Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 of this title, 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, 3, 7, & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto, JP S55-42012 U in view of Schulien et al., DE 4418999 A1, Li et al., CN 105951118 A, and Francis, CA 2,150,982 A1. A machine translation and partial human translation were used for Yamamoto. Machine translations are used for Schulien et al. [hereinafter Schulien] and Li et al. [hereinafter Li].
The body of the claim is generally written with parentheses following the limitations indicating the prior art’s teachings and/or examiner notes.
1. The following references render this claim obvious.
I. Yamamoto
An electrolysis element (electrolysis unit; Yamamoto claim 1, [0001], figs. 1-2) …, the electrolysis element comprising:
a… separating wall comprising a first face and a second face (partition wall 2; Yamamoto [0001], fig. 1);
an anode for generating oxygen; a cathode for generating hydrogen (electrodes 5 & 6; Yamamoto [0001], figs. 1 & 3-4);
a first connecting means fixing the anode to the separating wall such that the anode faces the first face of the separating wall at a first distance, and electrically connecting the anode to the separating wall; … the first connecting means comprising: an electroconductive first bolt comprising at least a shaft, wherein the anode is removably fixed to the separating wall by means of the first bolt (bolt with shaft; Yamamoto claim 3, p. 4; figs. 3-4) … .
The “for alkaline water electrolysis” recitation is intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. MPEP § 2114. Because the cited prior art teaches the structural limitations of the claim, the prior art is also structurally capable of performing the claimed intentions and therefore reads on the claimed language. See id.
II. Electroconductive & Elastic Body – Schulien
Yamamoto is silent on the separating wall being electroconductive; and an electroconductive elastic body supporting the cathode.
However, Schulien teaches an element comprising:
for alkaline water electrolysis (electrolysis assembly for potassium hydroxide and water; Schulien abstract, [0002]-[0003], figs. 1-3)
the separating wall being electroconductive (bipolar separating plates 5 which allow current to pass through multiple cells; Schulien [0015], figs. 1-3);
an electroconductive elastic body supporting the cathode (corrugated sieve-like pressure plates 17, which establish electrical connection and press the cathode against a diaphragm 4; id.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aforementioned prior art’s element with Schulien’s element to press the cathode against a diaphragm and pass a current across multiple cells.
III. Current Collector - Li
Yamamoto is silent on a cathode current collector supporting the elastic body, the cathode current collector being fixed to the separating wall, to face the second face of the separating wall at a second distance, and being electrically connected to the separating wall.
However, Li teaches that a cathode current collector 3 evenly distributes current to the electrode. Li claim 1, [0005], fig. 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aforementioned prior art’s element with Li’s current collector onto the cathode to evenly distribute current to the electrode.
Fixing Li’s current collector onto the cathode would have the current collector support the elastic body, fixed to the separating wall, etc.
IV. First Through-hole – Francis
Yamamoto is silent on the first connecting means further comprising:
a first through-hole provided in the separating wall, wherein the shaft of the first bolt can be put through the first through-hole; and
a first nut which can engage with the first bolt.
However, Yamamoto needs some means to fix conductive ribs 3 & 4 to the partition wall 2. See Yamamoto figs. 3-4.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have known that Yamamoto’s bolt with an accompanying first through-hole and also a second through-hole in the conductive ribs 3 & 4 would also be suitable to fix conductive ribs 3 & 4 to the partition wall 2. See Yamamoto p. 4, figs. 3-4.
Francis teaches an apparatus comprising nuts to fasten the fastener. Francis fig. 14 ll. 19-25, fig. 3.
Therefore, it would have been obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aforementioned prior art’s element with Yamamoto’s bolt with first and second through-holes to yield the predictable result of fixing conductive ribs to the partition wall. It also would have been obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aforementioned prior art’s element with Francis’s nut to further fasten and secure Yamamoto’s bolt.
3. The electrolysis element according to claim 2, the first connecting means further comprising:
an electroconductive first structural element, the first structural element comprising:
a first spacer portion extending from the anode toward the first face of the separating wall in a direction crossing the first face of the separating wall; and
a first plate-shaped portion being continuous from the first spacer portion and extending in a direction parallel to the first face of the separating wall, the first spacer portion comprising:
an end fixed to the anode (first and second ribs 3 & 4 which have the claimed components; Yamamato pp. 3-4, figs. 3-4),
the first plate-shaped portion comprising:
a second through-hole, wherein the shaft of the first bolt can be put through the second through hole, wherein the shaft of the first bolt is put through the first through-hole and the second through-hole and engages with the first nut, to fix the first structural element to the separating wall (rejected for similar reasons stated in the claim 2 rejection).
7. The electrolysis element according to claim 3, the cathode current collector comprising:
a third through-hole provided in a position facing the first through-hole of the separating wall, the third through-hole having a shape and dimensions such that the first nut can pass through the third through-hole. Yamamoto is silent on this.
However, Francis teaches an access hole 20a (i.e. third through-hole) which enables access to the screw. Francis p. 14 ll. 19-25, fig. 3.
It is obvious to reverse parts. See MPEP 2144 et seq.
Reversing the screw 20 would expose the nut 21 instead and the access hole 20a would allow access to the nut 21.
Therefore, it would have been obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aforementioned prior art’s element by making a third through hole which would allow access to the nut.
16. The electrolysis element according to claim 1, further comprising:
a second connecting means fixing the cathode current collector to the separating wall such that the cathode current collector faces the second face of the separating wall at the second distance, and electrically connecting the cathode current collector to the separating wall, the second connecting means comprising: an electroconductive second structural element, the second structural element comprising: a second spacer portion extending between the cathode current collector and the second face of the separating wall in a direction crossing the second face of the separating wall; a first end fixed to the cathode current collector; and a second end fixed to the second face of the separating wall (conductive ribs 3 &/or 4 with spacer portion and first and second ends). Yamamoto p. 3, figs. 1 & 3-4.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s latest filed arguments have been fully considered and are addressed below.
The Examiner has considered Applicant’s argument that Yamamoto attaches by welding and making holes would risk electrolyte mixing. Remarks pp. 13-14.
The Examiner respectfully submits that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that bolts would’ve attached as a substitute for welding. Furthermore, the Examiner respectfully submits that there is no evidence on record showing that there is a concern of electrolyte mixing and that the inventors certainly were not dissuaded by this risk.
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 Hosung Chung whose telephone number is (571)270-7578. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 AM - 5 PM CT.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James Lin can be reached on (571) 272-8902. 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.
/HOSUNG CHUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794