Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/130,694

METHOD FOR STARTING UP A FUEL CELL SYSTEM AFTER A STANDSTILL

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Apr 04, 2023
Examiner
SLIFKA, SARAH A
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Hoerbiger Antriebstechnik Holding GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
522 granted / 694 resolved
+10.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
708
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
52.2%
+12.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.3%
-20.7% vs TC avg
§112
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 694 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Objections Claim 1 requires the first phase and a second phase of powering-up. Each phase is followed by a parenthetical naming of the phase. Examiner recommends adding these phase names as a positive limitation and not in parentheses. 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 4 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 4 recites the limitation "the jet pump" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heidrich (DE 102007026004). Regarding claim 1, Heidrich discloses a fuel cell system (see figure 2) and a method for operating the fuel cell system, which method has two different operating phases (0035). In operating phase 1, the first valve 8A is opened. After a certain period of time after the opening of the first valve 8A, a decrease of the volume flow at the ejector inlet 2A occurs when the pressure in the partial line portion 6A' that is situated between the valves 8A and 8B of the partial line 6A has already fallen to close to a final value as a result of the action of the ejector 2. Here, the ejector 2 generates a vacuum in the gas container 9 or in the partial line portion 6A. As the volume flow at the ejector inlet 2A progressively decreases, the power of the recirculation blower 3 is gradually increased in order that as constant a volume flow as possible prevails at the anode inlet 4A of the fuel cell unit 4 (0037). In the subsequent purge mode, the first valve 8A is closed, and the second valve 8B is directly subsequently opened. Here, the negative pressure stored in the partial line portion 6A' causes a brief intensive purge in the anode return line 6 and in the fuel cell unit 4, such that liquid water is discharged from the fuel cell unit 4 (purging effect) (0038). During a shutdown phase of the fuel cell system, a vacuum/negative pressure can be maintained in the partial line portion 6A', such that, during a standstill period or during the next starting operation, the anode circuit can be passively purged or recirculated without the need to operate the hydrogen reservoir and the fuel cell system (0042). Regarding claim 2, Heidrich teaches the second phase to follow the first operating phase, as discussed above. Regarding claim 5, Heidrich teaches the configurations as discussed above wherein each phase includes similar equipment. Regarding claim 6, Heidrich teaches the valve as discussed above which is closed during the first phase and opened during the second phase. 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. Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heidrich (DE 102007026004) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Formanski et al (DE 102017208544). Regarding claim 3, Heidrich teaches the method as discussed above. Heidrich does not explicitly teach the use of a jet pump. Formanski discloses a method for recirculating fuel in an anode subsystem, the method comprising the step in which fuel is drawn out of the bypass flow path (218) by means of a recirculation jet pump (234), and a step in which the recirculation conveying means (236) conveys at least a proportion of the fuel that is present in the recirculation flow path (216) into the anode inflow path (215). According to this method, at a first operating point of the fuel cell system, the recirculation conveying means (236) and the recirculation jet pump (234) simultaneously convey fuel into the anode inflow path (215), and at a second operating point of the fuel cell system, only the recirculation conveyor (236) or only the recirculation jet pump (234) convey fuel into the anode inflow path (215) (see claims 4-8 and figure 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to utilize the jet pump as in Formanski with the method of Heidrich as it is a well known type of recirculation pump and would have been well within the purview of an ordinarily skilled artisan without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success. Regarding claim 4, Heidrich does not teach the pump to include suction, as claimed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH A SLIFKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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. /SARAH A. SLIFKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759 October 14, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603333
CIRCUIT STRUCTURE, BATTERY, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597659
BATTERY UNIT AND FEEDTHROUGH ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586821
LEAD-ACID BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586776
LEAD-ACID BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586810
Pressure Jig of Battery Cell and Gas Removal Method Using the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
75%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+11.3%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 694 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