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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group A, claims 1-4, in the reply filed on October 21st, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites “wherein said operating state includes one or more of the residual quantity of electricality in said lithium battery pack, the residual quantity of electricity in said hydrogen fuel cell stack, the electrical connection state of said hydrogen fuel cell stack, the gas pressure of saif hydrogen fuel cell stack, and the output voltage of saif hydrogen fuel cell stack;
when the gas pressure of said hydrogen fuel cell stack is less than a pressure threshold, said control chip obtains information showing faults from said hydrogen fuel cell stack; and
when there is essentially no output voltage from said hydrogen fuel cell stack, said control chips obtains information showing faults form said hydrogen fuel cell stack” is unclear what the operating state is required to include among the “residual quantity of electricality in said lithium battery pack, the residual quantity of electricity in said hydrogen fuel cell stack, the electrical connection state of said hydrogen fuel cell stack, the gas pressure of saif hydrogen fuel cell stack, and the output voltage of saif hydrogen fuel cell stack” or how the operating state is supposed to include these values. Furthermore, it is unclear if the gas pressure is required or output voltage is required.
For purposes of examination the examiner is interpreting Claim 2 to require the gas pressure of said hydrogen fuel cell stack, and the output voltage of the hydrogen fuel cell stack to be calculated.
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, 3, & 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (US20100273080).
Regarding Claim 1 & 3, Noguchi discloses a power supply method for a hydrogen fuel cell stack ([009], [0035]), where a hydrogen fuel cell stack and a lithium battery are connected in parallel to a vehicle ([009]), comprising following steps:
A control chip connected with said hydrogen fuel cell stack and said lithium battery pack detecting the operating states of said hydrogen fuel cell stack and said lithium battery pack (controlling unit acts as control chip, [0014]);
When said hydrogen fuel cell stack and said lithium battery pack are free of faults, said control chip obtaining the output voltage of said lithium battery pack, and comparing it with a preset charge-on threshold and charge-stop threshold; When said output voltage is lower than charge-on threshold, said hydrogen fuel cell stack powering said lithium battery pack; When said output voltage is higher than said charge-stop threshold, disconnecting the circuit of said hydrogen fuel cell stack powering said lithium battery pack; when said output voltage is more than or equal to said charge-on threshold and less than or equal to said charge-stop threshold, the circuit of said hydrogen fuel cell stack remaining to power said lithium battery pack (fuel cell is actuated at a predefined value, when capacity of charge of secondary battery reaches a predefined value, [0017], [0019]).
Noguchi doesn’t directly disclose wherein the electric vehicle is a motorcycle. However, Noguchi discloses an electric motor for a vehicle powered by the power supply ([0045]). It is the examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that an electric motor for a “vehicle” can include a motorcycle.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Noguchi to have wherein electric vehicle is a motorcycle.
Noguchi does not directly disclose when said hydrogen fuel cell stack remains to charge said lithium battery pack, controlling said hydrogen fuel cell stack to output a t-step output to said lithium battery pack, where the output current of the nth step is In = n*(100%/t)*Irated, until said hydrogen fuel cell stack outputs a rated current to said lithium battery pack, where 1 ≤ n ≤ t, or wherein the t-step output current has 4 steps, and the output current of the nth step is In = n*25%*Irated where 1 ≤ n ≤ 4.
However, Noguchi discloses wherein the power is supplied form the fuel cell to the first power supply line through a voltage step down system ([0050]). Noguchi further discloses wherein a step process is used to determine the State of Charge of the lithium battery and determine the power supply to charge the lithium battery ([0068], [0071]). Noguchi further discloses that once the SOC of the lithium battery increased to a predefined level, the power generation from the fuel cell is stopped ([0072]).
It is the examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art can derive the instant claimed formula of output current using the Noguchi’s disclosed voltage step down system, as both the instant claim function and the voltage step down function share the same function of controlling the hydrogen fuel cell charging the lithium battery process and because voltage is an inverse function of current.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Noguchi to have wherein when said hydrogen fuel cell stack remains to charge said lithium battery pack, controlling said hydrogen fuel cell stack to output a t-step output to said lithium battery pack, where the output current of the nth step is In = n*(100%/t)*Irated, until said hydrogen fuel cell stack outputs a rated current to said lithium battery pack, where 1 ≤ n ≤ t and wherein the t-step output current has 4 steps, and the output current of the nth step is In = n*25%*Irated where 1 ≤ n ≤ 4.
Regarding Claim 4, Noguchi discloses the limitations as set forth above. Noguchi further discloses said control chip being provided with a third voltage threshold (the new second discharge threshold acts as a third voltage threshold, [0012], [0017]).
Noguchi does not directly disclose wherein “when the output voltage of said lithium battery pack is less than said third voltage threshold, said lithium battery pack powering said motor and receiving electrical energy input by said hydrogen fuel cell stack within a first period of time, after said first period of time, said lithium battery pack stopping powering said motor, and then said hydrogen fuel cell stack powering said motor within a second period of time; and when the output voltage of said lithium battery pack is more than or equal to said third voltage threshold, said lithium battery pack powering said motor until said output voltage is less than said third voltage threshold”.
The examiner notes that the claim language “when the output voltage of said lithium battery pack is less than said third voltage threshold, said lithium battery pack powering said motor and receiving electrical energy input by said hydrogen fuel cell stack within a first period of time, after said first period of time, said lithium battery pack stopping powering said motor, and then said hydrogen fuel cell stack powering said motor within a second period of time; and when the output voltage of said lithium battery pack is more than or equal to said third voltage threshold, said lithium battery pack powering said motor until said output voltage is less than said third voltage threshold” under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, can be interpreted to mean that the motor connected to the lithium battery and hydrogen fuel cell stack will switch from receiving power from the lithium battery pack and to the hydrogen fuel cell stack when a certain voltage threshold is reached.
Noguchi discloses wherein when a second discharge threshold is met, the power supply from the fuel cell is switched to the lithium secondary battery cell ([0017]). Noguchi further discloses that the second discharge threshold allow for the fuel cell to supply power to the first supply power portion while preventing the secondary battery from dropping below a discharge threshold ([0019]). Noguchi further discloses wherein the fuel cell can supply power to the first supply portion to charge the capacitor and the secondary battery ([0020]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Noguchi to have wherein when the output voltage of said lithium battery pack is less than said third voltage threshold, said lithium battery pack powering said motor and receiving electrical energy input by said hydrogen fuel cell stack within a first period of time, after said first period of time, said lithium battery pack stopping powering said motor, and then said hydrogen fuel cell stack powering said motor within a second period of time; and when the output voltage of said lithium battery pack is more than or equal to said third voltage threshold, said lithium battery pack powering said motor until said output voltage is less than said third voltage threshold.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (US20100273080) in view of Dwyer (US20190002279).
Regarding Claim 2, Noguchi discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Noguchi does not directly disclose wherein said operating state includes one or more of the residual quantity of electricality in said lithium battery pack, the residual quantity of electricity in said hydrogen fuel cell stack, the electrical connection state of said hydrogen fuel cell stack, the gas pressure of saif hydrogen fuel cell stack, and the output voltage of saif hydrogen fuel cell stack; when the gas pressure of said hydrogen fuel cell stack is less than a pressure threshold, said control chip obtains information showing faults from said hydrogen fuel cell stack; and when there is essentially no output voltage from said hydrogen fuel cell stack, said control chips obtains information showing faults from said hydrogen fuel cell stack.
The examiner notes the 112b rejection above for interpretation.
Dwyer discloses a fuel cell system with a fault detection system to determine if the fuel cell is operating normally or with fault ([0021]). Dwyer further discloses that both the gas pressure of the hydrogen and the output voltage are measured as part of the criteria ([0021-0024). Dwyer teaches that this system provides a healthy start-up/shutdown sequence ([004]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Noguchi with the teachings of Dwyer to have wherein said operating state includes one or more of the residual quantity of electricality in said lithium battery pack, the residual quantity of electricity in said hydrogen fuel cell stack, the electrical connection state of said hydrogen fuel cell stack, the gas pressure of saif hydrogen fuel cell stack, and the output voltage of saif hydrogen fuel cell stack; when the gas pressure of said hydrogen fuel cell stack is less than a pressure threshold, said control chip obtains information showing faults from said hydrogen fuel cell stack; and when there is essentially no output voltage from said hydrogen fuel cell stack, said control chips obtains information showing faults from said hydrogen fuel cell stack. This modification would yield the expected result of a improved healthy start-up/shutdown sequence.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANKITH R SRIPATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30 am - 5:00pm.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. 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.
/ANKITH R SRIPATHI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728