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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9, 12-14, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2020/0203745A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses an antioxidant for fuel cells (antioxidant, see Title, Abstract, Fig. 1-5), comprising:
a core comprising an inorganic particle (composite including an antioxidant which may be a transition metal ion selected from the group consisting of Ce3+, Ce4+, Mg2+, Mg3+ [0043], Fig. 2); and
a shell covering at least a portion of a surface of the core and comprising an ionomer (first ionomer surrounding antioxidant [0042]),
wherein the ionomer comprises a polymer and a proton conductive functional group bonded to the polymer (PFSA [0044]); and
wherein the core is free of any proton conductive functional group (composite including an antioxidant which may be a transition metal ion selected from the group consisting of Ce3+, Ce4+, Mg2+, Mg3+ [0043]).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the inorganic particle comprises a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 below,
MXa, wherein: [Chemical Formula 1]
M comprises cerium (Ce), tin (Sn), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo), titanium (Ti), or any combination thereof;
X comprises at least one of halogen atoms; and
a is the same number as an oxidation number of M (precursor of the antioxidant may be selected from the group consisting of cerium chloride, manganese chloride, and combinations thereof [0058]).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the polymer comprises a main chain and a side chain; the proton conductive functional group is bonded to the side chain; and the proton conductive functional group has more proton transfer sites than the side chain ([0045]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the polymer comprises a perfluorinated sulfonic acid polymer ([0045]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses a method for manufacturing a membrane-electrode assembly for fuel cells (see Title, Abstract, Fig. 1-5), comprising:
preparing a dispersion solution comprising an ionomer;
adding a core comprising an inorganic particle to the dispersion solution to form a shell covering at least a portion of a surface of the core, wherein the shell comprises the ionomer (mixing the antioxidant solution and a first ionomer dispersion solution to prepare a mixture, and then dried [0056]-[0066]),
heat-treating a resultant, after forming the shell covering the surface of the core to obtain an antioxidant (mixing the antioxidant solution and a first ionomer dispersion solution to prepare a mixture, and then dried [0056]-[0066]);
preparing a solution including the antioxidant and an ion transfer material (mixing the antioxidant solution and a first ionomer dispersion solution to prepare a mixture, and then dried [0056]-[0066]),
manufacturing an electrolyte membrane by applying the solution to a substrate and drying the solution (thermally treating the electrolyte membrane [0072]); and
forming electrodes on both surfaces of the electrolyte membrane;
wherein the ionomer comprises a polymer and a proton conductive functional group bonded to the polymer (PFSA [0044]-[0047]); and
wherein the core is free of any proton conductive functional group (composite including an antioxidant which may be a transition metal ion selected from the group consisting of Ce3+, Ce4+, Mg2+, Mg3+ [0043]).
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the preparing the dispersion solution comprises: preparing an admixture comprising a precursor of the proton conductive functional group and a solution comprising the polymer; and stirring the admixture (mixing the antioxidant solution and a first ionomer dispersion solution to prepare a mixture [0056]-[0066]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the polymer comprises a main chain and a side chain; the proton conductive functional group is bonded to the side chain; and the proton conductive functional group has more proton transfer sites than the side chain ([0045]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the polymer comprises a perfluorinated sulfonic acid polymer (PFSA [0044]).
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the admixture is stirred at a temperature of about 30° C. to 140° C (mixed and dried at 25° C to 280° C [0064]).
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the inorganic particle comprises a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 below,
MXa, wherein: [Chemical Formula 1]
M comprises cerium (Ce), tin (Sn), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo), titanium (Ti), or any combination thereof;
X comprises at least one of halogen atoms; and
a is the same number as an oxidation number of M (precursor of the antioxidant may be selected from the group consisting of cerium chloride, manganese chloride, and combinations thereof [0058]).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses an amount of about 10 parts by weight to 1,000 parts by weight of the core is added to the dispersion solution, based on 100 parts by weight of the ionomer (a weight ratio of the first ionomer to the antioxidant range from 1:1 to 1:50 [0055]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the heat-treating is performed at a temperature of about 100° C. to 200° C (25 to 280° C [0064]; It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5, 10-11, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2020/0203745A1), as applied to claims 1-4, 6-9, 12-14, 16 above, in view of JP2011044250A, refer to English machine translation.
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. However, Kim does not further disclose the proton conductive functional group comprises a phosphoric acid group (—PO4H3) (phosphoric acid, see p.2-3,5).
JP2011044250A discloses an antioxidant comprising a core coated/covered with polymer, wherein the polymer has a phosphorus-containing functional group and can also include perfluorosulfonic acid resin (see p.3-5, Fig. 2). JP2011044250A further discloses the phosphorus-containing functional group improves proton conductivity and performance of the solid electrolyte membrane and the catalyst electrode layer (see p.4).
Kim and JP2011044250A are analogous art because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely fuel cell separator membranes comprising antioxidants.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim by incorporating a phosphorus-containing functional group in the polymer shell of the antioxidant because JP2011044250A teaches improved performance.
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. However, Kim does not further disclose the proton conductive functional group comprises a phosphoric acid group (—PO4H3) (phosphoric acid, see p.2-3,5).
JP2011044250A discloses an antioxidant comprising a core coated/covered with polymer, wherein the polymer has a phosphorus-containing functional group and can also include perfluorosulfonic acid resin (see p.3-5, Fig. 2). JP2011044250A further discloses the phosphorus-containing functional group improves proton conductivity and performance of the solid electrolyte membrane and the catalyst electrode layer (see p.4).
Kim and JP2011044250A are analogous art because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely fuel cell separator membranes comprising antioxidants.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim by incorporating a phosphorus-containing functional group in the polymer shell of the antioxidant because JP2011044250A teaches improved performance.
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. However, Kim does not further disclose the admixture comprises about 0.00188 parts by weight and 0.188 parts by weight of the precursor, based on 100 parts by weight of the polymer.
Because JP2011044250A teaches a content of the antioxidant in the coating layer is 0.005 to 10 wt% in view of antioxidant activity, surface coverage and membrane characteristics (see p.5), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the content of antioxidant in order to arrive at a desired balance between antioxidant properties and membrane characteristics (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses further discloses a fuel cell (fuel cell [0003]-[0006]) comprising:
an electrolyte membrane comprising an ion transfer material (second ionomer which is a polymer matrix, see Abstract);
a pair of electrodes disposed on both surfaces of the electrolyte membrane (membrane-electrode assembly); and
wherein at least one of the electrolyte membrane, the electrodes and the gas diffusion layers comprises an antioxidant of claim 1 (see Title, Abstract).
However, Kim does not disclose gas diffusion layers disposed on the pair of the electrodes.
JP2011044250A discloses a fuel cell comprising catalyst electrode layers bonded to both sides of an electrolyte membrane, and diffusion layer disposed on both sides of the membrane electrode assembly (see p.3, Fig. 1).
An obviousness determination is not the result of a rigid formula disassociated from the consideration of the facts of a case. Indeed, the common sense of those skilled in the art demonstrates why some combinations would have been obvious where others would not. Leapfrog Enterprises Inc. v. Fisher-Price Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1687 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also KSR v. Teleflex, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007).
The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
The claim would have been obvious because “a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If the leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.”
It has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is generally within the skill of the art.
Regarding claim 18, modified Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses the electrolyte membrane comprises an amount of about 0.1 parts by weight to 20 parts by weight of the antioxidant based on 100 parts by weight of the ion transfer material (a weight ratio of the first ionomer to the antioxidant range from 1:1 to 1:50 [0055]; It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549).
Regarding claim 19, modified Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. JP2011044250A further discloses the ion transfer material has a greater equivalent weight than an equivalent weight of the ionomer (when the solid electrolyte membrane contains the inorganic particles, the content is in the range of 0.5 to 10% by mass, p.6, wherein the inorganic particles includes the ionomer and, thus, the weight of the ion transfer material/separator is greater than a weight of the inorganic particles containing the ionomer/polymer).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2020/0203745A1) in view of JP2011044250A, refer to English machine translation, as applied to claims 5, 10-11, 17-19, and further in view of Park et al. (US 2020/0313213A1).
Regarding claim 20, modified Kim discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. However, modified Kim does not disclose a vehicle 7.
Park discloses antioxidant for fuel cells and fuel cell comprising the same (see Title, Abstract), and a vehicle including the fuel cell which can simultaneously secure both excellent antioxidation capability and acid resistance of the antioxidant in an acid atmosphere of a polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell for vehicles ([0026], [0047], [0066], [0109]).
Modified Kim and Park are analogous art because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely fuel cells incorporating antioxidants.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the fuel cell of modified Kim in a vehicle powered by the fuel cell because Park teaches securing performance in acid atmosphere of fuel cells for vehicles.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-14, 16-20 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 JAMES LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7937. 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, NICOLE BUIE-HATCHER can be reached at (571)270-3879. 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.
/James Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 6/12/2026
Prosecution Insights