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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s submission of drawings on August 1, 2025 is found to be sufficient to overcome the objections to the drawings presented in the previous office action of record, and those objections are accordingly withdrawn.
Applicant's further arguments filed August 1, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Here, in regards to the applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to a judicial exception, where the limitation of claim is that of analyzing a state of the fuel cell according to a measured result, as drafted, which is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation is a process which is a mathematical concept, the applicant asserts that the amended claim 1 does not recite any natural correlation or mental steps, but rather independent claim 1 recites additional elements which ensures that it reads on more than a product of nature. Here the applicant asserts that, for example, independent claim 1 recites, “wherein analyzing the state of the fuel cell includes analyzing the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size of the electrode of the fuel cell and analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of an ionomer”. The applicant asserts that these elements transform the claim into an inventive claim that is patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 as reciting a non-natural method of fuel cell analysis which is not a product of nature and reflects a design and engineering effort, and that claim 1 does not relate to any mathematical concepts, certain methods of organizing human activity, or mental processes, and that the claimed invention cannot be a natural principle or product, and cannot be practically performed in a human mind and thus cannot be an abstract idea.
Here, this argument has been fully considered but has not been found to be persuasive.
Here, the additional steps added to the independent claim 1 do not add significantly more than a mathematical concept or data gathering. Here, the step of measuring pore size was previously presented as dependent claim 2, and the step of analyzing the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size was previously presented as dependent claim 5, which are now cancelled with their limitations being added to claim 1. As discussed in the previous office action of record, the measuring pore size limitation is directed towards modifying the measuring step, which does not touch upon the abstract idea of the analyzing step, and further fail to provide any additional required limitations which are enough to be significantly more, as the measurement steps based on those limitations are still directed towards broad data gathering.
Additionally, the analyzing pore size step does modify the analyzing step which is the abstract idea, but it fails to integrate the abstract idea into a particular application, as the analyzing step would be, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 5, be directed to analyzing the state of the fuel cell in any way which considers any aspect of a measured pore size, while further failing to make use of that analysis in a practical application.
Additionally, the step of analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of the ionomer does modify the analyzing step which is the abstract idea, but it fails to integrate the abstract idea into a particular application, as the analyzing step would be, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 5, be directed to analyzing any aspect of a state of degradation of the fuel cell in any way which considers any aspect of a dispersity of an ionomer, while further failing to make use of that analysis in a practical application.
Accordingly, the amended claim 1 fails to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as it falls within the “mathematical concepts” grouping of abstract ideas, which can also be performed in the human mind, as there are no features or steps which exclude said possibility. Here, the applicant’s limitation of “analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of ionomer” is broad enough to encompass any consideration of a state of degradation of a fuel cell according to a dispersity of an ionomer, which includes simple analysis of gathered data in a human mind.
Additionally, in regards to the applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. 102, the applicant asserts that Miyata fails to teach or suggest “measuring the at least the portion of the electrode of the fuel cell includes measuring a pore size of the electrode of the fuel cell, wherein analyzing the state of the fuel cell includes analyzing the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size of the electrode of the fuel cell, and analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of an ionomer”, specifically stating that the feature of “measuring the pore size of the electrode of the fuel ell analyzing the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size and analyzing the degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of an ionomer” are neither taught nor suggested in Miyata. Here, this argument has been fully considered but has not been found to be persuasive.
Here, Miyata discloses structure wherein analyzing the state of the fuel cell includes analyzing the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size, where Miyata discloses conducting a nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherm test on the pores to determine their current pore size (Paragraph 0034, “The pore volume and the mode radius of the mesopores 4 are determined by analyzing nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherm measurement data according to a method such as a BJH method, a Non-Localized Density Functional Theory (NLDFT) method, or a Quenched Solid Density Functional Theory (QSDFT) method.”), where this results in an analysis of the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size.
Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim which requires that the analyzing the state of the fuel includes analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of an ionomer, the limitation does not establish any bounds in regards to what is considered a degree of degradation, nor does it establish what element or what bounds or aspects of dispersity are considered in the analyzing of the degree of degradation. Accordingly, where the definition of dispersity is the measure of heterogeneity of sizes of the particles in the mixture, any analysis which analyzes a state of the function of the fuel cell based on any aspect of sizes of ionomer particles would constitute analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a degree of dispersity of an ionomer.
Here, Miyata discloses that their ionomer is a polymer electrolyte covering the outer surface of an electrode catalyst and is made of an ion exchange resin (Paragraph 0054, “The ionomer 6 is a polymer electrolyte covering the outer surface of the electrode catalyst 1 and having proton conductivity and is formed of, for example, an ion exchange resin”).
Additionally, Miyata discloses that the dispersity of the ionomer, based on the size of ionomer particles relative to pore sizes, effects the functionality of the battery, through preventing the entry of the ionomer into the pores (Paragraph 0032, “When the mode radius is less than or equal to 4 nm, for example, even in the case where an ionomer is in contact with the electrode catalyst 1 , the ionomer is less likely to enter the mesopores 4.”). Additionally, Miyata discloses that this reduction results a deterioration of the catalyst for the battery being reduced (Paragraph 0045, “because the ionomer is less likely to enter the mesopores 4 , the specific surface of the catalyst metal particles 3 covered with the ionomer can be reduced. Thus, the deterioration of the catalyst activity of the electrode catalyst 1 due to the covering of the catalyst metal particles 3 with the ionomer can be reduced.”). Accordingly, where the dispersity of the ionomer is analyzed based on the size relative to the size of the pores, where the results of the analysis provides information regarding a deterioration of the catalyst of the fuel cell battery, this therefore constitutes analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of an ionomer.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on February 27, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Here, claim 1 is objected to due to the phrase “wherein measuring the at least the portion of the electrode”, due to grammatical incorrectness. Here, a suggested rephrasing to overcome this objection is “wherein measuring the at least a portion of the electrode”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) measuring a portion of an electrode of a fuel cell to determine a measured result, and analyzing a state of the fuel cell according to the measured result.
The limitation of Claim 1 of analyzing a state of the fuel cell according to the measured result, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, is a process that is a mathematical concept. Here, the process of “analyzing a state of the fuel cell”, in light of the interpretation made based on paragraph [0063] (“The apparatus for analyzing a fuel cell may analyze/use a dispersion state/dispersity of a catalyst or ionomer with respect to an electrode of the fuel cell.”) of the specification, comprises mathematical concepts such as performing calculations and/or comparing numerical values to a threshold. Where this step comprises a mathematical analysis, it therefore falls within the “mathematical concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim fails to recite any additional elements which are significantly more than the abstract idea. Here, the other elements of the claim are directed toward measuring a portion of an electrode to determine a measured result. Here, this represents measuring any aspect of an electrode in any way, which is data gathering with a high degree of generality. Here, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, or comprise further steps which make use of the analyzed measurement.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because as discussed above, with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of measuring a portion of the electrode to determine a measured result constitutes broad data gathering seemingly without limitation in scope, as long as the electrode is considered. Here, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Additionally, the feature wherein measuring at least the portion of the fuel cell includes measuring a pore size of the electrode of the fuel cell, this limitation further fails to integrate the abstract idea into a particular practical application, or recite any elements which are specifically more than the abstract idea. Here, this feature is directed towards modifying the measuring step, which does not touch upon the abstract idea of the analyzing step, and further fail to provide any additional required limitations which are enough to be significantly more, as the measurement steps based on those limitations are still directed towards broad data gathering.
Additionally, the feature of analyzing the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size of the electrode fuel cell does modify the analyzing step which is the abstract idea, but it fails to integrate the abstract idea into a particular application, as the analyzing step would be, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 5, be directed to analyzing the state of the fuel cell in any way which considers any aspect of a measured pore size, while further failing to make use of that analysis in a practical application.
Accordingly, Claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Additionally, in regards to claims 3-4 and 6-7, they further fail to integrate the abstract idea into a particular practical application, or recite any elements which are specifically more than the abstract idea. Here, claims 3-4, 6, and 7 are directed towards modifying the measuring step, which does not touch upon the abstract idea of the analyzing step, and further fail to provide any additional required limitations which are enough to be significantly more, as the measurement steps based on those limitations are still directed towards broad data gathering.
Accordingly, Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-7 are not patent eligible.
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, 3-4, and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyata (WO 2021117369 A1, with US equivalent US 20220021005 A1 used as a translation for citation purposes).
Regarding Claim 1, Miyata is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a method of fuel cell analysis comprising measuring at least a portion of an electrode of a fuel cell to determine a measured result (Paragraph 0075, “Commercially available mesoporous carbon having a design pore size of 10 nm (CNovel, manufactured by Toyo Tanso Co., Ltd.) was used as a mesoporous material.”), where pore size is measured by determining that it is present, and analyzing a state of the fuel cell according to the measured result (Paragraph 0080, “The specific surface area S1-25 and the mode radius of the mesopores of the mesoporous carbon, before the mesoporous carbon supported the catalyst metal, were determined from an adsorption isotherm of nitrogen gas at a liquid nitrogen temperature.”), where the analysis performed includes the analysis of the mode pore radius and surface area based on an adsorption isotherm of nitrogen gas.
Additionally, Miyata discloses structure wherein measuring the at least portion of the fuel cell includes measuring a pore size of the electrode fuel cell (Paragraph 0075, “Commercially available mesoporous carbon having a design pore size of 10 nm (CNovel, manufactured by Toyo Tanso Co., Ltd.) was used as a mesoporous material.”), where pore size is measured by determining that it is present.
Additionally, Miyata discloses structure wherein analyzing the state of the fuel cell includes analyzing the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size, where Miyata discloses conducting a nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherm test on the pores to determine their current pore size (Paragraph 0034, “The pore volume and the mode radius of the mesopores 4 are determined by analyzing nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherm measurement data according to a method such as a BJH method, a Non-Localized Density Functional Theory (NLDFT) method, or a Quenched Solid Density Functional Theory (QSDFT) method.”), where this results in an analysis of the state of the fuel cell based on a measured pore size.
Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim which requires that the analyzing the state of the fuel includes analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of an ionomer, the limitation does not establish any bounds in regards to what is considered a degree of degradation, nor does it establish what element or what bounds or aspects of dispersity are considered in the analyzing of the degree of degradation. Accordingly, where the definition of dispersity is the measure of heterogeneity of sizes of the particles in the mixture, any analysis which analyzes a state of the function of the fuel cell based on any aspect of sizes of ionomer particles would constitute analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a degree of dispersity of an ionomer.
Here, Miyata discloses that their ionomer is a polymer electrolyte covering the outer surface of an electrode catalyst and is made of an ion exchange resin (Paragraph 0054, “The ionomer 6 is a polymer electrolyte covering the outer surface of the electrode catalyst 1 and having proton conductivity and is formed of, for example, an ion exchange resin”).
Additionally, Miyata discloses that the dispersity of the ionomer, based on the size of ionomer particles relative to pore sizes, effects the functionality of the battery, through preventing the entry of the ionomer into the pores (Paragraph 0032, “When the mode radius is less than or equal to 4 nm, for example, even in the case where an ionomer is in contact with the electrode catalyst 1 , the ionomer is less likely to enter the mesopores 4.”). Additionally, Miyata discloses that this reduction results a deterioration of the catalyst for the battery being reduced (Paragraph 0045, “because the ionomer is less likely to enter the mesopores 4 , the specific surface of the catalyst metal particles 3 covered with the ionomer can be reduced. Thus, the deterioration of the catalyst activity of the electrode catalyst 1 due to the covering of the catalyst metal particles 3 with the ionomer can be reduced.”). Accordingly, where the dispersity of the ionomer is analyzed based on the size relative to the size of the pores, where the results of the analysis provides information regarding a deterioration of the catalyst of the fuel cell battery, this therefore constitutes analyzing a degree of degradation of the fuel cell according to a dispersity of an ionomer.
Regarding Claim 3, Miyata anticipates the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Miyata discloses structure wherein measuring the at least the portion of the electrode of the fuel cell includes measuring at least a portion of an air electrode of the fuel cell. Miyata discloses that one of their electrodes is an air electrode (Paragraph 0026, “A membrane-electrode assembly according to a seventh aspect of the present disclosure may include a polymer electrolyte membrane; and a fuel electrode and an air electrode respectively disposed on both main surfaces of the polymer electrolyte membrane,”), which is component 11 in Miyata’s figure 4 (Paragraph 0062, “and an air electrode 11.”). Miyata further discloses that their air electrode comprises a catalyst layer (Paragraph 0068, “The air electrode 11 is a cathode electrode of the fuel battery and includes an electrode catalyst layer (a second electrode catalyst layer 14)”), where the electrocatalyst layer includes a mesoporous material, where the electrocatalyst layer 5 of the air electrode comprises the mesoporous material 4 (Paragraph 0033, “the mesoporous material 2 (i.e., the mesopores 4)”, Paragraph 0062, “At least the electrode catalyst layer of the air electrode 11 includes the electrode catalyst layer 5 of a fuel battery according to the second embodiment or Modification 4 thereof.”). Additionally, Miyata discloses that there if a step of measuring a nitrogen adsorption isotherm of the mesoporous material (Paragraph 0036, “The specific surface area S1-25 of the mesopores 4 is obtained by analyzing a nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherm of the mesoporous material 2”). Accordingly, this represents structure wherein the measuring step includes measuring at least a portion of an air electrode of the fuel cell.
Regarding Claim 4, Miyata anticipates the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Miyata discloses structure wherein the method comprises forming at least a portion of the electrode of the fuel cell by at least some of a coating process, a bonding process, and an attaching process. Here, Miyata discloses that the forming of their electrode includes a coating of catalyst metal particles to a mesoporous material (Paragraph 0040, “The catalyst metal particles 3 are supported at least in the mesoporous material 2.”), where the initial state of the mesoporous material does not include catalyst particles (Paragraph 0044, “As in this structure, before supporting the catalyst metal particles 3, the mesoporous material 2 has the mesopores 4 having a mode radius of…”). Accordingly, where the final electrode comprises a mesoporous material coated with catalyst particles, and the initial mesoporous material does not include catalyst particles, Miyata therefore includes structure where the method of forming a portion of the fuel cell includes coating the mesoporous material with the catalyst particles.
Regarding Claim 6, Miyata anticipates the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Miyata discloses structure wherein measuring the at least a portion of the electrode of the fuel cell further includes removing at least one of impurities and moisture located at the least one of the inside and around the electrode of the fuel cell. Here, the measuring of the electrode material includes the forming of the electrode material, and Miyata discloses that in the formation process of the electrode catalyst layer 5, which must be formed to be measured, there is a drying step which removes a solvent comprising water and alcohol (Paragraph 0057, “This electrode catalyst 1 and the ionomer 6 are dispersed in a solvent containing water and/or an alcohol. This dispersion is applied to the base materials such as a polymer electrolyte membrane, gas diffusion layers, and various transfer films and thereafter dried to thereby form the electrode catalyst layer 5.”), which therefore constitutes structure wherein measuring includes removing at least one of impurities and moisture from the inside of the electrode of the fuel cell.
Regarding Claim 7, Miyata anticipates the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Miyata discloses structure wherein the measuring of the pore size of the electrode of the fuel cell further includes calculating the pore size based on a result of nitrogen supply to the electrode of the fuel cell, via their disclosure of the measurement of the mode pore radius via analyzing a nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherm (Paragraph 0034, “The pore volume and the mode radius of the mesopores 4 are determined by analyzing nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherm measurement data according to a method such as a BJH method, a Non-Localized Density Functional Theory (NLDFT) method, or a Quenched Solid Density Functional Theory (QSDFT) method.”), where the nitrogen isotherm is performed by steps which include supplying nitrogen to the electrode of the fuel cell (Paragraph 0036, “This nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherm is measured by causing the mesoporous material 2 to adsorb nitrogen at a predetermined temperature such as a liquid nitrogen temperature.”).
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 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 JONATHAN W ESTES whose telephone number is (571)272-4820. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 5:30.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 5712721453. 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.
/J.W.E./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/BASIA A RIDLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725