Ex Parte Hyde et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 11, 2016

12460979 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 11, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO.
12/460,979
136716 7590
HolzerIPLaw, PC
216 16th Street
Suite 1350
Denver, CO 80202
FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
0712712009 Roderick A. Hyde
08/15/2016
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
365012CIP/0707-032-006-CI 5691
EXAMINER
O'CONNOR, MARSHALL P
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3646
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/15/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
docket@holzerIPlaw.com
docketing@terrapower.com
hiplaw@blackhillsip.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte RODERICK A. HYDE,
MURIEL Y. ISHIKAWA, NATHANP. MYHRVOLD,
JOSHUA C. WALTER, THOMAS ALLAN WEA VER,
LOWELL L. WOOD, JR., and VICTORIA Y.H. WOOD
Appeal2014-008526
Application 12/460,979
Technology Center 3600
Before JAMES P. CAL VE, WILLIAM A. CAPP, and
BRANDON J. WARNER, Administrative Patent Judges.
CAL VE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of
claim 1. Notice of Appeal, Dec. 23, 2013. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
Appeal2014-008526
Application 12/460,979
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claim 1, the sole claim on appeal, is reproduced below.
1. A method, comprising:
thermoelectrically converting heat generated with a
nuclear reactor to electrical energy; and
supplying the electrical energy to at least one operation
system of the gas cooled nuclear reactor.
REJECTION
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by
McGraw-Hill (Nuclear Reactor, Encyclopedia of Science & Technology,
177-185 (9th Ed. 2002)).
ANALYSIS
The Examiner found that McGraw-Hill discloses thermoelectrically
converting heat generated by a gas cooled nuclear reactor to electric energy.
Final Act. 3 (citing McGraw Hill, 177, Fig. 5); Ans. 3. The Examiner found
that l\1cGrav,r-Hill discloses supplying electrical energy to an operation
system of the reactor, such as a power grid and distribution system. Final
Act. 3--4 (citing McGraw-Hill, 177, 179, 181 (second column), 185); Ans. 3.
Appellants argue that McGraw-Hill merely discloses electrical energy
production by a nuclear reactor using a steam generator or turbo-generator
that is powered by the heat of the reactor, but does not disclose the claimed
thermoelectric conversion of heat generated by a gas cooled nuclear reactor.
Appeal Br. 26-27. Appellants further argue that the Examiner's treatment of
a turbine generator as equivalent to the claimed thermoelectric conversion of
heat to electrical energy is unreasonable in light of the Specification, which
discloses that such conversion involves devices based on the junction of two
materials with different Seebeck coefficients. Reply Br. 6-7, 8.
2
Appeal2014-008526
Application 12/460,979
Appellants also argue that McGraw-Hill does not disclose supplying
electrical energy to "at least one operation system of the gas cooled nuclear
reactor," because a power grid and distribution system distributes electrical
energy to consumers and therefore is not equivalent to the claimed operating
system. Appeal Br. 26-28; Reply Br. 9.
The Examiner's finding that McGraw-Hill's disclosure of electrical
energy generation by a steam turbine generator corresponds to the claimed
thermoelectric conversion of heat to electrical energy is an unreasonably
broad interpretation. We interpret "thermoelectrially converting heat ... to
electrical energy," in light of the Specification, to require conversion by a
thermoelectric device, which Appellants disclose as involving a junction of
two materials with different Seebeck coefficients, such as a thermocouple
with semiconductor-semiconductor junction 240, 242, metal-metal junction
244, and nanofabricated device 246 optimized for varying temperature
operating ranges with some examples of those materials. Spec. i-fi-1 9, 10, 21-
28, 44--48, Figs. 1-5. The Examiner's finding that McGraw-Hill's Figure 5
discloses a turbine generator that converts heat to electrical energy does not
explain how this conversion would be done thermoelectrically, as claimed.
Appellants disclose that electrical energy generated thermoelectrically
by thermoelectric device 104 is supplied to operation systems of the reactor
such as control system 116, rod control system 118, valve control system
120, monitoring system 122, coolant system 124, shutdown system 134, and
warning system 13 6. Spec. 11-16, Fig. 1. The Examiner has not established
that a power grid and distribution system connected to a reactor to supply
customers with electricity is an operation system of the nuclear reactor.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of claim 1.
3
Appeal2014-008526
Application 12/460,979
DECISION
We REVERSE the rejection of claim 1.
REVERSED
4