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 .
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DISTRIBUTING THE POWER OF FUEL CELL SYSTEMS IN A VEHICLE
Examiner: Adam Arciero S.N. 18/001,240 Art Unit: 1727 April 13, 2026
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s response filed on January 20, 2026 has been received. Claims 1, 4-11 and 14-18 are currently pending. Claims 1, 4-11 and 14-18 have been amended. Claims 2-3 and 12-13 have been canceled.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites an intended use for a device for distributing power of fuel cell systems. The courts have held that “if the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction.” Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See also Rowe v. Dror, 112 F.3d 473, 478, 42 USPQ2d 1550, 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ("where a patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention, the preamble is not a claim limitation"). See MPEP 2111.02.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The claim rejections under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pearson on claims 1-13 and 15-18 are withdrawn because Applicant has amended the claims.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 9, 11, 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by O-Neill (US 2015/0099204 A1; as found in IDS dated 02/11/26).
As to Claims 1, 6, 11 and 16-17, O-Neill discloses a device and a method for controlling a fuel cell system, comprising: a control device that modulates the power of a first and second fuel cell system by way of first and second electrical signals, wherein one fuel cell stack can operate at a high power mode (reads on increasing a first electrical power) and wherein the second fuel cell stack can operate in a low power mode (reads on decreasing a first electrical power) (paragraphs [0013-0016 and 0020]).
As to Claims 4-5, 14 and 18, O-Neill discloses temporarily varying the voltages of the first and second fuel cell systems, which reads on applying a temporally offset oscillation (paragraphs [0013-0016 and 0020]).
As to Claims 9 and 15, O-Neill discloses a hydrogen storage tank 20 that is configured to provide the fuel cell systems with hydrogen (Fig. 1 and paragraph [0011]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejections under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over Pearson on claim 14 is withdrawn because Applicant has amended the claims.
Claim(s) 7-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O-Neill (US 2015/0099204 A1; as found in IDS dated 02/11/26) in view of Pearson (US 2004/0009380 A1).
As to Claims 7-8, O-Neill discloses the same control unit and device of claim 1. However, O-Neill does not specifically disclose the claimed catalyst.
However, Pearson discloses a device and method for distributing power of at least a first fuel cell system and a second fuel cell system (a fuel cell having a membrane electrode assembly and a platinum catalyst) in a vehicle (Abstract and paragraph [0004]). At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the fuel cells of O-Neill to comprise the claimed catalyst because Pearson teaches that the desired electrochemical reaction is provided (paragraph [0004]). In addition, it is the position of the Office that the control unit of modified O-Neill, when it is in operation, intrinsically causes the claimed catalyst conversion process given that the structure of the claimed and the prior art are the same, see MPEP 2112 and 2114.
As to Claim 10, O-Neill does not specifically disclose the claimed battery.
However, Pearson discloses at least one battery system 24 configured to store electrical energy generated by the fuel cell systems (Fig. 1 and paragraph [0045]). At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of O-Neill to comprise the claimed battery because Pearson teaches that electrical power can be stored and used as needed (paragraphs [0058]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ADAM ARCIERO whose telephone number is (571)270-5116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5 ET.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571)272-1330. 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.
/ADAM A ARCIERO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights