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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04-20-2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 14 recites “…determining a user’s intention to activate a launch control function by a controller…” Examiner submits that such recitation about the user’s intention is unclear and can be construed in several possibilities. Specifically, paragraph [0085] of Applicant’s specification describes such intention as pressing the acceleration pedal according to the outputted signal. Determining a user’s intention is therefore interpreted to include pressing the acceleration or touching the signal displayed on the cluster.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2009/0280372 hereinafter Maenaka in view of U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2018/0334160 hereinafter Kava.
Regarding Claim 1, Maenaka teaches a fuel cell system [10] mounted on a fuel cell vehicle (paragraph 20), the fuel cell system [10] comprising: a fuel cell stack [12]; an air compressor [16] configured to supply air to the cathode electrode side of the fuel cell stack; and a control section (controller) [18] configured to drive the drive motor of the air compressor in response to a signal output (paragraphs 23, 29) and charge the secondary battery [46] through an output of the fuel cell stack (paragraphs 30, 32).
PNG
media_image1.png
468
696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Maenaka does not specifically disclose that the control section (controller) is configured to prepare to activate a launch control function and output a signal indicating that the launch control function can be activated when the fuel cell stack output reaches a preset value.
However, Kava teaches a hybrid electric vehicle [10] comprising: an engine [14] and an electric motor/generator (M/G) [18]; a fuel cell; and a controller [50] (paragraphs 10-11, 18), wherein the controller is configured to prepare and activate launch control strategy for the vehicle based on an output signal when the power output reaches a predetermined level (paragraphs 35-42). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine such launch control strategy with the air compressor control method before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because such modification can increase the fuel cell power output with the launch control function based on various conditions or states of the vehicle/components received by the input signals (paragraph 35).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination teaches that the controller is configured to increase the fuel cell power output by increasing the drive control of the air compressor (paragraphs 23, 29 of Maenaka and paragraph 37 of Kava).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination teaches that the controller is configured to control charging and discharging of the secondary battery based on the signal output (paragraph 36 of Maenaka).
Regarding Claims 4-6, the combination teaches that the fuel cell vehicle further comprises a charging or discharging means (i.e., control section and power distribution) [18, 42], a plurality of auxiliary devices (i.e., auxiliary device can include a cooling device) configured to assist the fuel cell stack, and the controller controls the plurality of auxiliary devices (paragraphs 31, 36 of Maenaka).
Regarding Claims 7-10, the combination teaches that the control section (controller) is configured to control the power output of the fuel cell stack in response to power consumed by the plurality of auxiliary devices (paragraphs 30-31 of Maenaka), and the controller is configured to prepare and activate launch control strategy for the vehicle based on an output signal when the power output reaches a predetermined level (paragraphs 35-42). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine such launch control strategy with the air compressor control method before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because such modification can increase the fuel cell power output with the launch control function based on various conditions or states of the vehicle/components received by the input signals (paragraph 35).
Regarding Claims 11-13, the combination teaches that the controller determines a user's intention to accelerate after outputting a signal indicating that the launch control function can be activated, and drives the vehicle when the user is deemed to have an intention to accelerate or deactivates the launch control function when a user is deemed to have no intention to accelerate (i.e., vehicle operator fully depressing both the accelerator and the brake pedals to activate launch control strategy) (paragraphs 35-42 of Kava).
Regarding Claim 14, Maenaka teaches a fuel cell system [10] mounted on a fuel cell vehicle and a method for controlling the fuel cell vehicle (paragraphs 20, 32), the method comprising: driving the drive motor of the air compressor [16] in response to a signal output via a control section (controller) [18] (paragraphs 23, 29) and charging the secondary battery [46] through an output of the fuel cell stack [12] (paragraphs 30, 32).
Maenaka does not specify determining a user’s intention to activate a launch control function by a controller, preparing to activate a launch control function by a controller, and outputting a signal indicating that the launch control function can be activated by the controller.
However, Kava teaches a hybrid electric vehicle [10] and a method for controlling the vehicle, the vehicle [10] comprising: an engine [14] and an electric motor/generator (M/G) [18]; a fuel cell; and a controller [50] (paragraphs 10-11, 18), wherein the method comprises determining a user’s intention to activate a launch control strategy (i.e., vehicle operator fully depressing both the accelerator and the brake pedals), preparing to activate launch control strategy, and an outputting a signal to indicate the launch control strategy can be activated (paragraphs 35-42). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine such launch control strategy with the air compressor control method before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because such modification can increase the fuel cell power output with the launch control function based on various conditions or states of the vehicle/components received by the input signals (paragraph 35).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination teaches that the method comprises in preparing to activate the launch control strategy, driving the drive motor of the air compressor driving (i.e., increasing rotational frequency of the drive motor), and the battery is charged through an output of the fuel cell stack (paragraphs 23, 29-32 of Maenaka); and the controller is configured to prepare and activate launch control strategy for the vehicle based on an output signal when the power output reaches a predetermined level (paragraphs 35-42 of Kava).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSEI K AMPONSAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Ula C Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752