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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2021-132001, filed on 8/16/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 7/15/2022, 4/14/2023 and 2/21/2025 fail to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.98(a)(4) because it lacks the appropriate size fee assertion. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Omura (US20060191600A1).
Regarding Claim 1, the preamble of the instant claim pertains to a metal component recited in the format of its intended use for an electrochemical stack. Since the particular of the metal component in or with the electrochemical stack is not limited by the preamble, for examination purpose, no patentable weight will be given to the recitation, “for electrochemical stack”, as long as the prior art discloses the structural limitations of the metal component. The body of the claim further recites, “a metal base material having a first surface exposed to an atmosphere containing hydrogen and a second surface exposed to an atmosphere containing oxygen; and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating provided on the first surface of the metal base material.” However, the recitations pertaining the first surface being exposed to an atmosphere containing hydrogen and the second surface being exposed to an atmosphere are intended use of the metal component. That is, the structural limitations of the metal component of the claimed invention are limited to: (1) a metal based material having a first and a second surface, and (2) a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating provided on the first surface. As long as the prior art discloses a metal component comprising a metal based material having first and second surfaces, and a coating provided on a surface thereof which is capable of serving as a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating, the prior art will have been considered to have met the requirements of the instant claim.
In this regards, Omura discloses a metal component [pars. 0024-25] comprising:
a metal base material (steel) having a first surface and a second surface, and
a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating (compound oxide film) provided on the first surface of the metal base material.
Regarding Claim 2, Omura discloses wherein the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises at least one from the group consisting of aluminum, aluminum oxide, and aluminum-chromium composite oxide [pars. 0026-29].
Regarding Claim 3, Omura discloses wherein the metal base material comprises chromium [pars. 0026-27]; and the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises aluminum-chromium composite oxide, and at least part of the chromium of the aluminum-chromium composite oxide is formed by diffusion of chromium in the metal base material [pars. 0026-29,0043,0045-46].
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-6 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Leah (US20160233524A1).
Regarding Claim 1, the preamble of the instant claim pertains to a metal component recited in the format of its intended use for an electrochemical stack. Since the particular of the metal component in or with the electrochemical stack is not limited by the preamble, for examination purpose, no patentable weight will be given to the recitation, “for electrochemical stack”, as long as the prior art discloses the structural limitations of the metal component. The body of the claim further recites, “a metal base material having a first surface exposed to an atmosphere containing hydrogen and a second surface exposed to an atmosphere containing oxygen; and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating provided on the first surface of the metal base material.” However, the recitations pertaining the first surface being exposed to an atmosphere containing hydrogen and the second surface being exposed to an atmosphere are intended use of the metal component. That is, the structural limitations of the metal component of the claimed invention are limited to: (1) a metal based material having a first and a second surface, and (2) a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating provided on the first surface. As long as the prior art discloses a metal component comprising a metal based material having first and second surfaces, and a coating provided on a surface thereof which is capable of serving as a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating, the prior art will have been considered to have met the requirements of the instant claim.
In this regards, Leah discloses a metal component (interconnect) [pars. 0020-24,0029] comprising:
a metal base material (stainless steel substrate) having a first surface and a second surface, and
a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating (aluminum oxide layer) provided on the first surface of the metal base material.
Regarding Claim 2, Leah discloses wherein the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises aluminum oxide [par. 0029].
Regarding Claim 5, Leah discloses an electrochemical stack (fuel cell stack comprising at least one interconnect necessarily provided between adjacent cells) [pars. 0039-40,0029] comprising:
a first electrochemical cell (not explicitly described but inherent feature of a fuel cell/stack) comprising a first electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing hydrogen (e.g., anode), a second electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen (e.g., cathode), and an electrolyte layer (inherent) interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode;
a second electrochemical cell (not explicitly described but inherent feature of a fuel cell stack comprising an interconnect) comprising a first electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing hydrogen (e.g., anode), a second electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen (e.g., cathode), and an electrolyte layer (inherent) interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode; and
a separator (interconnect) arranged between the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell to electrically connect the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell (i.e., although not explicitly described, an ordinary skilled artisan would realize that the interconnect, by definition, is a component that provides an electrical connection between individual fuel cells in a stack), wherein
the separator comprises a metal component comprising: a metal base material (stainless steel substrate) having a first surface (e.g., second surface) arranged on the first electrode side (i.e., fuel side) of the first electrochemical cell and exposed to an atmosphere containing hydrogen and a second surface (e.g., first surface) arranged on the second electrode side (i.e., air/oxidant side) of the second electrochemical cell and exposed to an atmosphere containing oxygen; and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating (aluminum oxide layer) provided on the first surface of the metal base material.
Regarding Claim 6, Leah discloses wherein the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises aluminum oxide [par. 0029].
Regarding Claim 9, Leah discloses wherein the electrolyte layer of the first electrochemical cell and the electrolyte layer of the second electrochemical cell comprise a solid oxide electrolyte (i.e., Leah teaches a solid oxide fuel cell) [par. 0040].
Regarding Claim 10, Leah discloses wherein the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the first electrode of the second electrochemical cell are electrodes each for generating a hydrogen ion from supplied hydrogen (inherent feature of fuel cell anode), and the second electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell are electrodes each for generating water from supplied oxygen and the hydrogen ion sent from the first electrode (inherent feature of a fuel cell cathode).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yin (CN106992309A; foreign copy and machine translations on record).
Regarding Claim 12, Yin discloses an electrochemical stack (fuel cell stack 1) [pars. 0033,0043-45; Fig. 1] comprising:
a first electrochemical cell comprising (shown but not described in detail) a first electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing hydrogen, a second electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen, and an electrolyte layer interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode (not explicitly described but inherent feature of a fuel cell);
a second electrochemical cell (shown but not described in detail) comprising a first electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing hydrogen, a second electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen, and an electrolyte layer interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode (not explicitly described but inherent feature of a fuel cell);
a separator arranged between the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell to electrically connect the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell (not explicitly described but inherent feature of a fuel cell stack); and
a pipe having 2,3 at least one of a supply pipe (hydrogen delivery pipe 2) configured to supply gas containing hydrogen to the first electrode, and an exhaust pipe (hydrogen discharge pipe 3) configured to exhaust gas containing hydrogen from the first electrode, wherein
the pipe comprises a metal pipe (stainless steel pipe) comprising: a metal tube (stainless steel pipe) having an inner surface in contact with the supply gas or the exhaust gas, and an outer surface in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen (e.g., exposed to environment); and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating (hydrogen embrittlement-treated plating layer) provided at least on the inner surface of the metal tube.
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.
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) 4, 8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leah, as applied to claims 1 and 5, respectively.
Regarding Claims 4 and 8, Leah discloses wherein the metal component is configured to use as a conduction member, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating has a thickness of 2 μm or more and 30 μm or less. However, Leah teaches providing a metal oxide coating to the second surface of the metal base material which is exposed to an atmosphere containing oxygen in order to protect the second surface from corrosion and to prevent chromium evaporation from the second surface of the metal base, wherein the thickness of the metal oxide layer is from 0.5-20 μm as a suitable thickness for preventing evaporation of chromium without unnecessarily increasing the thickness of the interconnect structure [pars. 0020,0024,0031]. Leah further teaches that the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating provides resistant to corrosion from carbon-containing gases in the fuel, and inhibits the diffusion of hydrogen into the steel, thus providing some corrosion protection to the air-facing side [par. 0029]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have controlled the thickness of the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating to have a thickness of 2 μm or more and 30 μm or less as a suitable thickness for the purpose of providing resistance to corrosion from carbon-containing gases in the fuel, inhibit the diffusion of hydrogen into the steel, thus providing some corrosion protection to the air-facing side, and further, in order to prevent unnecessarily increasing thickness of the interconnect structure, without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success [MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 11, Leah fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the first electrode of the second electrochemical cell are electrodes each for generating hydrogen and an oxide ion from supplied water, and the second electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell are electrodes each for generating oxygen from the oxide ion sent from the first electrode. However, Leah discloses that the electrochemical stack is a solid oxide fuel cell stack [par. 0040] which is well-known in the art as a solid oxide electrolysis cell or a reversible solid oxide cell, wherein, for the purpose of generating electricity, hydrogen is supplied to the fuel electrode (i.e., anode) and oxygen is supplied to the air electrode (e.g. cathode), and for the purpose of producing fuel, the fuel electrode serves as the cathode to which water may be supplied in order to produce hydrogen and an oxide ion, and the air electrode serves as the anode from which oxygen ions that have traveled through the electrolyte are oxidized to form pure oxygen gas. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the electrochemical stack of Leah wherein the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the first electrode of the second electrochemical cell are electrodes each for generating hydrogen and an oxide ion from supplied water, and the second electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell are electrodes each for generating oxygen from the oxide ion sent from the first electrode.
Claim(s) 3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leah, as applied to claims 1 and 5, respectively, and further in view of Omura (US20060191600A1).
Regarding Claims 3 and 7, Leah discloses wherein the metal base material comprises chromium [par. 0030], but fails to disclose the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of aluminum-chromium composite oxide and silicon-chromium composite oxide, and at least part of chromium in the at least one selected from the group consisting of the aluminum-chromium composite oxide and the silicon-chromium composite oxide is formed by diffusion of chromium in the metal base material. However, Omura, from the same field of endeavor, discloses a metal component comprising: a metal base material (steel) having a first surface and a second surface, and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating (compound oxide film) provided on the first surface of the metal base material [Omura – pars. 0024-25], wherein the metal base material comprises chromium [Omura – pars. 0026-27]; and the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises aluminum-chromium composite oxide, and at least part of the chromium of the aluminum-chromium composite oxide is formed by diffusion of chromium in the metal base material [Omura – pars. 0026-29,0043,0045-46]. Omura further teaches that, when the aluminum-chromium composite oxide is formed via diffusion of chromium in the metal based material, in contrast to simply forming an oxide film, prevention of hydrogen from permeating the metal based material is significantly improved [Omura – pars. 0016-20]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have employed the teachings of Omura to have modified the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating of Leah to have comprised aluminum-chromium composite oxide, and at least part of the chromium of the aluminum-chromium composite oxide is formed by diffusion of chromium in the metal base material in order to significantly improve prevention of hydrogen from permeating the metal based material.
Claim(s) 12-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leah (US20160233524A1) in view of Yin (CN106992309A; foreign copy and machine translations on record).
Regarding Claim 12, Leah discloses an electrochemical stack (fuel cell stack comprising at least one interconnect necessarily provided between adjacent cells) [pars. 0039-40,0029] comprising:
a first electrochemical cell (not explicitly described but inherent feature of a fuel cell/stack) comprising a first electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing hydrogen (e.g., anode), a second electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen (e.g., cathode), and an electrolyte layer (inherent) interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode;
a second electrochemical cell (not explicitly described but inherent feature of a fuel cell stack comprising an interconnect) comprising a first electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing hydrogen (e.g., anode), a second electrode in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen (e.g., cathode), and an electrolyte layer (inherent) interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode; and
a separator (interconnect) arranged between the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell to electrically connect the first electrode of the first electrochemical cell and the second electrode of the second electrochemical cell (i.e., although not explicitly described, an ordinary skilled artisan would realize that the interconnect, by definition, is a component that provides an electrical connection between individual fuel cells in a stack).
Leah further teaches wherein the separator comprises a metal component comprising: a metal base material (stainless steel substrate) having a first surface (e.g., second surface) arranged on the first electrode side (i.e., fuel side) of the first electrochemical cell and exposed to an atmosphere containing hydrogen and a second surface (e.g., first surface) arranged on the second electrode side (i.e., air/oxidant side) of the second electrochemical cell and exposed to an atmosphere containing oxygen; and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating (aluminum oxide layer) provided on the first surface of the metal base material [par. 0029].
Leah fails to disclose a pipe having at least one of a supply pipe configured to supply gas containing hydrogen to the first electrode, and an exhaust pipe configured to exhaust gas containing hydrogen from the first electrode, wherein the pipe comprises a metal pipe comprising: a metal tube having an inner surface in contact with the supply gas or the exhaust gas, and an outer surface in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen; and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating provided at least on the inner surface of the metal tube.
However, Yin discloses an electrochemical stack (fuel cell stack 1) comprising: a pipe having 2,3 at least one of a supply pipe (hydrogen delivery pipe 2) configured to supply gas containing hydrogen to the first electrode, and an exhaust pipe (hydrogen discharge pipe 3) configured to exhaust gas containing hydrogen from the first electrode, wherein
the pipe comprises a metal pipe (stainless steel pipe) comprising: a metal tube (stainless steel pipe) having an inner surface in contact with the supply gas or the exhaust gas, and an outer surface in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen (e.g., exposed to environment); and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating (hydrogen embrittlement-treated plating layer) provided at least on the inner surface of the metal tube [Yin – pars. 0033,0043-45; Fig. 1]. Yin further teaches that the purpose of providing the inner surface of the metal pipe with a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating is to prevent hydrogen embrittlement and ensure the metal pipe safety [Yin – par. 0023]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have employed the teachings of Yin to have modified the electrochemical stack of Leah to have further comprised a pipe having at least one of a supply pipe configured to supply gas containing hydrogen to the first electrode, and an exhaust pipe configured to exhaust gas containing hydrogen from the first electrode, wherein: the pipe comprises a metal pipe comprising: a metal tube having an inner surface in contact with the supply gas or the exhaust gas, and an outer surface in contact with an atmosphere containing oxygen; and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating provided at least on the inner surface of the metal tube, in order to the purpose of providing the inner surface of the metal pipe with a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating is to prevent hydrogen embrittlement and ensure the metal pipe safety.
Regarding Claim 13, Leah discloses wherein the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises aluminum oxide [par. 0029].
Regarding Claim 15, Leah discloses wherein the electrolyte layer of the first electrochemical cell and the electrolyte layer of the second electrochemical cell comprise a solid oxide electrolyte (i.e., Leah teaches a solid oxide fuel cell) [par. 0040].
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leah and Yin, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Omura (US20060191600A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Leah discloses wherein the metal tube comprises chromium [par. 0030], but fails to disclose the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of aluminum-chromium composite oxide and silicon-chromium composite oxide, and at least part of chromium in the at least one selected from the group consisting of the aluminum-chromium composite oxide and the silicon-chromium composite oxide is formed by diffusion of chromium in the metal base material. However, Omura, from the same field of endeavor, discloses a metal component (e.g. tube or “pipe”) comprising: a metal base material (steel) having a first surface and a second surface, and a hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating (compound oxide film) provided on the first surface of the metal base material [Omura – pars. 0024-25,0053], wherein the metal base material comprises chromium [Omura – pars. 0026-27]; and the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating comprises aluminum-chromium composite oxide, and at least part of the chromium of the aluminum-chromium composite oxide is formed by diffusion of chromium in the metal base material [Omura – pars. 0026-29,0043,0045-46]. Omura further teaches that, when the aluminum-chromium composite oxide is formed via diffusion of chromium in the metal based material, in contrast to simply forming an oxide film, prevention of hydrogen from permeating the metal based material is significantly improved [Omura – pars. 0016-20]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have employed the teachings of Omura to have modified the hydrogen permeation inhibition and protection coating of Leah to have comprised aluminum-chromium composite oxide, and at least part of the chromium of the aluminum-chromium composite oxide is formed by diffusion of chromium in the metal base material in order to significantly improve prevention of hydrogen from permeating the metal based material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAROON S SHEIKH whose telephone number is (571)270-0302. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6.
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, JONATHAN LEONG can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
HAROON S. SHEIKH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751