DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This is in response to the above application filed on 03/16/2023. Claims 1 – 20 are examined.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Para. [0017], middle “…and/or pressure of exhaust impinging on turbine 42 to vary a torque the exhaust applies to exhaust turbine 44” is believed to be in error for --and/or pressure of exhaust impinging on exhaust turbine [[42]] 44 to vary a torque the exhaust applies to exhaust turbine 44-- because Para. [0017], second sentence disclosed ‘intake air compressor 42’.
Para. [0018], first sentence “…a compressor bypass conduit 46 may extend from intake air conduit 20 to flow control valve assembly 46” is believed to be in error for --a compressor bypass conduit [[46]] 84 may extend from intake air conduit 20 to flow control valve assembly 46--.
Para. [0029], middle “Going from Fig. 3 to Fig. 2 would thus include transitioning flow control valve 60 from an angular orientation blocking one of two sides of divided turbine feed outlet 56…” is believed to be in error for --Going from Fig. [[3]] 2 to Fig. [[2]] 3 would thus include transitioning flow control valve 60 from an angular orientation blocking one of two sides of divided turbine feed outlet 56…-- because Fig. 2 shows (64) blocking (61) while Fig. 3 shows both (58 and 61) unblocked by (64).
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 – 3, 8 – 11, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mori et al. (11,207,800).
Regarding Claim 1, Mori discloses, in Figs. 1 - 11, all the claimed limitations including an electric power system comprising: a fuel cell system including a fuel cell stack (1), an intake air conduit (4) extending to the fuel cell stack (1), and an exhaust conduit (5a) extending from the fuel cell stack (1); a charge air system including an intake air compressor (3a), an exhaust turbine (3c), and a flow control valve assembly (Figs. 4 and 5); the flow control valve assembly including a housing (11) forming an exhaust inlet (5v) fluidly connected to the exhaust conduit (5a), and a turbine feed outlet (5c), and at least one flow control valve (12) exposed to a flow of exhaust from the exhaust inlet (5v); and the at least one flow control valve (12) is rotatable in the valve housing (11, Col. 7, ll. 25 – 30 “With the shaft 13 rotated by an actuator 14, the valve body 12 rotates in the housing 11.”) to fluidly connect the exhaust inlet (5v), selectively, to the exhaust turbine (3c) via an unrestricted flow area (shown in Fig. 5, Col. 7, ll. 35 – 50), or to the exhaust turbine (3c) via a restricted flow area (shown in Fig. 4, Col. 7, ll. 30 – 40).
Re Claim 2, Mori discloses the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the housing (11) forms a wasting outlet (7v), and the at least one flow control valve (12) is rotatable in the housing (11, Col. 7, ll. 25 – 30 “With the shaft 13 rotated by an actuator 14, the valve body 12 rotates in the housing 11.”) to fluidly connect the exhaust inlet (5v), selectively, to the wasting outlet (7v, shown in Fig. 5).
Re Claim 3, Mori discloses the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the at least one flow control valve (12) includes a single flow control valve (shown in Figs. 4 and 5) rotatable in the valve housing (11) about an axis (13), to fluidly connect the exhaust inlet (5v), respectively, to the exhaust turbine (3c) via the unrestricted flow area (when 5v and 5c were 100% open, for example, when 12 was rotated into a position between the positions shown in Figs. 4 and 5), to the exhaust turbine (3c) via the restricted flow area (5v partially blocked/restricted as shown in Fig. 4), or to the wasting outlet (7v as shown in Fig. 5), at a first, a second, and a third angular orientation (at least three different rotational positions of 12) about the axis (13).
Re Claim 8, Mori discloses the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the exhaust turbine (3c) is located outside of and downstream of the housing (11).
Regarding Claim 9, Mori discloses, in Figs. 1 - 11, all the claimed limitations including a method of operating a fuel cell electric power system (Fig. 1) comprising: feeding exhaust (arrow flowing out of 1 next to 5a) from a fuel cell stack (1) through an exhaust passage (5v at the end of 5a, see Figs. 4 and 5) to a turbine (3c); operating a compressor (3a) to pressurize intake air (arrow pointing toward 3a, Col. 3, ll. 10 – 15 “…cathode gas (air) supplied to the fuel cell 1.”) supplying the fuel cell stack (1, Col. 3, ll. 20 – 25 “Cathode gas is compressed by the compressor 3a and supplied to the supply passage 4.”) based on a torque applied to the turbine (3c) via a flow of the exhaust (Col. 3, ll. 30 – 40 “The cathode exhaust gas is supplied to the turbine 3c. At this time, the turbine 3c recovers energy and generates power. The turbine 3c and the compressor 3a are connected via a shaft (not shown). Energy recovered by the turbine 3c is used as driving power for rotating the compressor 3a.”); varying a geometry of the exhaust passage (5v) via rotating (Col. 7, ll. 25 – 30 “With the shaft 13 rotated by an actuator 14, the valve body 12 rotates in the housing 11.”) a flow control valve (12); and operating the compressor (3a driven by the turbine 3c) to pressurize intake air supplying the fuel cell stack (1) based on an adjusted torque applied to the turbine (3c) via a flow of the exhaust after varying the geometry of the exhaust passage (5v), Col. 5, l. 63 to Col. 6, l. 10.
Re Claim 10, Mori discloses the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the varying a geometry of the exhaust passage (5v) includes varying a flow area [As shown in Figs. 4 and 5, as the flow control valve (12) rotated clockwise about the axis (13) the cross-sectional flow area of the exhaust passage (5v) would have increased to a maximum cross-sectional flow area when the exhaust passage (5v) was 100% open, i.e., the flow control valve (12) would not be blocking any portion of the exhaust passage (5v) as shown in Fig. 5.] of the exhaust passage (5v) to the turbine (3c).
Re Claim 11, Mori discloses the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the varying a geometry of the exhaust passage (5v) includes rotating (Col. 7, ll. 25 – 30 “With the shaft 13 rotated by an actuator 14, the valve body 12 rotates in the housing 11.”) a single flow control valve (12 shown in Figs. 4 and 5) within the exhaust passage (5v).
Regarding Claim 15, Mori discloses, in Figs. 1 - 11, all the claimed limitations including a charge air system for a fuel cell electric power system (Fig. 1) comprising: an intake air conduit (4); an exhaust conduit (5a, 11) forming an exhaust passage (open space inside 5a), and having a unitary exhaust inlet (end of 5a connected to 1) configured to receive a flow of exhaust from a fuel cell stack (1), and a turbine feed outlet (5c); a turbine (3c) [The following was the designed and intended use of an exhaust turbine.] positioned for impingement by the flow of exhaust conveyed through the turbine feed outlet (5c); a compressor (3a) coupled (Col. 3, ll. 30 – 40 “The cathode exhaust gas is supplied to the turbine 3c. At this time, the turbine 3c recovers energy and generates power. The turbine 3c and the compressor 3a are connected via a shaft (not shown). Energy recovered by the turbine 3c is used as driving power for rotating the compressor 3a.”) to the turbine (3c) and positioned at least partially within the intake air conduit (4) to [The following was the designed and intended use of an air compressor.] pressurize intake air for the fuel cell stack (1); a flow control valve (12) including an exhaust-impinged surface (outer surface of 12 that was exposed to the exhaust) positioned within the exhaust conduit (5a, 11), and rotatable (Col. 7, ll. 25 – 30 “With the shaft 13 rotated by an actuator 14, the valve body 12 rotates in the housing 11.”) to vary a geometry (5v) of the exhaust passage (open space inside 5a); and an actuator (14) for varying at least one of a position or an orientation of the flow control valve (12).
Re Claim 16, Mori discloses the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the flow control valve (12) is rotatable (Col. 7, ll. 25 – 30 “With the shaft 13 rotated by an actuator 14, the valve body 12 rotates in the housing 11.”) in the exhaust conduit (5a, 11) to at least three different angular orientations (12 appears able to rotate 360° about the axis) about an axis (13), and defines a different fluid flow pattern through the exhaust conduit (5a, 11) at each of the at least three different angular orientations about the axis (13). As shown in Fig. 4, flow control valve (12) completely blocked bypass flow path (7v) and partially blocked exhaust inlet path (5v) so that the fuel cell stack exhaust that flowed through the open portion of exhaust inlet path (5v) would have flowed to the turbine through the turbine feed outlet (5c). As the flow control valve (12) rotated clockwise about the axis (13) from the Fig. 4 orientation but before reaching the Fig. 5 orientation, the cross-sectional flow area of the exhaust passage (5v) would have increased to a maximum cross-sectional flow area when the exhaust passage (5v) was 100% open, i.e., the flow control valve (12) would not be blocking any portion of the exhaust passage (5v) but would have still have completely blocked bypass flow path (7v) so that 100% of the exhaust flow from (5a) would have flowed to the turbine feed outlet (5c). As the flow control valve (12) continued rotating clockwise about the axis (13) to the Fig. 5 orientation, the exhaust passage (5v) would have remained 100% open, but a portion of bypass flow path (7v) would be open, i.e., no longer completely blocked by the flow control valve (12), so that the exhaust flow from (5a) would have been split to a first flow to the turbine feed outlet (5c) and a second flow through bypass flow path (7v). As the flow control valve (12) continued rotating clockwise about the axis (13) past the Fig. 5 orientation, the exhaust passage (5v) would have remained 100% open and the bypass flow path (7v) would have been 100% open, but the flow control valve (12) would have partially blocked or completely blocked the turbine feed outlet (5c) so that most if not all of the exhaust flow from (5a) would have flowed through bypass flow path (7v).
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 5, 12, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori et al. (11,207,800) in view of McNab (3,064,947).
Re Claim 5, Mori teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except, wherein the turbine feed outlet includes a divided turbine feed outlet.
McNab teaches, in Figs. 1 and 6, inlet pipe (18) and outlet pipe (20) both having flow dividers (49 – Fig. 6 and 76 – Fig. 1) that divided the fluid flow into substantially equal fluid streams (Col. 3, ll. 65 – 70 and Col. 4, ll. 10 – 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify turbine feed outlet of Mori, with the flow divider located inside an inlet or outlet pipe, taught by McNab, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the fuel cell system including the fuel cell stack, the intake air conduit extending to the fuel cell stack, the exhaust conduit extending from the fuel cell stack; the charge air system including the intake air compressor, the exhaust turbine, and the flow control valve assembly; the flow control valve assembly including the housing forming the exhaust inlet fluidly connected to the exhaust conduit, the turbine feed outlet, and the flow divider located inside an inlet or outlet pipe, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., installing the flow divider inside the turbine feed outlet would have facilitated a divided turbine feed outlet where the flow of exhaust into the divided turbine feed outlet would have been divided into substantially equal streams, McNab - Col. 3, ll. 65 – 70. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(A).
Re Claim 12, Mori teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except, further comprising opening or blocking one of two sides of a divided turbine feed outlet based on the rotating a single flow control valve within the exhaust passage.
McNab teaches, in Figs. 1 and 6, inlet pipe (18) and outlet pipe (20) both having flow dividers (49 – Fig. 6 and 76 – Fig. 1) that divided the fluid flow into substantially equal fluid streams (Col. 3, ll. 65 – 70 and Col. 4, ll. 10 – 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify turbine feed outlet of Mori, with the flow divider located inside an inlet or outlet pipe, taught by McNab, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the fuel cell system including the fuel cell stack, the intake air conduit extending to the fuel cell stack, the exhaust conduit extending from the fuel cell stack; the charge air system including the intake air compressor, the exhaust turbine, and the flow control valve assembly; the flow control valve assembly including the housing forming the exhaust inlet fluidly connected to the exhaust conduit, the turbine feed outlet, and the flow divider located inside an inlet or outlet pipe, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., installing the flow divider inside the turbine feed outlet would have facilitated a divided turbine feed outlet where the flow of exhaust into the divided turbine feed outlet would have been divided into substantially equal streams, McNab - Col. 3, ll. 65 – 70, to facilitate blocking or opening one of two sides of a divided turbine feed outlet based on the rotating a single flow control valve within the exhaust passage. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that in the combination of Mori, i.v., McNab, as the flow control valve (12) was rotated clockwise past the angular orientation shown in Fig. 5, said flow control valve (12) would have had to completely block the bottom side of the divided turbine feed outlet before further clockwise rotation of said flow control valve (12) would have started blocking the top side of the divided turbine feed outlet. Conversely, once said flow control valve (12) was rotated to completely block the bottom side of the divided turbine feed outlet, then counter-clockwise rotation of said flow control valve (12) would have resulted in unblocking, i.e., opening, said bottom side of the divided turbine feed outlet.
Re Claim 17, Mori teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above including wherein the exhaust conduit (5a, 11) includes a housing (11) forming the unitary exhaust inlet (end of 5a connected to 1). Mori is silent on the turbine feed outlet includes a divided turbine feed outlet.
McNab teaches, in Figs. 1 and 6, inlet pipe (18) and outlet pipe (20) both having flow dividers (49 – Fig. 6 and 76 – Fig. 1) that divided the fluid flow into substantially equal fluid streams (Col. 3, ll. 65 – 70 and Col. 4, ll. 10 – 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify turbine feed outlet of Mori, with the flow divider located inside an inlet or outlet pipe, taught by McNab, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the fuel cell system including the fuel cell stack, the intake air conduit extending to the fuel cell stack, the exhaust conduit extending from the fuel cell stack; the charge air system including the intake air compressor, the exhaust turbine, and the flow control valve assembly; the flow control valve assembly including the housing forming the exhaust inlet fluidly connected to the exhaust conduit, the turbine feed outlet, and the flow divider located inside an inlet or outlet pipe, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., installing the flow divider inside the turbine feed outlet would have facilitated a divided turbine feed outlet where the flow of exhaust into the divided turbine feed outlet would have been divided into substantially equal streams, McNab - Col. 3, ll. 65 – 70. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(A).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, and 7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 18 – 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LORNE E MEADE whose telephone number is (571)270-7570. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5 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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/LORNE E MEADE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741