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 1-20, in the reply filed on 24 November 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that there is no search burden. This is not found persuasive. The Examiner maintains that the different categories of invention require a different field of search.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2011/0272277 A1 to Potchen et al. (Potchen).
As to claim 1, Potchen teaches an electrolytic cell (10) comprising an inlet (54) for receiving fluids into a first side of the electrolytic cell (10); an outlet (52) opposite the inlet (54) at a second side of the electrolytic cell (10) where fluids exit the electrolytic cell (10); a cell body (30) positioned between the inlet (54) and the outlet (52), the cell body (30) comprising a plurality of spaced apart bipolar electrode plates (electrode plates (20) not directly connected to terminals (16)); a first space formed between the inlet (54) and the plurality of bipolar plates (20); and a first flow diverter (34) positioned within the first space, the first flow diverter (34) comprising a plurality of channels (44) that adjust a flow of fluids flowing into the cell body (30) from the inlet (54) (Paragraphs 0022-0027; Figure 2).
As to claims 2 and 3, Potchen teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Potchen further teaches that the flow diverter (34) comprises a top surface, a bottom surface, side surfaces and a body portion with the channels (44) formed through top surface, bottom surface and body portion and between the sides (Figure 2, as annotated below).
PNG
media_image1.png
805
558
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 4, Potchen teaches the apparatus of claim 3. Potchen further teaches that the sides of the first flow divertor extend below the body forming grips (Figure 2, as annotated above).
As to claim 6, Potchen teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Potchen further teaches that the top surface of the first flow diverter faces the plurality of bipolar electrode plates (20) when positioned in the first space (Figure 2, as annotated above).
As to claim 7, Potchen teaches the apparatus of claim 6. Potchen further teaches that the top surface of the first flow diverter abuts the plurality of bipolar electrode plates (20) when positioned in the first space (Figure 2, as annotated above).
As to claims 9 and 10, Potchen teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Potchen further teaches that the apparatus comprises a second space formed between the outlet (52) and the plurality of bipolar plates (20) and a second flow diverter (32) positioned within the second space, the second flow diverter configured the same as the first flow diverter (34) and comprising a plurality of channels (42) that adjust a flow of fluids flowing out of the cell body (30) through the outlet (52) (Paragraphs 0022-0027; Figure 2).
As to claim 11, Potchen teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Potchen further teaches that the flow diverter is formed of two connecting components, a flow diverting section (34) and a spacer plate (38) engaged and connected to each other (Paragraph 0024; Figure 2).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Potchen as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of US 552,414 to Cabell (Cabell).
As to claim 5, Potchen teaches the apparatus of claim 4. However, Potchen fails to further teach that the flow diverter comprises an additional support member that extends from the bottom of the first flow diverter spaced apart from the grips. However, Cabell also discusses the formation of fluid flow structure underneath a stack of electrode plates in a housing and teaches that additional supports (legs) beyond the sides should be provided for supporting the electrodes (Page 1, Lines 65-71). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide an additional support spaced from the sides and extending from the bottom of the flow diverter in order to provide additional support to the bipolar plate stack as taught by Cabell.
Claims 1, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0276942 A1 to Fritz et al. (Fritz) and further in view of US 4,248,690 to Conkling (Conkling).
As to claim 1, Fritz teaches an electrolytic cell (10) comprising an orifice capable of operating as an inlet (46) for receiving fluids into a first side of the electrolytic cell (10); an orifice capable of operating as an outlet (42) opposite the inlet (46) at a second side of the electrolytic cell (10) where fluids exit the electrolytic cell (10); a cell body (20) positioned between the inlet (46) and the outlet (42), the cell body (20) comprising a plurality of spaced apart bipolar electrode plates (14); a first space formed between the inlet (46) and the plurality of bipolar plates (14) (Paragraphs 0049, 0050 and 0056; Figure 2).
However, Fritz fails to further teach that the first space comprises a flow diverter. However, Conkling also discusses an apparatus for the generation of sodium hypochlorite and teaches that by providing a lower electrolyte inlet with a flow diverter (120) comprising a plurality of channels (132/134/136) that adjust a flow of fluids flowing into the cell from the inlet undesirable product buildup can be prevented (Column 10, Lines 29-58; Figure 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the flow diverter of Conkling in the first space of Fritz in order to adjust the inlet flow to prevent undesirable product buildup as taught by Conkling.
As to claims 6 and 8, the combination of Fritz and Conkling teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Conkling further teaches that a top surface of the flow diverter (120) faces the bipolar plates in a spaced apart manner (Figure 8).
Claims 12-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Potchen in view of Fritz.
As to claims 12, 13 and 14, Potchen teaches an electrolytic cell (10) comprising an inlet (54) for receiving fluids into a first side of the electrolytic cell (10); an outlet (52) opposite the inlet (54) at a second side of the electrolytic cell (10) where fluids exit the electrolytic cell (10); a cell body (30) positioned between the inlet (54) and the outlet (52), the cell body (30) comprising a plurality of spaced apart bipolar electrode plates (electrode plates (20) not directly connected to terminals (16)); a first space formed between the inlet (54) and the plurality of bipolar plates (20); and a first flow diverter (34) positioned within the first space, the first flow diverter (34) comprising a plurality of channels (44) that adjust a flow of fluids flowing into the cell body (30) from the inlet (54) (Paragraphs 0022-0027; Figure 2).
Potchen further teaches that the apparatus comprises a vessel (126) for suppling fluid to the electrolytic cell (Paragraph 0044; Figure 12). However, Potchen fails to specifically teach that the fluid is a base solution. Potchen teaches that the cell can be used for a variety of electrochemical purposes, not focusing on the specific reactions, merely mentioning water electrolysis as an example, Potchen instead focusing on the cell configuration.
However, Fritz also discusses electrolytic cells with a bipolar plate flow through configuration as in Potchen and teaches that the cells are useful for the generation of sodium hypochlorite from a base solution (Paragraph 0011; Figure 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a base solution to the vessel of Potchen to allow for the cell configuration of Potchen to form desirable sodium hypochlorite as taught by Fritz. Fritz further teaches that for the generation of sodium hypochlorite the cells should be provided identically in plurality (Paragraph 0011; Figure 3).
As to claim 15, the combination of Potchen and Fritz teaches the apparatus of claim 12. Potchen further teaches that the flow diverter (34) comprises a top surface, a bottom surface, side surfaces and a body portion with the channels (44) formed through top surface, bottom surface and body portion and between the sides (Figure 2, as annotated above).
As to claim 16, the combination of Potchen and Fritz teaches the apparatus of claim 15. Potchen further teaches that the sides of the first flow divertor extend below the body forming grips (Figure 2, as annotated above).
As to claim 18, the combination of Potchen and Fritz teaches the apparatus of claim 12. Potchen further teaches that the top surface of the first flow diverter abuts the plurality of bipolar electrode plates (20) when positioned in the first space (Figure 2, as annotated above).
As to claim 19, the combination of Potchen and Fritz teaches the apparatus of claim 12. Potchen further teaches that the apparatus comprises a second space formed between the outlet (52) and the plurality of bipolar plates (20) and a second flow diverter (32) positioned within the second space, the second flow diverter configured the same as the first flow diverter (34) and comprising a plurality of channels (42) that adjust a flow of fluids flowing out of the cell body (30) through the outlet (52) (Paragraphs 0022-0027; Figure 2).
As to claim 20, the combination of Potchen and Fritz teaches the apparatus of claim 12. Potchen further teaches that the flow diverter is formed of two connecting components, a flow diverting section (34) and a spacer plate (38) engaged and connected to each other (Paragraph 0024; Figure 2).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Potchen and Fritz as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Cabell.
As to claim 17, the combination of Potchen and Fritz teaches the apparatus of claim 16. However, Potchen fails to further teach that the flow diverter comprises an additional support member that extends from the bottom of the first flow diverter spaced apart from the grips. However, Cabell also discusses the formation of fluid flow structure underneath a stack of electrode plates in a housing and teaches that additional supports (legs) beyond the sides should be provided for supporting the electrodes (Page 1, Lines 65-71). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide an additional support spaced from the sides and extending from the bottom of the flow diverter in order to provide additional support to the bipolar plate stack as taught by Cabell.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CIEL P Contreras whose telephone number is (571)270-7946. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM to 4 PM.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/CIEL P CONTRERAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights