DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Office action addresses claims 1-15. Claims 13 and 14 remain withdrawn. Claims 9-12 remain objected to as containing allowable subject matter, and claims 1-8 and 15 remain rejected over JP ‘073 and Watanabe for the reasons of record. Accordingly, this action is made final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2005-123073 in view of Watanabe et al (US 20180034087).
Regarding claim 1, JP ‘073 is directed to a fuel cell and thermal management system thereof. The structure comprises a fuel cell stack (10), a radiator (22) configured to exchange heat with a coolant discharged from the stack, a coolant supply pump (21) configured to supply the coolant to the stack, and an electric heater (30) disposed in parallel with the radiator. The electric heater may be supplied with power from the fuel cell ([0035]). Thus, it is a cathode oxygen depletion (COD) heater as claimed. The system further comprises a heater core (31) disposed in series with the COD heater and configured to heat an interior of a vehicle ([0035]) and a temperature adjustment valve (25) coupled to the radiator, the pump and the core and configured to control a flow of the coolant. Regarding claim 2, the valve is configured to restrict a flow of the coolant to the radiator and allow the coolant to flow to the COD heater and core during a cold start of the system ([0054]). Regarding claim 6, the valve is configured to prevent the coolant discharged from the stack to flow to the core and COD heater and to allow the coolant to flow to the radiator in a high output mode of the system ([0030]-[0033]). Regarding claim 8, the valve is configured to prevent the coolant from flowing to the radiator and to allow the coolant discharge from the stack to flow to the COD heater and core in a heating mode of the system ([0054]). Regarding claim 15, an inlet manifold (shown near 201, Fig. 3) is disposed at an upstream side of the stack, an outlet manifold (shown near 201a, Fig. 3) is disposed at a downstream side of the stack, and the outlet manifold distributes the coolant to the COD heater and the radiator.
JP ‘073 does not expressly teach a reservoir disposed between a downstream side of the fuel cell stack and a front end of the pump and configured to adjust a pressure of the coolant, as recited in claim 1. It is further not disclosed that the system has a bypass valve disposed between the upstream side of the stack and the pump, or an ion filter disposed between the bypass valve and the downstream side of the stack as recited in claim 3.
Watanabe et al. is directed to a fuel cell system and a method of controlling. The system comprises a cooling loop (109) comprising, among other elements, an expansion tank (112) immediately upstream of a coolant pump (104), the fuel cell stack inlet (48a) downstream of the pump, and a branch junction between the pump and the fuel cell inlet wherein an ion filter (116) is provided in a branch pipe (115) which bypasses the fuel cell and connects to the downstream side of the stack (Fig. 1). A reserve tank (114) is connected to the expansion tank.
Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing because the artisan would have been motivated to use the ion filter, branch pipe, expansion tank and reserve tank of Watanabe in the system of JP ‘073. Regarding the ion filter, it is disclosed that the ion exchanger prevents liquid junction of the stack 12 by removing ions contained in the coolant. Further, with respect to the tanks 112 and 114, it is disclosed that when necessary, coolant can be supplied to tank 114 from tank 112 and vice verse ([0043]) and that pressure can be released outside the tank 112 via a pressure release valve ([0068]). Therefore, the artisan would have used these elements in the system of JP ‘073. Accordingly, claim 1 is rendered obvious including the limitation that the reservoir is “configured to adjust a pressure of the coolant.” Regarding the recitation of a bypass valve, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to use a valve in the location where the branch junction is located in Watanabe to precisely control flow to the fuel cell and the ion exchanger. As such, this limitation in claim 3 is also rendered obvious.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, such a bypass valve would be fully capable of performing the claimed functions and thus the limitations are rendered obvious.
Regarding claim 7, the system of modified JP ‘073 would be capable of performing the claimed function (“a part of the coolant discharged from the fuel cell stack flows to the reservoir at normal times”).
Regarding claim 15, the outlet manifold of the fuel cell also would distribute coolant to the reservoir in the system of modified JP ‘073.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed April 30, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The position is maintained that it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to incorporate the stated elements from Watanabe et al. into the system of JP ‘073. Applicant states that the Office has failed to properly articulate a prima facie case of obviousness, and that “because the pressure relief is performed by the expansion tank 112, not the reserve tank 114, the finding that ‘the reserve [tank 114] is configured to adjust a pressure of the coolant’ is erroneous.” In response, the motivation to combine the elements is found throughout the Watanabe reference, in particular in [0082] where it is stated that “simply by providing a single expansion tank, 112, it is enabled to remove air bubbles from the coolant. [..] Accordingly, the increase in the size of the fuel cell system 10 can be avoided. As a result, flexibility in placement layout in the fuel cell vehicle increases.” Therefore, motivation to use the tank 112 (among other features) is to remove air bubble from the coolant. Finally, Applicant’s statement above that “the finding that ‘the reserve [tank 114] is configured to adjust a pressure of the coolant’ is erroneous” is not an accurate characterization of the Office’s position. The position of the Office is that it would be obvious to use all the above-noted elements including tank 112 in the system of JP ‘073. The quoted statement of Applicant regarding tank 114 does not appear to be a statement that was made by the Office in the previous Office action.
Accordingly, the rejection is deemed proper and is maintained herein.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Jonathan Crepeau whose telephone number is (571) 272-1299. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Nicole Buie-Hatcher, can be reached at (571) 270-3879. The phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 272-1700. Documents may be faxed to the central fax server at (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Jonathan Crepeau/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
June 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights