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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 12/5/2025 has been entered into the prosecution for the application. Currently claims 1, 2, 4-11 and 13-20 are pending examination.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 18 is dependent on claim 12 which is cancelled. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0179996 of Nygren et al.
As to claim 1, Nygren teaches to a hydrogen production system (Nygren, [0025] and Fig. 1), comprising:
a first stage conversion module and a second stage conversion module, wherein the second stage conversion module comprises a second conversion unit, and each second conversion unit comprises at least two DC/DC converters connected to each other in parallel (Nygren, [0030] – [0031] and Fig. 3);
an input end of the first stage conversion module is connected to a power supply (Nygren, [0030], [0032] and Fig. 3);
an output end of the first stage conversion module is connected to an input end of the second stage conversion module (Nygren, [0030] – [0031] and Fig. 3); and
each output end of the second stage conversion module is connected to a power supply end of each hydrogen production device, respectively (Nygren, [0030] – [0032] and Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
684
482
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As seen in Fig. 3, there is a power supply (325) that is connected to a first conversion module (306) that converts AC to DC current. The DC current is then supplied to second stage module (302) comprises parallel connected DC/DC conversion units (308a and 308b) that supply current to the power supply end of the hydrogen production device (electrodes 315/316).
As to claim 2, Nygren teaches a quantity of the second conversion unit in the second stage module is at least two such that the connections are disclosed as claimed (Nygren, [0030] and Fig. 3).
As seen above in Fig. 3, there are multiple equivalent convertors (302, 303, 304) that each have the same configuration as that described for convertor 302.
As to claim 4, Nygren teaches that the main circuit topography of the at least two DC/DC convertors in each second conversion unit is the same (Nygren, [0030] – [0032] and Fig. 3).
As to claim 5, Nygren teaches the first stage conversion module comprises a first conversion unit (306) such that an input end of the first conversion unit is connected to the power supply (325) and the output end is connected to the input of each second conversion unit (308a/308b), respectively (Nygren, [0030] – [0032] and Fig. 3).
As to claim 7, Nygren teaches in a case when the power supply (325) is an alternating current power supply, the first conversion unit comprises a AC/DC convertor (306) (Nygren, [0030] – [0032] and Fig. 3).
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.
Claims 6, 8, 9-11 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nygren as applied to the respective claims above, and further in view of US 2021/0363651 of Seymour et al.
As to claim 6, Nygren teaches to the system of claim 2.
Nygren does not suggest the first conversion module comprises at least two first conversion units.
Seymour teaches of power distribution for electrolytic cells (Seymour, [0001]).
Seymour teaches that the first conversion module comprises two of more conversion units (i.e. rectifiers) to allow decoupling of the size (i.e. power capacity) of the transformer and the active rectifier such that each rectifier is then connected to a second conversion unit of the system (including more than one second conversion unit per rectifier) to effectively supply electricity to the electrolytic cell stacks (Seymour, [0078] – [0079]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nygren as per Seymour so as to utilize the desired amount of first conversion units per first conversion modules to allow a decoupling of the size of the power capacity within the system in order to allow for a more effective supply of electricity to the electrolytic cells of the system.
As to claim 8, Nygren in view of Seymour teaches to the system of claim 6.
Nygren teaches in a case when the power supply (325) is an alternating current power supply, the first conversion unit comprises a AC/DC convertor (306) (Nygren, [0030] – [0032] and Fig. 3).
Seymour also teaches, in the case of an AC power supply, the first conversion unit is a AC/DC conversion unit (Seymour, [0064] – [0066] and Fig. 1).
As to claim 9, Nygren teaches to the system of claim 7.
Nygren teaches of an AC/DC convertor, but does not specifically teach the type of convertor (Nygren, [0032]).
Seymour teaches of power distribution for electrolytic cells (Seymour, [0001]).
Seymour additionally teaches the known AC/DC convertor include thyristor rectified circuits (Seymour, [0058]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nygren as per Seymour so as to utilize a specific type of convertor in order to modify the AC current to DC current for use.
As to claims 10-11 and 13-14, Nygren teach to the claims 1, 2, 4 and 5 while for claim 15, Nygren in view of Seymour teach to claim 6.
Nygren does not specifically teach a controller.
Seymour teaches of power distribution for electrolytic cells (Seymour, [0001]).
Seymour additionally teaches a controller connected to first convertor, second convertor and each hydrogen production device such that the electrical volumes can be controlled by the system (Seymour, [0021], [0086] – [0089]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nygren as per Seymour so as to utilize a controller within the system in order to control the electrical volumes of each component for the system.
As to claims 16-20, Nygren in view of Seymour teach to the systems of claims 10-11 and 13-15.
Nygren does not teach the controller.
Seymour teaches of power distribution for electrolytic cells (Seymour, [0001]).
Seymour additionally teaches a controller connected to first convertor, second convertor and each hydrogen production device such that the electrical volumes can be controlled by the system (Seymour, [0021], [0086] – [0089]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nygren as per Seymour so as to utilize a controller within the system in order to control the electrical volumes of each component for the system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot due to new art provided as per Nygren.
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 BRIAN W COHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7961. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 am to 5 pm EST.
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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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.
BRIAN W. COHEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1759
/BRIAN W COHEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759