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 .
The Applicant’s amendment filed on 12/03/2025 was received. Claim 1 was amended. Claims 13-20 were withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office action issued on 09/03/2025.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding to claim 1: the hierarchy level of “engine high voltage (EVH)”, “quad high voltage (QHV)”, and “plant high voltage (PHV)” is unclear. For purposes of examination, Examiner interprets:
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 10914650 B2) in view of Sato (US 20170047602 A1) on claim 1 is withdrawn because Applicant amended independent claim 1. The claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 10914650 B2) in view of Sato (US 20170047602 A1) and Kwon et al. (US 8859158 B2) on claim 2 is withdrawn because Applicant amended independent claim 1. The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 10914650 B2) in view of Sato (US 20170047602 A1) and Yoshida et al. (US 20120015268 A1) on claims 3-8 are withdrawn because Applicant amended independent claim 1. The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 10914650 B2) in view of Sato (US 20170047602 A1), Yoshida et al. (US 20120015268 A1), and Yamamoto et al. (US 20160133975 A1) on claims 6-7 are withdrawn because Applicant amended independent claim 1.
Claims 1, 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (US 20120015268 A1) in view of Fujita (US 20180233756 A1).
Regarding to claim 1: Yoshida et al. disclose a fuel cell system (abstract). The system comprising:
a fuel cell (11) (par. 26, fig. 1);
a hydrogen supply pipe (27) (equivalent to a hydrogen supply line) (par. 28, fig. 1) connected to an inlet side of an anode of the fuel cell to supply hydrogen to the fuel cell (11) (par. 28);
a pressure sensor (47) (equivalent to a hydrogen supply pressure sensor) (par. 28, fig. 1) configured for detecting the pressure of the hydrogen supply pipe (27) (par. 28); and
a control portion (50) (equivalent to a controller) (par. 31, fig. 1) electrically connected to the hydrogen supply pressure sensor (fig. 1) and configured for pressurizing hydrogen system (S207) (equivalent to supplying the hydrogen) (par. 50) while the air compressor (19) has not been started (equivalent to when the air supply is cut off during an operation of the fuel cell) (par. 51), detecting an initial hydrogen pressure (S210) (par. 55, fig. 7) and an end hydrogen pressure (S212) (par. 7) (equivalent to measuring a pressure variation of the hydrogen supply line).
Yoshida et al. fail to explicitly disclose the controller configured for deriving a correction value of the hydrogen supply pressure sensor and selectively applying the correction value of the hydrogen supply pressure sensor based on a magnitude of the measured pressure variation. However, Fujita discloses a gas supply system (par. 2). The system comprising a control unit (300) (par. 17, fig. 1) The control unit (300) is configured to calibrating a detection value of a first gas pressure sensor (131) through a use of a detection value of a second gas pressure sensor (132) (the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) is equivalent to a correction value) (par. 33, fig. 1, S130 in fig. 2) when the gas pressure detected by the second gas pressure sensor (132) has fallen to a prescribed gas pressure (par. 33, S120 in fig. 2) after a valve control in step S110 (closing the shutoff valve (124) on the hydrogen gas tank (110) side and opening the on-off valve (135)) (par. 32, 33, fig. 2).
The initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) right before the on-off valve (135) opens of Fujita is equivalent to a target pressure of the instant application. The prescribed gas pressure of Fujita is equivalent to a derived pressure value of the instant application. The pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure of Fujita is equivalent to a pressure error in the instant application. The pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) of Fujita is equivalent to a magnitude of a pressure variation in the instant application. The detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) falling to the prescribed gas pressure (S120) of Fujita is equivalent to the pressure variation is larger than the pressure error in the instant application. Fujita discloses the control unit (300) determines to calibrate the detection value of the first gas pressure sensor (131) through the use of a detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) when the gas pressure detected by the second gas pressure sensor (132) has fallen to a prescribed gas pressure (par. 33, S120 in fig. 2). This means when the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the magnitude of a pressure variation) is larger than the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure (equivalent to the pressure error), the controller unit (300) selects to apply the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the correction value) to the first gas pressure sensor (131); and when the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the magnitude of a pressure variation) is smaller than the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure (equivalent to the pressure error), the controller unit (300) selects to not apply the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the correction value) to the first gas pressure sensor (131).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the control unit (300), configured for deriving the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the correction value) and selectively applying the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) to the first gas pressure sensor (131) based on the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the magnitude of a pressure variation), of Fujita into the fuel cell system of Yoshida et al. because Fujita teaches the calibration of the pressure sensor can be more swiftly completed (par. 8).
Regarding to claim 3: Yoshida et al. disclose after the pressure of the hydrogen system has reached a certain pressure (equivalent to a target pressure value), for example, an ordinary operation pressure, as shown in step S106 in fig. 4, the control portion (50) outputs a command to seal the hydrogen system (equivalent to stop supplying the hydrogen) as shown in S107 in fig. 4 (par. 36). Due to this command, the hydrogen supply valve (18) and the gas discharge valve (22) shown in fig. 1 are closed. At this time, since the air compressor (19) has not been started, the oxidant electrode has not been supplied with air (equivalent to when the air supply is cut off). The hydrogen at the fuel electrode is consumed in the reaction with the oxygen that remains at the oxidant electrode. After sealing the hydrogen system in S107, the control portion (50) calculate rate of hydrogen pressure decrease (par. 55). In S111, the control portion (50) calculates a rate of pressure decrease in the time interval Δt1 (equivalent to a reference time period) through the pressure difference (ΔP1) (equivalent to a pressure variation) between the initial pressure (P0) (detected in S108) and the end pressure (P1) (detected in S110) (par. 39, fig. 3, 4).
Regarding to claim 4: Yoshida et al. disclose the pressure of the hydrogen system reaches a certain pressure (equivalent to a target pressure)in S106 in fig. 4 (par. 36) The target pressure can an ordinary operation pressure (equivalent to above a minimum pressure value required during the operation of the fuel cell ) (par. 36). It is known that fuel cells typically operate at pressure of 1 to 3 atm as evidenced by Spiegel reference on page 4. Therefore, the certain pressure of Yoshida et al. is greater than atmospheric pressure. A reference which is silent about a claimed invention’s features is inherently anticipatory if the missing feature is necessarily present in that which is described in the reference. In re Robertson, 49 USPQ2d 1949 (1999).
Regarding to claim 5: Yoshida et al. disclose the control portion (50) stores ΔP1 in a memory (par. 38).
Regarding to claim 6: Yoshida et al. disclose the fuel cell system, further inducing:
a hydrogen gas discharge pipe (28) (par. 28, fig. 1) that connects the fuel cell (27) to the outside air through a recirculation pipe (29) and a gas discharge pipe (45) (par. 28, fig. 1);
a gas discharge valve (22) (par. 28, fig. 1),
wherein the control portion (50) is configured to supply hydrogen at in S105 in fig. 4 (par. 34) to reach a certain pressure (equivalent to the target pressure) (par. 36). During this process, the oxidant electrode has not been supplied with air, the electrochemical reaction does not occur within the fuel cell (11), and therefore the fuel cell (11) does not generate electricity (equivalent to the operation of the fuel cell is terminated) (par. 34). After the control portion (50) determines the pressure has reached a certain pressure in S106 in fig. 4, the control portion (50) commands to close the hydrogen supply valve (18) and the gas discharge valve (22) in S107 in fig. 4 and at time t2 in fig. 3 (par. 36). Before time t2, the gas discharge valve (22) is open for a period of time to ensure the hydrogen at P0 pressure is stable (equivalent to opening the discharge valve for a reference time period when the hydrogen supply is completed). See fig. PD2 annotated by Examiner.
PNG
media_image1.png
645
1053
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding to claim 7: Yoshida et al. disclose a fuel cell system as described above. Yoshida et al. fail to explicitly disclose the controller is configured to derive a pressure value of the hydrogen supply line detected by the hydrogen supply pressure sensor after the discharge valve is opened for the reference time period, and to determine a difference between the derived pressure value of the hydrogen supply line and the target pressure value, as a pressure error.
However, Fujita discloses a gas supply system (par. 2). The system comprises a control unit (300) (par. 17, fig. 1). The control unit (300) performs the control of fully closing the shutoff valve (124) on the hydrogen gas tank (110) side and the control of fully opening the on-off valve (135) (equivalent to the discharge valve) for the branch flow channel (133) (step S110) (par. 31, fig. 1). After the valve control in step S110, the control unit (300) determines whether or not the gas pressure detected by the second gas pressure sensor (132) has fallen to a prescribed gas pressure (step S120) (the prescribed gas pressure is equivalent to the derived pressure value), and stands by (equivalent to the reference time period) until the gas pressure detected by the second gas pressure sensor (132) falls to the prescribed gas pressure. This prescribed gas pressure is a gas pressure that serves as a reference in performing calibration control of the first gas pressure sensor (131) (par. 33) and is defined such that the pressure of gas upstream of the pressure reducing valve (125) and the pressure of gas downstream of the pressure reducing valve (125) become equal to each other (par. 33).
The initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) right before the on-off valve (135) opens of Fujita is equivalent to the target pressure of the instant application. The pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure of Fujita is equivalent to a pressure error in the instant application.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the control unit (300) configured to derive the prescribed gas pressure of Fujita and to determine the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure of Fujita into the fuel cell system of Yoshida et al. because Fujita teaches the calibration of the pressure sensor can be more swiftly completed (par. 8).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (US 20120015268 A1) in view of Fujita (US 20180233756 A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Taniguchi et al. (US 20060073363 A1).
Regarding to claim 8: Yoshida et al. disclose a fuel cell system as described in paragraph 3 above. Yoshida et al. fail to explicitly disclose the controller is configured to reflect a correction factor in the pressure variation stored in a memory.
However, Taniguch et al. discloses a fuel cell system (abstract). The fuel cell system comprises a control unit (par. 30). The control unit is configured to incorporate a correction factor (equivalent to a correction factor in the instant application) into a feedforward value (FF value) which can correct a first hydrogen circulating system inlet target pressure Pt1 at a first pressure sensor (10) to Pt2 (par. 36, 37, 38). The correction factor is prepared in advance for the correcting map (31) (equivalent to the correction factor stored in a memory) (par. 37)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the correction factor of Taniguch et al. to correct the initial pressure (equivalent to the target pressure) of Yoshida et al. because Taniguch et al. teach the correction factor can improve controllability of a pressure of a fuel gas supplied to a fuel cell (par. 6).
Yoshida et al. and Taniguchi et al. fail to explicitly disclose the controller is configured to compare the pressure variation in which the correction factor is reflected with a magnitude of the pressure error, thus determining whether to use the correction value of the hydrogen supply pressure sensor.
However, Fujita discloses a gas supply system (par. 2). The system comprises a control unit (300) (par. 17, fig. 1). The control unit (300) is configured to calibrate a detection value of the first gas pressure sensor (131) through the use of a detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) is equivalent to the correction value) (par. 33, fig. 1, S130 in fig. 2) when the gas pressure detected by the second gas pressure sensor (132) has fallen to a prescribed gas pressure (par. 33, S120 in fig. 2).
The pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) of Fujita is equivalent to a pressure variation in the instant application. The detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) falling to the prescribed gas pressure (S120) of Fujita is equivalent to the pressure variation is larger than the pressure error in the instant application. Fujita discloses the control unit (300) determines to calibrate the detection value of the first gas pressure sensor (131) through the use of a detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) when the gas pressure detected by the second gas pressure sensor (132) has fallen to a prescribed gas pressure (par. 33, S120 in fig. 2). This means when the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the magnitude of a pressure variation) is larger than the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure (equivalent to the pressure error), the controller unit (300) selects to apply the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the correction value) to the first gas pressure sensor (131); and when the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the magnitude of a pressure variation) is smaller than the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure (equivalent to the pressure error), the controller unit (300) selects to not apply the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the correction value) to the first gas pressure sensor (131).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the control unit (300) configured to compare the pressure variation (the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132)) with the pressure error (the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure), thus determining whether to use the detection value of the second gas pressure sensor (132) to the first gas pressure sensor (131) of Fujita into the fuel cell system of Yoshida et al. which already incorporated the correction factor of Taniguch et al. because Fujita teaches the calibration of the pressure sensor can be more swiftly completed (par. 8).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (US 20120015268 A1) in view of Fujita (US 20180233756 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kwon et al. (US 8859158 B2).
Regarding to claim 2: Yoshida et al. disclose a fuel cell system as described in paragraph 3 above. Yoshida et al. fail to explicitly disclose the controller is configured to induce charging of a battery until voltage of the fuel cell reaches below effective voltage when the air supply is cut off during an operation of the fuel cell, and to supply the hydrogen when the voltage of the fuel cell reaches below the effective voltage.
However, Kwon et al. disclose a hybrid fuel cell system with an idle stop mode, in which the power generation of the fuel cell is stopped (abstract, col. 1, lines 59-60). In the idle stop mode, the high voltage battery is forcibly charged by the output current of the fuel cell generated while the oxygen in the cathode is exhausted until the voltage of the fuel cell drops below the voltage of the bidirectional high voltage DC-DC converter (equivalent to effective voltage) when the air supply is cut off (col. 9, lines 10-39). Kwon et al. disclose when the idle stop condition of the fuel cell system is satisfied, only the air supply to the fuel cell is cut off (this implicates the hydrogen remains supplied) (equivalent to supplying the hydrogen when the voltage of the fuel cell reaches below the effective voltage) (col. 8, lines 65-67, col. 9, lines 1-9, fig. 5). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the idle stop mode (charging battery until the voltage of the fuel cell drops to a certain value and remaining supplying hydrogen when the voltage of the fuel cell reaches below a certain value) of Kwon et al. to the fuel cell system of Yoshida et al. because Kwon et al. teach that the idle stop mode improves durability and fuel efficiency as the voltage of the fuel cell can be reduced and there is no waste hydrogen (col. 9, lines 40-51).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-12 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 9-12 would be allowable because the prior arts do not disclose or suggest that the controller is configured to measure a maximum opening amount and a maximum opening arrival time of the discharge valve after the discharge valve is opened, and the correction factor is determined based on the maximum opening amount and the maximum opening arrival time of the discharge valve as recited in claim 9; to utilize the correction value of the hydrogen supply pressure sensor, when the determined pressure error is greater than a pressure variation value in which the correction factor is reflected as recited in claim 11; and to eliminate the correction value of the hydrogen supply pressure sensor to derive the correction value of the hydrogen supply pressure sensor again, when the determined pressure error is smaller than a pressure variation value in which the correction factor is reflected as recited in claim 12.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/03/2025 have been fully considered. Applicant primarily argues: Kim calibrates an offset of a pressure sensor by counting a time instead of a magnitude of the measured pressure variation.
In response: Applicant’s arguments are moot because the newly cited Fujita reference teaches the control unit (300) determines to calibrate the first gas pressure sensor (131) when the gas pressure detected by the second gas pressure sensor (132) has fallen to a prescribed gas pressure. This means when the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the magnitude of a pressure variation) is larger than the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure (equivalent to the pressure error), the controller unit (300) calibrates the first gas pressure sensor (131); and when the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the detected pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) (equivalent to the magnitude of a pressure variation) is smaller than the pressure difference between the initial pressure of the second gas pressure sensor (132) and the prescribed gas pressure (equivalent to the pressure error), the controller unit (300) does not calibrate the first gas pressure sensor (131). Therefore, the magnitude of a pressure variation is used to determine if calibration is proceeded.
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 PIN JAN WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7057. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at (571) 272-1295. 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.
/PIN JAN WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
/Dah-Wei D. Yuan/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1717