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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 02/25/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4 and 6-10 are currently pending. Claims 1 and 9-10 are amended. Support for the amended claims, while not specifically pointed out, is found in figure 1 and page 7 of the instant application. In view of Applicant’s amendments, the rejections set forth in the previous Office Action mailed 12/11/2025 have been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Szrama et al. (US 20080118802 A1) in view of Farrington et al. (US 20150357656 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Szrama discloses a fuel cell assembly (paragraph 0001), comprising: a membrane electrode assembly including: a membrane; a first electrode arranged on a first side of the membrane and to which a first gas diffusion layer is assigned; and a second electrode arranged on a second side of the membrane opposite to the first side of the membrane and to which a second gas diffusion layer is assigned (paragraphs 0011, 0046, figure 11, CCM 11, gas diffusion layers 200); a frame configured to increase structural stability of the membrane electrode assembly (paragraph 0053) and positioned at least in part between the first gas diffusion layer and the first electrode of the membrane electrode assembly (paragraphs 0013, 0046-0047, figure 11, structural film layer 14); and an adhesive layer directly bonding the membrane electrode assembly to the frame (paragraph 0046, figure 11b, adhesive layer 15), wherein the adhesive layer is present at least in a first edge area on a first side of the membrane electrode assembly facing the frame (figure 11b, adhesive layer 15), wherein the adhesive layer completely penetrates through the first electrode on the first side of the membrane such that the membrane is directly bonded to the frame as a result of the penetration completely through the first electrode (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2c, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration), wherein the adhesive layer has a first adhesive layer section connecting the membrane at the edge area of the membrane electrode assembly adjacent the first side of the membrane directly to the frame and a second adhesive layer section connecting the membrane at the edge area of the membrane electrode assembly adjacent the second side of the membrane directly to the second gas diffusion layer (paragraph 0046, annotated figure 11b, adhesive layer 15 connects first membrane side to structural film layer 14, and second membrane side to gas diffusion layer 200), and wherein the first adhesive layer section and the second adhesive layer section form the adhesive layer with a monolithic structure that extends in a region beyond the membrane electrode assembly from the frame to the second gas diffusion layer without any intervening structure (annotated figure 11b, monolithic adhesive region). Szrama does not explicitly disclose that the adhesive layer is present in a second edge area on a second side of the membrane electrode assembly facing the second gas diffusion layer and that the only intervening structures throughout an entirety of the adhesive layer between the frame and second gas diffusion layer is the membrane electrode assembly.
Farrington discloses fuel cell assemblies for a solid polymer electrolyte fuel cell stack that employ catalyst coated membranes and a construction in which plastic film frames are used to frame the catalyst coated membranes within (Farrington paragraph 0013). Farrington further discloses that adhesive is used on both sides of a plastic frame, and additional adhesive is applied on anode surface of the CCM to provide a more robust seal (Farrington paragraph 0038, figure 2, adhesive layer 14, equivalent to adhesive in a second edge area on a second side of the MEA). The adhesive layer comprised of adhesive layers 13 and 14 has no intervening structures between the frame and second gas diffusion layer (anode gas diffusion layer 7) except for the MEA (Farrington paragraphs 0038, 0040, figure 2). The reference teaches that the sealing assembly reduces part counts and improves seal robustness (Farrington paragraphs 0049-0051). Farrington and Szrama are analogous because they both disclose sealing assemblies for fuel cells.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fuel cell assembly disclosed by Szrama to include the adhesive region at the edge of the area and with no intervening structures as disclosed by Farrington. Doing so would reduce parts and improve the robustness of the seal.
PNG
media_image1.png
354
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, modified Szrama discloses the limitations of claim 1. Szrama does not explicitly disclose that the first electrode has a porosity configured to facilitate the adhesive layer completely penetrating the first electrode to bond the frame directly to the membrane. Szrama does disclose that the adhesive layer completely penetrates the first electrode to bond the frame directly to the membrane (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration).
It is deemed that the porosity is an inherent characteristic and/or property of the specifically disclosed electrode. In this respect, MPEP 2112 sets forth the following:
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
“Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In the instant case, Szrama discloses that the adhesive layer imbibes the porous electrode to bond the membrane to the frame (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration). Since Szrama teaches substantially identical structure and function regarding the adhesive layer completely penetrating the porous electrode, the electrode must include the claimed porosity. Therefore, the recited porosity is deemed an inherent characteristic of the electrode anticipated by Szrama.
Regarding claim 3, modified Szrama discloses the limitations of claim 1. Szrama does not explicitly disclose that the adhesive layer has a viscosity selected to facilitate the adhesive layer completely penetrating the first electrode to bond the frame directly to the membrane. Szrama does disclose that the adhesive layer completely penetrates the first electrode to bond the frame directly to the membrane (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration).
It is deemed that the viscosity is an inherent characteristic and/or property of the specifically disclosed adhesive. In this respect, MPEP 2112 sets forth the following:
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
“Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In the instant case, Szrama discloses that the adhesive layer imbibes the porous electrode to bond the membrane to the frame (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration). Since Szrama teaches substantially identical structure and function regarding the adhesive layer completely penetrating the porous electrode, the adhesive layer must include the claimed viscosity. Therefore, the recited viscosity is deemed an inherent characteristic of the electrode anticipated by Szrama.
Regarding claim 4, modified Szrama discloses the limitations of claim 1. Szrama does not explicitly disclose that the adhesive layer has a surface energy and/or surface tension selected to facilitate the adhesive layer completely penetrating the first electrode to bond the frame directly to the membrane. Szrama does disclose that the adhesive layer completely penetrates the first electrode to bond the frame directly to the membrane (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration).
It is deemed that the surface energy and surface tension are inherent characteristics and/or properties of the specifically disclosed adhesive. In this respect, MPEP 2112 sets forth the following:
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
“Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In the instant case, Szrama discloses that the adhesive layer imbibes the porous electrode to bond the membrane to the frame (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration). Since Szrama teaches substantially identical structure and function regarding the adhesive layer completely penetrating the porous electrode, the adhesive layer must include the claimed surface energy and/or surface tension. Therefore, the recited surface energy and/or surface tension are deemed inherent characteristics of the electrode anticipated by Szrama.
Regarding claim 6, modified Szrama discloses the limitations of claim 1. Szrama further discloses that the membrane and the electrodes are formed in lateral extension with an identical surface area (paragraph 0030, figures 1-9, electrodes are coextensive with membrane).
Regarding claim 7, modified Szrama discloses the limitations of claim 6. Szrama further discloses that the frame comprises a recess with a flow cross section whose surface area is smaller than the lateral surface area of the membrane (paragraph 0046, lines 22-32, figures 11a-11b, gap 201).
Regarding claim 9, Szrama discloses a fuel cell system including a fuel cell assembly (paragraphs 0001, 0008) comprising: a membrane electrode assembly including: a membrane; a first electrode arranged on a first side of the membrane and to which a first gas diffusion layer is assigned; and a second electrode arranged on a second side of the membrane opposite to the first side of the membrane and to which a second gas diffusion layer is assigned (paragraphs 0011, 0046, figure 11, CCM 11, gas diffusion layers 200); a frame configured to increase structural stability of the membrane electrode assembly (paragraph 0053) and positioned at least in part between the first gas diffusion layer and the first electrode of the membrane electrode assembly (paragraphs 0013, 0046-0047, figure 11, structural film layer 14); and an adhesive layer directly bonding the membrane electrode assembly to the frame (paragraph 0046, figure 11b, adhesive layer 15), wherein the adhesive layer is present at least in a first edge area on a first side of the membrane electrode assembly facing the frame (figure 11b, adhesive layer 15), wherein the adhesive layer completely penetrates through the first electrode on the first side of the membrane such that the membrane is directly bonded to the frame as a result of the penetration completely through the first electrode (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2c, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration), wherein the adhesive layer includes a first adhesive layer section connecting the membrane at the edge area of the membrane electrode assembly adjacent the first side of the membrane directly to the frame and a second adhesive layer section connecting the membrane at the edge area of the membrane electrode assembly adjacent the second side of the membrane directly to the second gas diffusion layer (paragraph 0046, annotated figure 11b, adhesive layer 15 connects first membrane side to structural film layer 14, and second membrane side to gas diffusion layer 200), and wherein the first adhesive layer section and the second adhesive layer section form the adhesive layer with a monolithic structure that extends in a region beyond the membrane electrode assembly from the frame to the second gas diffusion layer without any intervening structure (annotated figure 11b, monolithic adhesive region). Szrama does not explicitly disclose that the adhesive layer is present in a second edge area on a second side of the membrane electrode assembly facing the second gas diffusion layer and that the only intervening structures throughout an entirety of the adhesive layer between the frame and second gas diffusion layer is the membrane electrode assembly.
Farrington discloses fuel cell assemblies for a solid polymer electrolyte fuel cell stack that employ catalyst coated membranes and a construction in which plastic film frames are used to frame the catalyst coated membranes within (Farrington paragraph 0013). Farrington further discloses that adhesive is used on both sides of a plastic frame, and additional adhesive is applied on anode surface of the CCM to provide a more robust seal (Farrington paragraph 0038, figure 2, adhesive layer 14, equivalent to adhesive in a second edge area on a second side of the MEA). The adhesive layer comprised of adhesive layers 13 and 14 has no intervening structures between the frame and second gas diffusion layer (anode gas diffusion layer 7) except for the MEA (Farrington paragraphs 0038, 0040, figure 2). The reference teaches that the sealing assembly reduces part counts and improves seal robustness (Farrington paragraphs 0049-0051). Farrington and Szrama are analogous because they both disclose sealing assemblies for fuel cells.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fuel cell assembly disclosed by Szrama to include the adhesive region at the edge of the area and with no intervening structures as disclosed by Farrington. Doing so would reduce parts and improve the robustness of the seal.
PNG
media_image1.png
354
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Szrama et al. (US 20080118802 A1) in view of Farrington et al. (US 20150357656 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kobayashi et al. (US 20070264557 A1).
Regarding claim 8, modified Szrama discloses the limitations of claim 6. Szrama further discloses that the adhesive layer forms a second sealing layer that circumferentially seals both the second gas diffusion layer and the membrane to the frame on a second frame side that is opposite the first frame side (paragraphs 0032, 0041, 0046, figure 11b, assembly may be circular, adhesive layer is gas sealing means and bonds the second GDL and membrane to structural layer 14’). Szrama does not explicitly disclose that a first sealing layer that circumferentially seals the first gas diffusion layer is assigned to the frame on a first frame side.
Kobayashi discloses a membrane electrode assembly (Kobayashi paragraph 0001) with a first sealing layer that circumferentially seals the first gas diffusion layer that is assigned to the frame on a first frame side (Kobayashi paragraph 0143, annotated figure 1B, second gasket 8, first sealing layer on the first frame side), and a second sealing layer that circumferentially seals both the second gas diffusion layer and the membrane that is assigned to the frame on a second frame side that is opposite the first frame side (Kobayashi paragraph 0143, annotated figure 1B, second gasket 8, second sealing layer on the second frame side). Kobayashi further discloses that the use of the sealing gaskets can restrain gas leakage and consequently restrain a decrease in the gas utilization factor of the fuel cell (Kobayashi paragraph 0031-0032). Kobayashi and Szrama are analogous because they both disclose membrane electrode assemblies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the membrane electrode assembly disclosed by Szrama to include the sealing layer disclosed by Kobayashi on the first frame side. Doing so would restrain gas leakage and prevent a decrease in gas utilization factor of the fuel cell.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Szrama et al (US 20080118802 A1) in view of Farrington et al. (US 20150357656 A1) and Uozumi (US 20040262059 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Szrama discloses a fuel cell system including a fuel cell assembly (paragraphs 0001, 0008) comprising: a membrane electrode assembly including: a membrane; a first electrode arranged on a first side of the membrane and to which a first gas diffusion layer is assigned; and a second electrode arranged on a second side of the membrane opposite to the first side of the membrane and to which a second gas diffusion layer is assigned (paragraphs 0011, 0046, figure 11, CCM 11, gas diffusion layers 200); a frame configured to increase structural stability of the membrane electrode assembly (paragraph 0053) and positioned at least in part between the first gas diffusion layer and the first electrode of the membrane electrode assembly (paragraphs 0013, 0046-0047, figure 11, structural film layer 14); and an adhesive layer directly bonding the membrane electrode assembly to the frame (paragraph 0046, figure 11b, adhesive layer 15), wherein the adhesive layer is present at least in a first edge area on a first side of the membrane electrode assembly facing the frame (figure 11b, adhesive layer 15), wherein the adhesive layer completely penetrates through the first electrode on the first side of the membrane such that the membrane is directly bonded to the frame as a result of the penetration completely through the first electrode (paragraphs 0032, 0043, figure 2c, adhesive layer 15 imbibes porous electrode 13 to create imbibed portion 18 which can extend to the electrode-membrane interface, equivalent to complete penetration), wherein the adhesive layer includes a first adhesive layer section connecting the membrane at the edge area of the membrane electrode assembly adjacent the first side of the membrane directly to the frame and a second adhesive layer section connecting the membrane at the edge area of the membrane electrode assembly adjacent the second side of the membrane directly to the second gas diffusion layer (paragraph 0046, annotated figure 11b, adhesive layer 15 connects first membrane side to structural film layer 14, and second membrane side to gas diffusion layer 200), and wherein the first adhesive layer section and the second adhesive layer section form the adhesive layer with a monolithic structure that extends in a region beyond the membrane electrode assembly from the frame to the second gas diffusion layer without any intervening structure (annotated figure 11b, monolithic adhesive region). Szrama does not explicitly disclose that the adhesive layer is present in a second edge area on a second side of the membrane electrode assembly facing the second gas diffusion layer and that the only intervening structures throughout an entirety of the adhesive layer between the frame and second gas diffusion layer is the membrane electrode assembly.
Farrington discloses fuel cell assemblies for a solid polymer electrolyte fuel cell stack that employ catalyst coated membranes and a construction in which plastic film frames are used to frame the catalyst coated membranes within (Farrington paragraph 0013). Farrington further discloses that adhesive is used on both sides of a plastic frame, and additional adhesive is applied on anode surface of the CCM to provide a more robust seal (Farrington paragraph 0038, figure 2, adhesive layer 14, equivalent to adhesive in a second edge area on a second side of the MEA). The adhesive layer comprised of adhesive layers 13 and 14 has no intervening structures between the frame and second gas diffusion layer (anode gas diffusion layer 7) except for the MEA (Farrington paragraphs 0038, 0040, figure 2). The reference teaches that the sealing assembly reduces part counts and improves seal robustness (Farrington paragraphs 0049-0051). Farrington and Szrama are analogous because they both disclose sealing assemblies for fuel cells.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fuel cell assembly disclosed by Szrama to include the adhesive region at the edge of the area and with no intervening structures as disclosed by Farrington. Doing so would reduce parts and improve the robustness of the seal.
Szrama is silent regarding a fuel cell vehicle comprising the fuel cell system. Uozumi discloses a fuel cell vehicle equipped with a fuel cell system (Uozumi paragraph 0002, figure 2). Uozumi further discloses that vehicles utilizing fuel cells provide a countermeasure to air pollution and emissions while providing high efficiency (Uozumi paragraph 0004). Uozumi and Szrama are analogous because they both disclose fuel cell systems.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fuel cell disclosed by Szrama to be utilized in a fuel cell vehicle as disclosed by Uozumi. Doing so would provide a countermeasure to air pollution and emissions while providing high efficiency.
PNG
media_image1.png
354
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that the cited references fail to teach the monolithic structure wherein the only intervening structure throughout an entirety of the adhesive layer between the frame and the second gas diffusion layer is the membrane electrode assembly. However, Farrington does teach this limitation, rendering the claims obvious in view of the cited references (see claims 1, 9-10 rejections).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN T LUSTGRAAF whose telephone number is (571)272-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 6:00 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/B.T.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights