DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. Applicant's submission filed on 3/19/2026 has been entered. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. The rejections of claim 1, and thus dependent claims 2-9, 13, and 21-22; each of claims 16-20; and claim 21; under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments filed.
The rejections of claim 1, and thus dependent claims 2-9, 13, 21, and 22; each of claims 16-20; and claim 21 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or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments filed.
Claim Analysis
3. The following sections were all previously provided. It is noted that the claim language added to claim 1 and claims 21 and claim 22 is not particularly limiting. To meet the language of the electrolyte layer(s) covering each electrode layer in a region that is larger than each electrode layer- this could simply be the thickness of the electrolyte layer relative to that of the thickness of the electrode layer (i.e., an electrolyte layer of the prior art having a thickness greater than the electrode layer it covers meets the limitation that it covers each electrode layer in a region that is larger than electrode layer as claimed).
4. With regard to claims 21 and 22, an electrolyte layer that is stacked over an electrode taking the format as shown below is simultaneously directly on a top surface of the electrode layer, directly on a left side surface thereof, and directly on the right surface thereof (i.e., the top, respective corner areas of where the left and right surfaces of the electrode meet the electrolyte layer are in direct contact with one another):
PNG
media_image1.png
95
262
media_image1.png
Greyscale
To actually capture the construct shown in Figs. 3 and 4, the language would have to be further limited to define that the electrolyte layer(s) surrounds the(/each) electrode layer(s) (using proper antecedent basis for the two options defined in the claim); however this is met by the prior art as previously noted in the interview summary addressing analogous amendments as well as multiple references below. The comments made in this section are solely made for clarity of how the feature is being interpreted versus recommended language as the feature is not considered a path to allowability as it is addressed below by the prior art applied. The Examiner’s prior comment regarding this from the Interview Summary mailed 10/10/2025 is reproduced below:
PNG
media_image2.png
113
729
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The prior art cited to Komura et al. (US 2004/0175606) was cited in the Interview summary relative to the proposed feature, Komura teaching analogous art of a fuel cell including an anode or first electrode 28, an electrolyte membrane 29, and cathode/second electrode 30 that has the exact construct of Fig. 3 of the instant application in which end(s) 29a, 29b of the electrolyte membrane 29 are configured to surround and cover the respective, underlying electrode layer in a region larger than said electrode layer (P68; Fig. 3; entirely disclosure relied upon):
PNG
media_image3.png
391
894
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
277
740
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The best available prior art references addressing this feature are now applied to the claims given Applicant amended the claims to include the interview-proposed features along with the “solid oxide” feature to the preamble, wherein to further demonstrate the feature as a well-known design feature, additional references are cited below to demonstrate the vast body of prior art pertaining to a configuration in which an electrolyte layer surrounds an underlying electrode or electrodes:
Yoshikata et al. (JP 2007-323957) (abstract; figures) teaches a solid oxide fuel cell with electrolyte 4 having the shape shown below with fuel electrode 2 fully contained therein (Fig. 2 reproduced below):
PNG
media_image5.png
148
333
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Hara et al. (US 2003/0207166) teaches a solid oxide fuel cell construct in which the respective electrolyte layer 5 surrounds its corresponding, underlying electrode 7, the plurality of electrochemical reactions being disposed on porous metal layer 2 and connected in parallel:
PNG
media_image6.png
265
387
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
275
524
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Quek et al. (US 2007/0072070) teaches an electrochemical cell construct in which electrolyte 102 surrounds the underlying electrode on all sides acting as a deposited seal to keep the oxidant and the fuel from mixing (P33):
PNG
media_image8.png
414
543
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Frank et al. (US 2004/0170884):
PNG
media_image9.png
258
528
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Sasahara et al. (US 6,835,488) teaches a single layer, patterned electrolyte layer 120 (Fig. 9E) having the follow construct:
PNG
media_image10.png
491
460
media_image10.png
Greyscale
5. It is noted that regardless of whether the prior art is drawn to a solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC), a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cell, a phosphoric acid fuel cell, etc., they are all considered to be in the same field of endeavor, operating under the exact same principles, the only distinguishing feature(s) being either the specific reactants applied and/or the chemical constituents of the respective layers and corresponding operating temperature as would be immediately understood by one having ordinary skill in the art. Accordingly, at least as far as the structural aspects of a fuel cell are concerned, any specific type of chemistry fuel cell (e.g., those enumerated above) are applicable to achieving a similar device operating under the same principles, regardless of the chemistry selected. These statements are evidenced by the following prior art references:
Chun et al. (US 2015/0180064):
[0004] Fuel cells are classified into phosphoric acid fuel cells, molten carbonate fuel cells, solid oxide fuel cells, polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells, and the like according to the type of electrolytes. The basic principles of these fuel cells are identical to each other, but they are different from each other in terms of the type of fuels, operating temperature, catalyst, electrolyte, and the like.
Lee et al. (US 2016/0079616):
[0003] Based on the type of electrolyte used, fuel cells are largely classified into polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs), phosphoric acid fuel cells (PAFCs), molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFCs), solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs), alkaline fuel cells (AFCs) and the like. These various types of fuel cells essentially operate on the same principle, but are different in terms of the type of fuel used, operation temperature, catalyst, electrolyte and the like.
Whyatt et al. (US 2008/0113228):
[0007] The present invention provides a method and apparatus for improving water balance in a power unit. As used herein, a "power unit" is a system for generating electrical power that has fuel reformer utilizing water (based either steam reforming or autothermal reforming) and a fuel cell. The type of the particular fuel cell with which the invention can be applied includes not only PEM (Polymer Electrode Membrane) types of fuel cells but also SOFC (Solid Oxide Fuel Cells), phosphoric acid fuel cells and other types of fuel cells. …The discussion that follows will address one example of a steam reforming system with a PEM fuel cell but should not be considered limiting in terms of the choice of either reforming technology or fuel cell technology. A PEM fuel cell includes an anode side, which is fed a gas containing hydrogen, and a cathode side, which is fed a gas containing oxygen. Within such a fuel cell, the hydrogen fed to the anode side and the oxygen fed to the cathode side are combined to produce electricity and water. The present invention is suitable for use with power units and components of the power units of various designs. Accordingly, no further elaboration of the design and operation of the steam reforming system, the combustion system, and the fuel cell is necessary to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make or use the present invention.
Fisher et al. (US 2007/0037034) (P21):
While the fuel cell system 12 is particularly suited for PEM fuel cells, other fuel cell types that are fueled by hydrogen gas can be substituted, such as solid oxide fuel cells, phosphoric acid fuel cells and alkaline fuel cells.
6. Claim 1 defines two options for the electrolyte layer:
PNG
media_image11.png
289
685
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claim 6 is drawn only to the multi-electrolyte embodiment (option 1) and will thus only be addressed by prior art drawn to the multi-electrolyte embodiment. It is noted that only the multi-electrolyte embodiment has the features as defined; amending claim 6 otherwise would be a new matter issue. The comment is made solely as to why claim 6 is only addressed with prior art addressing the multi-electrolyte embodiment (option 1).
Claims 7 and 8 also each only refer to the embodiment 1 option.
Claim 4 is only applicable/supported in the embodiment 1 option (i.e., the plurality of gas following portions is only shown for the Fig. 3 embodiment).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. Rejection A: The rejection of claims 1-5, 9, 13, 16, 18-20, and 22 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobsen et al. (US 7,829,213) in view of Kazuo (JP 2013-077450) (machine translation previously provided) and Kabumoto (US 2006/0194088) is maintained.
Regarding claim 1, Jacobsen teaches a solid oxide electrochemical module (Figs. 4, 6-8; C1/L32-35; C12/L12-35) comprising:
a plurality of electrochemical element units (shown in Fig. 4) arranged in a grouped state (Figs. 6-8; note C12/L12-35 teaches that the embodiment shown in Fig. 4 can be stacked in vertical stacks to create an array with a corrugated duct (such as that shown in Fig. 6- see corrugated duct 54 (“cell connecting member”)) that is welded to the mesh or felt layer 52 of an adjacent planar array) between adjacent electrochemical element units. For easy visualization, this taught construct is provided below in the Examiner-annotated/combined Figure below:
PNG
media_image12.png
323
746
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Thus, Jacobsen teaches an electrochemical module (Figs. 4, 6-8; C12/L12-35) comprising:
a plurality of electrochemical element units (shown in Fig. 4),
a plurality of manifolds/corrugated ducts 54 (“cell connecting members”) (C12/L12-35; Fig. 6; explanation above);
wherein:
each manifold/corrugated duct 54 (“cell connecting member”) is positioned between two adjacent electrochemical element units (C12/L12-52; Figs. 6-8, with Fig. 8 teaching a three-tiered stack),
each electrochemical element unit comprises a single metal substrate 28 (Figs. 2A-5) and a plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 on an upper side of the single metal substrate 28,
the single metal substrate 28 of each electrochemical element unit has a respective gas flow allowing region (i.e., either a single perforation 30 OR a subset of perforations 30 that correspond to a respective electrochemical reaction portion 32) that allows flowing of a gaseous fuel (“a first gas”) between the upper side and a lower side of the respective single metal substrate 28 (Figs. 2A-5; C10/L58-C11/L39);
each electrochemical reaction portion 32 has at least an anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”), an electrolyte layer 48, and a cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”), and is arranged on and/or over the upper side of the respective single metal substrate 28 of each electrochemical unit (Figs. 4-5; C11/L51-C1211),
the electrolyte layer 48 of each electrochemical portion is arranged at least between the respective anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) and the respective cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”) (Fig. 5; C6; L42-46; C11/L51-57),
the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 are electrically connected in parallel so that failure of one will not result in the failure of the entire array (abstract; C10/L62-64; also immediately apparent by way of the illustrated construct in which all electrochemical reaction portions 32 are connected in parallel at the same potential by way of current collector mesh 52- see Fig. 4);
in each electrochemical element unit, the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 is separate from the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the other electrochemical reaction portions 32 of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions (Figs. 2A-5),
in each electrochemical element unit, the cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions is separate from the cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”) of each of the other electrochemical reaction portions 32 of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions (Figs. 2A-5),
in each electrochemical element unit, the electrolyte layer 48 of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 is separate from the electrolyte layer 48 of each of the other electrochemical reaction portions of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions (Figs. 2A-5),
each manifold/corrugated duct 54 (“cell connecting member”) has a plurality of first gas passages on an upper side thereof, and a plurality of second gas passages on a lower side thereof (Figs. 6-8),
the gaseous fuel (“a first gas”) flows through the plurality of first gas passages of each of the plurality of manifolds/corrugated ducts 54 (“cell connecting member”) (C11/L58-C12/L35),
the plurality of electrochemical element units 32 is arranged such that the gaseous fuel (“first gas”) flowing through the plurality of first gas passages of each of the plurality of manifolds/interconnect ducts 54 (“cell connecting members”) comes into contact with the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 of an adjacent one of the plurality of electrochemical element units, and an oxidant gas (“second gas”) flowing through the second gas passage[s] of each of the plurality of manifolds/interconnect ducts 54 (“cell connecting members”) comes into contact with the cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 of an adjacent one of the plurality of the electrochemical element units,
on the upper side of the single metal substrate 28 [also termed the porous conductive support plate within Jacobsen disclosure] of each electrochemical element unit, a protective layer of oxide (“i.e., an oxide film”) is formed to increase resistance to oxidation (C9/L57-C10/L35) by surface coating, the oxidation being an issue where the single metal substrate 28 is bonded or welded to the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) [i.e., the protective layer of oxide, formed on the surface of the single metal substrate 28 where oxidation is being avoided in the contact area between the anode layer which is thus, “in at least a region where the respective single metal substrate 28 of the electrochemical unit and the respective anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the respective plurality of electrochemical reaction portions of the electrochemical cell unit are in contact,” the latter also intrinsically true given the ion conduction feature described of the protective layer of oxide which could not hold true if not in direct contact with the negative electrode – see C10/L26-35],
and the gaseous fuel (“first gas’) and the oxidant gas (“second gas”) are different from one another.
The claim recites that in each electrochemical element unit, the electrolyte layer 48 of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 is separate from the electrolyte layer 48 of each of the other electrochemical reaction portions of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions (Figs. 2A-5) as is met by Jacobsen, OR the electrolyte layer 48 is a single electrolyte shared by the plurality of electrochemical reactions, wherein the single electrolyte covers each electrode layer of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions in a region that is larger than each electrode layer.
Addressing the latter, alternative electrolyte configuration, in the same field of endeavor, Kabumoto teaches analogous art of an electrochemical module including a planar array fuel cell in which there is a singular, electrolyte membrane 10/1016 with a plurality of anode sections applied to a first side thereof, and a plurality of cathodes applied on the opposite side thereof which together form a plurality of cells 36 (“electrochemical reaction portions”). Kabumoto teaches that the construct helps prevent cross-leakages of fuels or oxidants and improves the efficiency of the construct as it can be constructed in a simple manner (P9, 12, 26; Figs. 1-5; entire disclosure relied upon). The single electrolyte layer 10/2016 covers each electrode layer of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions in a region that is larger than each electrode layer given the electrolyte layer 10/2016 extends the entire length of the analogous electrochemical element unit (see Figs. 3-5). Figs. 3-5 of Kabumoto are reproduced below for convenience:
PNG
media_image13.png
372
624
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image14.png
320
550
media_image14.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image15.png
606
538
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to apply the known technique of Kabumoto to the construct of Jacobsen in terms of providing a singular, compound electrolyte membrane 10 (versus a plurality of individual membranes for each portion 32) that covers each electrode layer of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions in a region that is large than each electrode layer (Figs. 3-4) given Kabumoto demonstrates the technique is known in the art and provides the predictable and advantageous results of helping to prevent cross-leakages of fuels or oxidants and improving the efficiency of the construct as it can be constructed in a simple manner (i.e., less components required) (P9, 12, 26; Figs. 3-4; entire disclosure relied upon).
Jacobsen fails to explicitly teach that the protective layer of oxide is a metal oxide; however, in the same field of endeavor Kazuo teaches analogous art of a solid oxide fuel cell in which on a support A comprised of a metal partition having a honeycomb structure with a plurality of through-holes (i.e., analogous in structure to the single metal substrate 28 of Jacobsen), there is a fuel electrode B (i.e., anode), a solid electrolyte C, and an air electrode D (i.e., cathode) stacked in this order which is the same order as Jacobsen, wherein a porous layer H is provided to the honeycomb structure support A, wherein porous layer H may be provided to the entire top surface thereof and preferably is to prevent deterioration (Figs. 1-3; P48), the metal material of support A may be nickel, steel, etc. (P18), and wherein the material of the porous layer H may be the same as that of metal partition wall and may be a mixture or cermet of a metal and an inorganic oxide such as nickel oxides (P33). Kazuo teaches that the technique and construct provide a solid oxide fuel cell excellent in cell strength with rigidity against torsion and deflection and a degree of freedom of deformation against compression, wherein the adhesiveness between the metal support and the electrode is excellent (P7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to select as the specific type of protective oxide layer of Jacobsen that of a metal oxide layer H as taught by Kazuo given Kazuo teaches it is a known technique to provide the entire surface of the upper side of an analogous metal support A with such a layer and that it achieves the advantageous results of providing a solid oxide fuel cell excellent in cell strength with rigidity against torsion and deflection and a degree of freedom of deformation against compression, wherein the adhesiveness between the metal support and the electrode is excellent (P7).
Additionally, the finding of obviousness is two-fold given the following case law (MPEP § 2144.07):
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) ("…selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle." 325 U.S. at 335, 65 USPQ at 301.).
See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious).
Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (Claimed agricultural bagging machine, which differed from a prior art machine only in that the brake means were hydraulically operated rather than mechanically operated, was held to be obvious over the prior art machine in view of references which disclosed hydraulic brakes for performing the same function, albeit in a different environment.).
Therefore, it is additionally considered an entirely obvious expedient to select a known oxide composition (i.e., a metal oxide as taught by Kazuo) suitable for its intended use (Kazuo teaching a similar construct including an analogous layer and its suitability therefor) for the protective oxide layer of Jacobsen on the basis of the case law above.
Regarding claim 2, Jacobsen teaches wherein the cell connecting members 54 do not have gas permeability (C1/L49-65; C3/L39-55; C5/L23-27).
Regarding claim 3, Jacobsen teaches wherein the cell connecting members have electrical conductivity (C3/L39-55).
Regarding claim 4, Jacobsen teaches wherein the gas flow allowing region of the single metal substrate of each electrochemical unit comprises a plurality of gas flow allowing regions that are separated from one another [i.e., either perforations 30 or the respective subsets of perforations 30 that correspond to a respective electrochemical reaction portion 32 and are separated from each other (Figs. 2A-4)].
Regarding claim 5, Jacobsen teaches wherein the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 of each electrochemical element unit (Fig. 4), in combination, are arranged so as to cover at least the plurality of gas flow allowing regions (perforations 30 or subsets thereof) of the respective electrochemical element unit (Figs. 2A-5).
Regarding claim 7, Jacobsen as modified by Kabumoto teaches the [single] electrolyte layer is gas impermeable (P12; also intrinsic to the construct as otherwise the oxidant and fuel gases would mix).
Regarding claim 8, Jacobsen as modified by Kabumoto teaches the [single] electrolyte layer is gas impermeable (P12; also intrinsic to the construct as otherwise the oxidant and fuel gases would mix) and thus intrinsically “separates the first gas and the second gas from each other.”
Regarding claim 9, Jacobsen teaches wherein the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 are formed with gaps therebetween (Figs. 2A-5), and Jacobsen as optionally modified by Kabumoto teaches the plurality of cells 36 (“electrochemical reaction portions”) are formed with gaps therebetween (Figs. 3-4).
Regarding claim 13, Jacobsen as modified by Kazuo teaches wherein the metal oxide film porous layer H is an oxide (nickel oxide as one non-limiting example- P49) that contains at least a metal element (nickel) included in the single metal substrate 28 (Jacobsen teaches nickel, among others- C9/L19-46, as does Kazuo- P33).
Regarding claim 16, Jacobsen teaches an electrochemical device (C1/L32-48), comprising:
the electrochemical module according to claim 1; and
an intrinsic fuel supply unit that supplies a fuel gas containing a reducible component (hydrogen gas) to the electrochemical module (see C2/L9-48 providing hydrogen fuel to the solid oxide fuel cell construct which would intrinsically require a “fuel supply unit” in order to achieve the described feature).
Regarding claim 18, Jacobsen teaches an energy system (C1-C2), comprising:
the electrochemical device according to claim 16; and
a waste heat management unit (intrinsic to the described “waste heat may be used to generate steam to drive a generator”) that reuses heat discharged from the electrochemical device (C2/L54-60).
Regarding claim 19, Jacobsen teaches a solid oxide fuel cell unit (C1/L32-35) comprising:
the electrochemical module according to 1,
wherein the electrochemical module causes a power generation reaction (C2/L16-33)..
Regarding claim 20, Jacobsen teaches a solid oxide electrolysis cell unit (C13/L37-49), comprising: the electrochemical module according to the electrochemical module according to wherein the electrochemical module causes an electrolysis reaction (C13/L37-49).
Regarding claim 22, Jacobsen as modified by Kabumoto teaches wherein the single electrolyte layer construct covers each electrode layer of each of the plurality of electrochemical reactions portions in a region that is larger than each electrode layer, the single electrolyte layer is directly on a top surface of each electrode layer, directly on a left side surface of each electrode layer, and directly on a right side surface of each electrode layer (see pertinent claim analysis section above describing the interpretation of this feature, incorporated into this rejection in its entirety).
7. The alternative rejection of claim 22 as a compact prosecution rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobsen et al. (US 7,829,213) in view of Kazuo (JP 2013-077450) (machine translation previously provided) and Kabumoto (US 2006/0194088) as applied to at least claim 1 above, and further in view of Chao et al. (US 2010/0183948) is maintained.
Regarding claim 22 (compact prosecution rejection), the pertinent portion of the claim analysis section above is incorporated into the instant rejection, wherein for compact prosecution purposes, the non-required configuration in which the single electrolyte layer surrounds the underlying electrode layers is addressed.
In the same field of endeavor, Chao teaches analogous art of a multi-array fuel cell in which a plurality of Ni anodes 504 are provided with a single layer YSZ electrolyte layer 502 that entirely surrounds each underlying anode and has a connecting portion therebetween (Fig. 5; abstract; P7-8, 25, 28, 30, 34). Chao teaches that the single layer electrolyte can cover the entire surface of the array and be deposited by atomic layer deposition (ALD) with a uniform thickness such that ohmic loss in the electroyte membrane is extremely suppressed (P30).
Fig. 5 of Chao is reproduced below for convenience:
PNG
media_image16.png
775
535
media_image16.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to apply the known technique and construct of providing a solid electrolyte layer in a single layer construct that surrounds each underlying anode and has a connecting portion therebetween via ALD such that a uniform solid electrolyte can be achieved in order to provide the predictable result of suppressing ohmic loss in the electrolyte membrane (P30).
8. Rejection B: The rejection of claims 1-9, 13, 16, 18-20, and 21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobsen et al. (US 7,829,213) in view of Kazuo (JP 2013-077450) (machine translation previously provided) and Leah et al. (US 2015/0064596) is maintained.
Regarding claim 1, Jacobsen teaches a solid oxide electrochemical module (Figs. 4, 6-8; C1/L32-35; C12/L12-35) comprising:
a plurality of electrochemical element units (shown in Fig. 4) arranged in a grouped state (Figs. 6-8; note C12/L12-35 teaches that the embodiment shown in Fig. 4 can be stacked in vertical stacks to create an array with a corrugated duct (such as that shown in Fig. 6- see corrugated duct 54 (“cell connecting member”)) that is welded to the mesh or felt layer 52 of an adjacent planar array) between adjacent electrochemical element units. For easy visualization, this taught construct is provided below in the Examiner-annotated/combined Figure below:
PNG
media_image12.png
323
746
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Thus, Jacobsen teaches an electrochemical module (Figs. 4, 6-8; C12/L12-35) comprising:
a plurality of electrochemical element units (shown in Fig. 4),
a plurality of manifolds/corrugated ducts 54 (“cell connecting members”) (C12/L12-35; Fig. 6; explanation above);
wherein:
each manifold/corrugated duct 54 (“cell connecting member”) is positioned between two adjacent electrochemical element units (C12/L12-52; Figs. 6-8, with Fig. 8 teaching a three-tiered stack),
each electrochemical element unit comprises a single metal substrate 28 (Figs. 2A-5) and a plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 on an upper side of the single metal substrate 28,
the single metal substrate 28 of each electrochemical element unit has a respective gas flow allowing region (i.e., either a single perforation 30 OR a subset of perforations 30 that correspond to a respective electrochemical reaction portion 32) that allows flowing of a gaseous fuel (“a first gas”) between the upper side and a lower side of the respective single metal substrate 28 (Figs. 2A-5; C10/L58-C11/L39);
each electrochemical reaction portion 32 has at least an anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”), an electrolyte layer 48, and a cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”), and is arranged on and/or over the upper side of the respective single metal substrate 28 of each electrochemical unit (Figs. 4-5; C11/L51-C1211),
the electrolyte layer 48 of each electrochemical portion is arranged at least between the respective anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) and the respective cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”) (Fig. 5; C6; L42-46; C11/L51-57),
the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 are electrically connected in parallel so that failure of one will not result in the failure of the entire array (abstract; C10/L62-64; also immediately apparent by way of the illustrated construct in which all electrochemical reaction portions 32 are connected in parallel at the same potential by way of current collector mesh 52- see Fig. 4);
in each electrochemical element unit, the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 is separate from the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the other electrochemical reaction portions 32 of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions (Figs. 2A-5),
in each electrochemical element unit, the cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions is separate from the cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”) of each of the other electrochemical reaction portions 32 of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions (Figs. 2A-5,
in each electrochemical element unit, the electrolyte layer 48 of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 is separate from the electrolyte layer 48 of each of the other electrochemical reaction portions of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions (Figs. 2A-5),
each manifold/corrugated duct 54 (“cell connecting member”) has a plurality of first gas passages on an upper side thereof, and a plurality of second gas passages on a lower side thereof (Figs. 6-8),
the gaseous fuel (“a first gas”) flows through the plurality of first gas passages of each of the plurality of manifolds/corrugated ducts 54 (“cell connecting member”) (C11/L58-C12/L35),
the plurality of electrochemical element units 32 is arranged such that the gaseous fuel (“first gas”) flowing through the plurality of first gas passages of each of the plurality of manifolds/interconnect ducts 54 (“cell connecting members”) comes into contact with the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 of an adjacent one of the plurality of electrochemical element units, and an oxidant gas (“second gas”) flowing through the second gas passage[s] of each of the plurality of manifolds/interconnect ducts 54 (“cell connecting members”) comes into contact with the cathode layer 50 (“counter electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 of an adjacent one of the plurality of the electrochemical element units,
on the upper side of the single metal substrate 28 [also termed the porous conductive support plate within Jacobsen disclosure] of each electrochemical element unit, a protective layer of oxide (“i.e., an oxide film”) is formed to increase resistance to oxidation (C9/L57-C10/L35) by surface coating, the oxidation being an issue where the single metal substrate 28 is bonded or welded to the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) [i.e., the protective layer of oxide, formed on the surface of the single metal substrate 28 where oxidation is being avoided in the contact area between the anode layer which is thus, “in at least a region where the respective single metal substrate 28 of the electrochemical unit and the respective anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the respective plurality of electrochemical reaction portions of the electrochemical cell unit are in contact,” the latter also intrinsically true given the ion conduction feature described of the protective layer of oxide which could not hold true if not in direct contact with the negative electrode – see C10/L26-35],
and the gaseous fuel (“first gas’) and the oxidant gas (“second gas”) are different from one another.
Jacobsen teaches the embodiment in which the electrolyte of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions is separate from the electrolyte layre of each of the other electrochemical reaction portions of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions, but fails to disclose:
“wherein in each electrochemical reaction portion, the electrolyte layer covers the electrode layer in a region that is larger than the electrode layer…”
In the same field of endeavor, Leah teaches analogous art of a solid oxide fuel cell and that it a known technique and construct to surround the underlying electrode (anode 3) with an electrolyte layer 4 such that it covers the electrode layer in a region that is larger than the electrode layer, Leah teaching that that the construct provides a seal around the edge of the anode 3 given it overlaps the anode onto the undrilled area of the porous metal substrate 1 (P104; Fig. 1; not limited to entire disclosure). Fig. 1 of Leah is reproduced below:
PNG
media_image17.png
283
498
media_image17.png
Greyscale
It is noted that surrounding an electrode with an electrolyte membrane is a well-known feature as would be immediately recognized by one having ordinary skill in the art given it seals the gas provided to the underlying electrode (flowing through porous region 2 above) from the other gas provided to cathode 6, in this case, H2 or O2 gas, wherein leaking and mixing of these gases is problematic in terms of loss of reactants/efficiency, as well as safety concerns in terms of combustion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to configure the electrolyte layer 48 of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 of Jacobsen such that it has the above configuration (i.e. “covers the underlying electrode layer in a region that is larger than the electrode layer”) as taught by Leah to provide the taught, predictable results of providing a seal around the edge of the anode 3, thereby providing both efficiency and safety measures with respect to hydrogen/oxygen leakage/mixing.
Jacobsen fails to explicitly teach that the protective layer of oxide is a metal oxide; however, in the same field of endeavor Kazuo teaches analogous art of a solid oxide fuel cell in which on a support A comprised of a metal partition having a honeycomb structure with a plurality of through-holes (i.e., analogous in structure to the single metal substrate 28 of Jacobsen), there is a fuel electrode B (i.e., anode), a solid electrolyte C, and an air electrode D (i.e., cathode) stacked in this order which is the same order as Jacobsen, wherein a porous layer H is provided to the honeycomb structure support A, wherein porous layer H may be provided to the entire top surface thereof and preferably is to prevent deterioration (Figs. 1-3; P48), the metal material of support A may be nickel, steel, etc. (P18), and wherein the material of the porous layer H may be the same as that of metal partition wall and may be a mixture or cermet of a metal and an inorganic oxide such as nickel oxides (P33). Kazuo teaches that the technique and construct provide a solid oxide fuel cell excellent in cell strength with rigidity against torsion and deflection and a degree of freedom of deformation against compression, wherein the adhesiveness between the metal support and the electrode is excellent (P7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to select as the specific type of protective oxide layer of Jacobsen that of a metal oxide layer H as taught by Kazuo given Kazuo teaches it is a known technique to provide the entire surface of the upper side of an analogous metal support A with such a layer and that it achieves the advantageous results of providing a solid oxide fuel cell excellent in cell strength with rigidity against torsion and deflection and a degree of freedom of deformation against compression, wherein the adhesiveness between the metal support and the electrode is excellent (P7).
Additionally, the finding of obviousness is two-fold given the following case law (MPEP § 2144.07):
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) ("…selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle." 325 U.S. at 335, 65 USPQ at 301.).
See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious).
Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (Claimed agricultural bagging machine, which differed from a prior art machine only in that the brake means were hydraulically operated rather than mechanically operated, was held to be obvious over the prior art machine in view of references which disclosed hydraulic brakes for performing the same function, albeit in a different environment.).
Therefore, it is additionally considered an entirely obvious expedient to select a known oxide composition (i.e., a metal oxide as taught by Kazuo) suitable for its intended use (Kazuo teaching a similar construct including an analogous layer and its suitability therefor) for the protective oxide layer of Jacobsen on the basis of the case law above.
Regarding claim 2, Jacobsen teaches wherein the cell connecting members 54 do not have gas permeability (C1/L49-65; C3/L39-55; C5/L23-27).
Regarding claim 3, Jacobsen teaches wherein the cell connecting members have electrical conductivity (C3/L39-55).
Regarding claim 4, Jacobsen teaches wherein the gas flow allowing region of the single metal substrate of each electrochemical unit comprises a plurality of gas flow allowing regions that are separated from one another [i.e., either perforations 30 or the respective subsets of perforations 30 that correspond to a respective electrochemical reaction portion 32 and are separated from each other (Figs. 2A-4)].
Regarding claim 5, Jacobsen teaches wherein the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 of each electrochemical element unit (Fig. 4), in combination, are arranged so as to cover at least the plurality of gas flow allowing regions (perforations 30 or subsets thereof) of the respective electrochemical element unit (Figs. 2A-5).
Regarding claim 6, Jacobsen teaches wherein the anode layer 46 (“electrode layer”) of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 of each electrochemical element unit, in combination, cover at least one of the gas flow allowing regions (perforations 30 or subsets thereof) of the respective electrochemical unit, and wherein the respective electrolyte layer 48 of each of the plurality of electrochemical reactions portions, in combination, are arranged so as to cover at least each of the gas flow allowing regions (perforations 30 or subsets thereof) or the respective electrode layer of each of the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, Jacobsen teaches wherein the electrolyte layer 48 of each electrochemical reaction portion 32 of each of the electrochemical units is gas impermeable (“gas-tight”) (C5/L5-8). The feature is further intrinsically required of any solid oxide fuel cell construct.
Regarding claim 8, Jacobsen teaches wherein the electrolyte layer 48 of each electrochemical reaction portion 32 of each of the electrochemical units is gas impermeable (“gas-tight”) (C5/L5-8) and thus intrinsically “separates the first gas and the second gas from each other”).
Regarding claim 9, Jacobsen teaches wherein the plurality of electrochemical reaction portions 32 are formed with gaps therebetween (Figs. 2A-5).
Regarding claim 13, Jacobsen as modified by Kazuo teaches wherein the metal oxide film porous layer H is an oxide (nickel oxide as one non-limiting example- P49) that contains at least a metal element (nickel) included in the single metal substrate 28 (Jacobsen teaches nickel, among others- C9/L19-46, as does Kazuo- P33).
Regarding claim 16, Jacobsen teaches an electrochemical device (C1/L32-48), comprising:
the electrochemical module according to claim 1; and
an intrinsic fuel supply unit that supplies a fuel gas containing a reducible component (hydrogen gas) to the electrochemical module (see C2/L9-48 providing hydrogen fuel to the solid oxide fuel cell construct which would intrinsically require a “fuel supply unit” in order to achieve the described feature).
Regarding claim 18, Jacobsen teaches an energy system (C1-C2), comprising:
the electrochemical device according to claim 16; and
a waste heat management unit (intrinsic to the described “waste heat may be used to generate steam to drive a generator”) that reuses heat discharged from the electrochemical device (C2/L54-60).
Regarding claim 19, Jacobsen teaches a solid oxide fuel cell unit (C1/L32-35) comprising:
the electrochemical module according to 1,
wherein the electrochemical module causes a power generation reaction (C2/L16-33)..
Regarding claim 20, Jacobsen teaches a solid oxide electrolysis cell unit (C13/L37-49), comprising: the electrochemical module according to the electrochemical module according to wherein the electrochemical module causes an electrolysis reaction (C13/L37-49).
Regarding claim 21, Jacobsen as modified by Leah teaches the configuration applied is one in which the electrolyte membrane 4 is directly on each of a top surface, left side surface, and right side surface of the first electrode 3 (P104; Fig. 1; entirely disclosure relied upon), and the advantages of such a configuration (P104; see rejection of claim 1 above). Fig. 1 of Leah is reproduced below for convenience:
PNG
media_image17.png
283
498
media_image17.png
Greyscale
9. The rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over:
Rejection A as applied to at least claim 1; OR
Rejection B as applied to at least claim 1;
and further in of Maly et al. (US 2005/0287402) is maintained.
Regarding claim 17, Jacobsen teaches an electrochemical device, comprising:
the electrochemical module according to claim 1 (see corresponding rejections above; Jacobsen: C1-C2; entire disclosure relied upon), wherein the electrochemical module may be a solid oxide fuel cell stack (C1-C2).
The references fail to disclose an inverter that extracts electrical power from the electrochemical module. In the same field of endeavor, Maly teaches it is a known technique to provide an inverter 202 to extract DC power from the fuel cell stack and invert the extracted DC power to AC power and export the AC power to a load 208 (P30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to provide the construct of Jacobsen with an inverter that that extracts electrical power from the electrochemical module given Maly teaches the technique and construct are known in the art, the combination thereof providing for the predictable result of allowing DC power to be extracted from the fuel cell module such that it may be converted to AC power and exported as AC power to a load 208 (P30).
Response to Arguments
10. Applicant's arguments filed 3/19/2026 have been fully considered but with respect to the maintained prior art rejections above, they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image18.png
308
656
media_image18.png
Greyscale
In response: No such amendment was made to the claims (i.e., the argued “directly on” feature), nor would it be possible to amend the claims in such a manner given the following limitation required within the independent claim:
PNG
media_image19.png
144
656
media_image19.png
Greyscale
The above quoted limitation is shown in Fig. 3, in which the claimed metal oxide film 6 is an intervening layer between the respective electrodes A1-A5 (i.e., the respective electrode layers as claimed in the claim set) and the metal substrate 1. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments are not commensurate in scope with any claim limitation presented, wherein moreover, such a limitation would not be possible given the requirements of the metal oxide film subsequently claimed. It appears Applicant is, in effect, arguing against their own claimed construct presented. The argument is not persuasive and the rejections maintained given no such amendment exists in the claim set, and all limitations presented are met by the maintained prior art rejections.
Conclusion
11. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMANDA J BARROW whose telephone number is (571)270-7867. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am - 6pm CST.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached on (571) 272-1481. 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.
/AMANDA J BARROW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights