard Dynamics system and the system is structurally capable of being employed in the claimed manner. See MPEP 2114 II. See screen captures 6-7.).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Morris US 20100000252 in further view of Onboard Dynamics 2, published 2023, (URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEaaLxDt1Sk).
Regarding claim 9, as best understood it appears Onboard Dynamics discloses wherein the output comprises a report containing a volume of prevented greenhouse gas emissions calculated from the volume of the fluid received and injected
PNG
media_image15.png
514
897
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Screen capture 14
PNG
media_image16.png
509
900
media_image16.png
Greyscale
.
Screen capture 15
Additionally, Onboard Dynamics 2 discloses wherein the output comprises a report containing a volume of prevented greenhouse gas emissions calculated from the volume of the fluid received and injected (as best understood see screen capture 11).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a display and reports as taught by Onboard Dynamics 2 in the system of Onboard Dynamics as modified above to gain the benefit of allowing relevant information to be displayed.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Morris US 20100000252 in further view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/) in further view of The Ultimate Guide to Dual Fuel Generators, by Anker, published 2023 (URL: https://www.anker.com/au/story/others/dual-fuel-generators-guide).
Regarding claim 10, Onboard Dynamics discloses an engine for the compressor system (see screen capture 2) and a controller for the compressor system (see screen capture 8) but does not disclose the use of a dual-fuel engine, the controller adapted to select an operational mode of the dual-fuel engine based on an availability of the first fluid and the second fluid.
Bryde discloses a dual-fuel engine (266), the dual-fuel engine is adapted to operate using the first fluid in a first operational mode and the second fluid in a second operational mode (see e.g. 0051).
Before the effective filing date of eh claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize an additional propane tank as taught by Bryde to power the engine of Onboard Dynamics to gain the benefit of enabling the system to be used to evacuate other gasses such as propane as evidenced by IPS which provides evidence that it is known to evacuate propane via a compressor.
Anker discloses the controller adapted to select an operational mode of the dual-fuel engine based on an availability of the first fluid and the second fluid (see e.g. “Automatic Fuel Detection –Some dual-fuel generators can automatically detect and switch to the appropriate fuel type when one source is depleted”.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to configure the controller to switch from one fuel to another when depletion is detected as taught by Anker in the system of Onboard Dynamics as modified above to gain the benefit of allowing the engine to continue to run when one fuel source is depleted.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Morris US 20100000252 in further view of RNG Model QRNG 4125 Series Parts Manual, published 2014, (URL: https://engineservicesupply.com/contentonly.aspx?file=pdf/4125NG%20PARTS%20BOOK.pdf).
Regarding claim 11, Onboard dynamics does not disclose the limitations of claim 11.
However, Quincy discloses a single-stage, belt-driven natural gas compressor.
A simple substitution of one known natural gas compressor for another with the predictable result of compressing natural gas has been held obvious as per MPEP 2143 I (B).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize the natural gas compressor of Quincy in the system of Onboard dynamics as modified above as a simple substitution to gain the benefit of using a smaller, less expensive compressor for lower volume / lower pressure applications.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/).
Onboard Dynamics discloses:
15. A compressor system comprising: a system inlet adapted to couple with a utility pipe (see e.g. screen capture 1); a compressor in fluid communication with the system inlet to receive a first fluid from the utility pipe (see e.g. screen capture 2); a first fuel bottle in fluid communication with the compressor to receive the first fluid from the compressor (see e.g. screen capture 3); and an aftercooler in fluid communication with the compressor, the aftercooler adapted to lower a temperature of the first fluid before the first fluid is received in the first fuel bottle (see e.g. screen capture 5).
Onboard dynamics does not disclose a second fuel bottle adapted to receive a second fluid that is different than the first fluid; a dual-fuel engine coupled with the compressor to provide input power to the compressor, the dual-fuel engine coupled with the first fuel bottle and the second fuel bottle.
Bryde discloses the use of a second fuel bottle (202-208) adapted to receive a second fluid that is different than the first fluid (fuel in tanks 202-208 is propane as per e.g. the abstract and fuel in 272 is natural gas as per e.g. 0050 to power engine 266); a dual-fuel engine 266 coupled with the first fuel bottle and the second fuel bottle (see e.g. Fig 7).
Before the effective filing date of eh claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize an additional propane tank as taught by Bryde to power the engine of Onboard Dynamics to gain the benefit of enabling the system to be used to evacuate other gasses such as propane as evidenced by IPS which provides evidence that it is known to evacuate propane via a compressor.
Onboard Dynamics as modified above discloses (all reference s to Onboard Dynamics unless noted otherwise):
16. The compressor system of claim 15, wherein the dual-fuel engine is adapted to operate using the first fluid in a first operational mode and the second fluid in a second operational mode (see e.g. 0051 0f Bryde).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/) in further view of The Ultimate Guide to Dual Fuel Generators, by Anker, published 2023 (URL: https://www.anker.com/au/story/others/dual-fuel-generators-guide).
Regarding claim 17, Onboard Dynamics discloses a controller in electrical communication with the dual-fuel engine (see e.g. screen capture 8). Onboard Dynamics does not disclose the controller adapted to automatically select an operational mode of the dual-fuel engine based on an availability of the first fluid and the second fluid.
Anker discloses the controller adapted to select an operational mode of the dual-fuel engine based on an availability of the first fluid and the second fluid (see e.g. “Automatic Fuel Detection –Some dual-fuel generators can automatically detect and switch to the appropriate fuel type when one source is depleted”.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to configure the controller to switch from one fuel to another when depletion is detected as taught by Anker in the system of Onboard Dynamics as modified above to gain the benefit of allowing the engine to continue to run when one fuel source is depleted.
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/) in further view of Morris US 20100000252.
Regarding claim 18, Onboard Dynamics discloses the aftercooler is designed to reduce a temperature of the fluid before the compressor injects the first fluid into a second segment of the utility pipe (see e.g. screen capture 5) but does not disclose a suction bottle designed to receive the first fluid from a first segment of the utility pipe; the compressor in fluid communication with the suction bottle, wherein the compressor is designed to receive the fluid from the suction bottle.
Morris discloses the use of an inlet scrubber bottle 222.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize an inlet scrubber bottle in the system of Onboard Dynamics to gain the benefit of removing water and other undesirable components as taught by Morris in 0073.
Onboard Dynamics as modified above discloses (all reference s to Onboard Dynamics unless noted otherwise):
19. The compressor system of claim 18, further comprising: a controller (see e.g. screen capture 8) in electrical communication with a sensor, the sensor designed to monitor a volume of the first fluid received from the first segment of the utility pipe and injected into the second segment of the utility pipe (see e.g. screen capture 12), and to send an input to the controller related to the volume, wherein the controller generates an output based on the input received from the sensor (see e.g. screen capture 13).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onboard Dynamics (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dvqw1Vo8vA), published 2021 in view of Bryde US 20040164618 as evidenced by IPS, published 2023 (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20231101075557/https://whyips.com/plant-service/cylinder-evacuation-systems/) in further view of Morris US 20100000252 in further view of Onboard Dynamics 2, published 2023, (URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEaaLxDt1Sk).
Regarding claim 20, Onboard Dynamics as modified above does not disclose a display unit in electrical communication with the controller, the display unit is adapted to provide real-time data on the volume of the first fluid received from the first segment of the utility pipe and injected into the second segment of the utility pipe, and to generate reports on greenhouse gas emissions savings based on the real-time data.
It would be understood that Onboard dynamics would include a both a local and remote display to display information. For example, Onboard Dynamics 2 discloses a display unit in electrical communication with a controller (see screen capture 9-10), the display unit is adapted to provide real-time data on a volume of natural gas evacuated and injected, and to generate reports on greenhouse gas emissions savings based on the real-time data (see screen capture 11).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a display and reports as taught by Onboard Dynamics 2 in the system of Onboard Dynamics as modified above to gain the benefit of allowing relevant information to be displayed.
Conclusion
See form PTO-892 for additional prior art made of record but not relied upon that is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS ANDREW FINK whose telephone number is (571) 270-3373. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 9-7.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Laurenzi can be reached on (571) 270-7878. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-4373.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Thomas Fink/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights