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 of Group I, claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 3/10/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/10/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 7-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballantine (U.S. Patent Publication 2021/0156038) in view of Ballantine (U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0049367).
Regarding claim 7, Ballantine (‘038) discloses a bipolar plate used in an electrochemical stack, the bipolar plate comprising: a substrate 222 having an anode (i.e., water) side 228 and a cathode (i.e., hydrogen) side 230 opposite one another, wherein an anode flow field 234 includes a plurality of straight and/or curved ribs (humps), and wherein the cathode side comprises cathode ports/openings (cavities) (Paragraphs 0051, 0054, 0055). As to claims 8 and 9, Ballantine (‘038) teaches that the substrate is made from electrically conductive and thermally conductive materials, such as titanium (Paragraph 0052). Regarding claim 10, Ballantine (‘038) states that the anode and cathode flow fields may have the same shape, but differently shaped gaskets and different positions for seals, which are complementary to one another (Paragraph 0058). As to claims 11-14, Ballantine (‘038) shows in Figs. 2A-2C that the ribs are in the water main flow channels and the ports are in the hydrogen main flow channels.
Ballantine (‘038) fails to disclose that the water and hydrogen channels have a cross-flow configuration.
Ballantine (‘367) discloses a bipolar plate used in an electrochemical stack, the bipolar plate comprising: an anode plate 404 and a cathode plate 406, wherein the channels 506 and 606 of the anode and cathode sides are oriented in orthogonal directions to form a cross-flow bipolar plate 202 (Paragraph 0054).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that the anode and cathode channels of Ballantine (‘038) could have a cross-flow configuration because Ballantine (‘367) teaches that this is a common configuration that is an alternative to a co-flow or counter flow configuration.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art references fail to teach the positioning of the seal within a flange of a land to provide variable groove depth for the land.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY L RAYMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-6545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-6 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
BRITTANY L. RAYMOND
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1722
/BRITTANY L RAYMOND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights