Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/116,702

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FUEL CELL

Non-Final OA §101§103
Filed
Mar 02, 2023
Examiner
OHARA, BRIAN R
Art Unit
1724
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kia Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
422 granted / 533 resolved
+14.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
577
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
57.3%
+17.3% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 533 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 1-11) in the reply filed on 11/3/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that of the amended claims and that there would not be a serious burden to the examiner. This is not found persuasive because the restriction was based off of the previous claim set and thus there was no error within the restriction, furthermore, there would be a serious burden to the examiner as the differences between the product and the method would require different search strings and strategies across different fields of endeavor. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. 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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a fuel cell system without significantly more. The claims recite a fuel cell system comprising: an ejector provided in a hydrogen supply line; a hydrogen pressure sensor provided in the hydrogen supply line at a front end portion of the ejector and configured to measure a pressure of hydrogen flowing in from a hydrogen tank connected to the hydrogen supply line; a supply valve provided in the hydrogen supply line at a front end portion of the hydrogen pressure sensor and configured to control a flow rate of the hydrogen supplied from the hydrogen tank to an anode of a fuel cell stack of the fuel cell system; a discharge valve provided in a hydrogen discharge line fluidically connected to the anode; and a controller electrically connected to the supply valve and configured to estimate the pressure of the hydrogen flowing into the anode of the fuel cell stack from a rear end portion of the ejector for each open or closed state of each of the supply, and to control the supply based on a pressure estimate value of the hydrogen, while claims 2-11 are directed to more controller calculations/determinations. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the determination and the calculations are an abstract idea and calculation without the implementation of changing anything. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because Bae (US 2020/0185743) discloses all of the components within the same location thus demonstrating it is known structure and the calculation and determination that are done by the controller are not doing anything more i.e. adjusting valves or flow rates at certain thresholds. Therefore, until the controller does something with the information there is not significantly more. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae (US 2020/0185743). As to claim 1, Bae discloses a fuel cell system (figure 1, [0008], [0014], discussed throughout) comprising: an ejector provided in a hydrogen supply line (figure 1 #30, [0026], discussed throughout); a hydrogen pressure sensor provided in the hydrogen supply line at a front end portion of the ejector (figure 1 #20, [0030], discussed throughout) and configured to measure a pressure of hydrogen flowing in from a hydrogen tank connected to the hydrogen supply line (figures 1 and 2, P1 and P2, [0005], discussed the supply coming from a tank; discussed throughout); a supply valve provided in the hydrogen supply line at a front end portion of the hydrogen pressure sensor and configured to control a flow rate of the hydrogen supplied from the hydrogen tank to an anode of a fuel cell stack of the fuel cell system (figure 1 and 2 #10, [0026], discussed throughout); a discharge valve provided in a hydrogen discharge line fluidically connected to the anode (figure 1 #50 and/or #70, [0027], discussed throughout); and a controller electrically connected to the supply valve ([0010] and [0032], discussed throughout) and configured to estimate the pressure of the hydrogen flowing into the anode of the fuel cell stack from a rear end portion of the ejector for each open or closed state of each of the supply (figures 5 and 6, [0010], [0033]-[0039], the controller is controlling the supply valve and estimating the pressure, discussed throughout), and to control the supply based on a pressure estimate value of the hydrogen (figures 5 and 6, [0033]-[0039] and discussed throughout). Bae is silent to the controller controlling the discharge valves. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention for the controller to use the discharge valves and use the discharge valves within the calculation as the discharge valves affect the pressure P3, if the valves are closed then the system would be closed and reach an equilibrium. Thus, it would have been obvious to use the valves to contribute to controlling the output of the fuel cell. As to claim 2, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to estimate the pressure of the hydrogen measured by the hydrogen pressure sensor as an initial pressure of the hydrogen flowing into the anode of the fuel cell stack from the rear end portion of the ejector (figures 1 and 5-6, the pressure is P2 and as the controller is determine the pressure and estimate can mean to judge, thus the instant claimed limitation is meet). As to claim 3, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to determine a target supply pressure of the hydrogen and a target discharge flow rate of the hydrogen based on the pressure estimate value of the hydrogen (figures 5 and 6, discussed throughout), to control the supply valve based on the target supply pressure of the hydrogen (figures 5 and 6, discussed throughout), and to control the discharge valve based on the target discharge flow rate of the hydrogen (see modification in claim 1). As to claim 4, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to derive a target supply flow rate of the hydrogen based on a required current of the fuel cell stack, and to determine the target supply pressure of the hydrogen based on the target supply flow rate of the hydrogen and the pressure estimate value of the hydrogen (figure 5, [0010], [0028], [0032], [0037], the output is the power of the fuel cell which is current, discussed throughout). As to claim 5, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to derive a concentration estimate value of the hydrogen inside the anode based on the pressure estimate value of the hydrogen, and to determine the target discharge flow rate of the hydrogen based on the concentration estimate value of the hydrogen (figure 5, discussed throughout, the calculation are using the required hydrogen based of the pressure thus an assumption or estimation is being made on the concentration even if the estimated value is 100 percent as there is only hydrogen). As to claim 6, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to derive a change amount in flow rate of gas inside the anode for each open or closed state of each of the supply valve and the discharge valve, to determine a change amount in the pressure inside the anode based on the derived change amount in the flow rate of the gas, and to estimate the pressure of the hydrogen flowing into the anode of the fuel cell stack from the rear end portion of the ejector based on the determined change amount in the pressure (figure 5, the opening and closing of the valves changes the pressure, thus the flow rate and pressure and directly proportional and the system is preforming the claimed function). As to claim 7, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to determine a consumption amount of the hydrogen inside the anode and a supply amount of the hydrogen supplied into the anode in a state in which the supply valve is open and the discharge valve is closed, and to derive a change amount in flow rate of the gas inside the anode based on the determined consumption amount of the hydrogen and the determined supply amount of the hydrogen (figure 5, [0010], [0028], [0032], [0037], with the valves closed and the output of the fuel cell is directly proportional to the hydrogen consumption the information is known). As to claim 8, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to determine the consumption amount of the hydrogen inside the anode based on an output current of the fuel cell stack in a state in which the supply valve is open and the discharge valve is closed, and to determine the supply amount of the hydrogen supplied into the anode based on the pressure estimate value of the hydrogen and the pressure of the hydrogen measured by the hydrogen pressure sensor in a state in which the supply valve is open and the discharge value is closed (figure 5, [0010], [0028], [0032], [0037], with the valves closed and the output of the fuel cell is directly proportional to the hydrogen consumption, the pressure at P1 is proportional to the amount of hydrogen in the tank, the information is known). As to claim 9, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to determine a consumption amount of the hydrogen inside the anode and a discharge amount of the gas discharged through the discharge valve in a state in which the supply valve is closed and the discharge valve is open, and to derive the change amount in the flow rate of the gas inside the anode based on the determined consumption amount of the hydrogen and the determined discharge amount of the gas (figure 5, [0010], [0028], [0032], [0037], the consumption is proportional to the output, and the flow rate is proportional to the pressure, thus all the information is known and can be calculated). As to claim 10, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to determine the consumption amount of the hydrogen inside the anode based on an output current of the fuel cell stack in a state in which the supply valve is closed and the discharge valve is open, and to determine the discharge amount of the gas discharged through the discharge valve based on the pressure estimate value of the hydrogen and a pressure difference between an inlet and outlet of the discharge valve in a state in which the supply valve is closed and the discharge valve is open (figure 5, [0010], [0028], [0032], [0037], the consumption is proportional to the output, and the flow rate is proportional to the pressure, thus all the information is known and can be calculated). As to claim 11, Bae discloses wherein, the controller is configured to determine the consumption amount of the hydrogen inside the anode based on an output current of the fuel cell stack in a state in which the supply valve and the discharge valve are closed, and to derive the change amount in the fluid rate of the gas inside the anode based on the determined consumption amount of the hydrogen (figure 5, [0010], [0028], [0032], [0037], the consumption is proportional to the output, thus all the information is known and can be calculated). Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST M-F. 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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 R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 02, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589999
LITHIUM MANGANESE IRON PHOSPHATE POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL AND PREPARATION METHOD, POSITIVE ELECTRODE PLATE, SECONDARY BATTERY AND ELECTRICAL APPARATUS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586805
SOLID OXIDE FUEL CELL, SOLID OXIDE FUEL CELL STACK AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF SOLID OXIDE FUEL CELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580275
Battery Module
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12555814
FUEL CELL UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12555879
CYLINDRICAL SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+9.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 533 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month