DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed September 15, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 3 – 6 and 8 – 11 are pending in the application with claims 2 and 7 being cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3 – 6 and 8 – 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 2: “the jet pump” should read --the hydrogen jet pump--. This is suggested for consistency in view of such language being presented in claims 8-11.
Claim 1, third from last line: “the needle” should read --the nozzle needle--. This is suggested for consistency in view of such language being presented in last 2nd line of claim 1 for instance.
Claims 3 – 6 and 8 – 11 are objected to for being dependent on claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 3 – 6 and 8 – 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (US 2008/0199746 – herein after Kobayashi) and evidenced by Maruyama et al. (US 2012/0085124 – herein after Maruyama) in view of Subuen Hookanson (JPH 08157060A – herein after Subuen) and Killion, David L (US 2008/0273992 – herein after Killion).
In reference to claim 1, Kobayashi teaches a hydrogen jet pump (24, see fig. 2) configured to control a feed of a gaseous medium (feed of “mixed gas” in fig. 2), the gaseous medium being hydrogen (the mixed gas being “new hydrogen gas” + “hydrogen off-gas”), the hydrogen jet pump comprising:
a primary nozzle (defined by features in rectangular region shown in fig. A below) configured to feed a gaseous propellant (“new hydrogen gas” in fig. 2), the gaseous propellant being hydrogen, through an opening (see fig. A below) of the primary nozzle, the primary nozzle including a nozzle body (see shaded wall portion in fig. A below) and a nozzle needle (61+62) longitudinally movable (movable in ↔ direction in view of fig. A below) within the nozzle body so that a nozzle cross section (cross-section at opening of the nozzle, see fig. A below) of the opening of the primary nozzle is variably adjustable and closeable by the nozzle needle (see ¶40-¶41), wherein the nozzle needle (61+62) includes a cylindrical piston (62) and a needle (61) including a tapered tip (as evident from fig. 2) and is integrally formed with the cylindrical piston, wherein (see ¶40-¶41) the feeding of the gaseous propellant is controlled by variably adjusting and closing the nozzle cross section formed between the tapered tip of the needle and the nozzle body;
a compression spring (63) that urges the nozzle needle (61+62) in a closing direction (closing direction being → in view of fig. A below),
wherein the cylindrical piston (62) of the nozzle needle includes a first pressure surface (62a) configured to be loaded with a pressure (P4) of the gaseous propellant in an opening direction (opening direction being ← in view of fig. A below) that is opposite to the closing direction (→), and a second pressure surface (62b) configured to be loaded with a pressure (P5) of a secondary medium (“hydrogen off-gas”) in the closing direction (→) [see disclosure in ¶40-¶45 with respect to the operation of the asserted jet pump],
wherein the nozzle body (see shaded wall portion in fig. A below) includes a first nozzle body component (see fig. A below: this “component” being a wall portion of the asserted nozzle body) including a first flow in opening (42) for the gaseous propellant (“new hydrogen gas”), and a second nozzle body component (see fig. A below: this “component” being another wall portion of the asserted nozzle body) including a second flow in opening (70) for the secondary medium (“hydrogen off-gas”), and
wherein the nozzle needle (61+62) is longitudinally movable in the first nozzle body component, the compression spring (63) is provided between the cylindrical piston (62) of nozzle needle (61+62) and the second nozzle body element (see fig. A below), and the compression spring (63) contacts the second pressure surface (62b), and
wherein the nozzle cross section is closed by the tapered tip of the needle and the nozzle needle is pressed into axial contact with the first nozzle body component by the spring.
PNG
media_image1.png
766
1250
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A: Edited fig. 2 of Kobayashi to show claim interpretation.
Kobayashi does not teach the hydrogen jet pump, wherein the cylindrical piston and the needle are integrally formed in “one piece”.
However, Maruyama teaches a similar jet pump wherein the nozzle needle (equivalent to 352 in fig. 8) includes a cylindrical piston (equivalent to 352p in fig. 8) and a needle (equivalent to 352a in fig. 8) integrally formed with the cylindrical piston in one piece (as evident in view of presented hatch lines).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the cylindrical piston and the needle in the jet pump of Kobayashi in one piece since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art, as evidenced by Maruyama. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1993). Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation of forming the cylindrical piston and the needle as one piece.
Kobayashi further does not teach the hydrogen jet pump, wherein the nozzle body “is assembled from two discrete components” that includes the first nozzle body component and the second nozzle body component and “wherein the cylindrical piston of the nozzle needle contacts the first nozzle body component, but does not contact the second nozzle body component”.
However, Subuen teaches a jet pump (as discussed above in detail in rejection of claim 1 wherein Subuen is a primary reference), wherein the nozzle body (“A”+16) is assembled from two discrete components (as evident from fig. B below) including a first nozzle body component (16; also shown as “shaded component” in fig. B below) including a first flow in opening (17) for a propellant (“driving water”), and a second nozzle body component (“A”; see fig. B below) including a second flow in opening (26) for a secondary medium (“medium” corresponding to filtration device 1; see ¶38 of translation), and wherein the cylindrical piston (24) of the nozzle needle contacts (interpreted as “direct contact”) the first nozzle body component (16 or “shaded component” in fig. B below), but does not contact (interpreted as “direct contact”) the second nozzle body component (“A” in fig. B below).
PNG
media_image2.png
748
1110
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. B: Edited fig. 5 of Subuen to show claim interpretation.
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the first nozzle body component and the second nozzle body component in the nozzle body of Kobayashi as two discrete components as taught by Subuen since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art (as shown by Treml). Nerwin v. Erlicnrnan, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Please note that in the instant application (see ¶29 of filed specification), applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation of forming the first and second nozzle body components as discrete components. Furthermore, it is to be noted that this modification of making the first and second nozzle body components in Kobayashi as discrete components does not require to adopt the precise shape of the first and second nozzle body components shown in the jet pump of Subuen.
Kobayashi remains silent on the hydrogen jet pump “wherein the cylindrical piston does not axially overlap with the first flow in opening” when the nozzle cross section is closed by the tapered tip of the needle and the nozzle needle is pressed into axial contact with the first nozzle body component by the spring.
However, Killion teaches a jet pump (10, see fig. 2) wherein the cylindrical piston (40; also shown as portion of 40 within “rectangular boxed region” in fig. C below) does not axially overlap (as evident from fig. C below) with the first flow in opening (76) when the nozzle cross section (at 38) is closed by the tapered tip (34) of the needle (58) and the nozzle needle (58) is pressed into axial contact with the first nozzle body component by the spring (44).
PNG
media_image3.png
544
774
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. C: Edited fig. 2 of Killion to show claim interpretation.
The claimed feature “wherein the cylindrical piston does not axially overlap with the first flow in opening when the nozzle cross section is closed by the tapered tip of the needle and the nozzle needle is pressed into axial contact with the first nozzle body component by the spring” depends on various factors such as shape/size of the tapered tip and dimensions of the cylindrical piston which in turn affects the control of fluid flow rate through the nozzle. Since applicant in the instant application has not disclosed any criticality associated with claimed feature of “the cylindrical piston does not axially overlap with the first flow in opening” in a particular instance, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the hydrogen jet pump of Kobayashi such that “wherein the cylindrical piston does not axially overlap with the first flow in opening when the nozzle cross section is closed by the tapered tip of the needle and the nozzle needle is pressed into axial contact with the first nozzle body component by the spring” as a matter of design choice since such a modification would have involved a mere change in shape and/or sizing of the components {for instance, piston, needle} (as recognized by Killion above) to have a desired fluid flow control through the nozzle. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Kobayashi’s hydrogen pump to perform equally well with the above claimed feature.
Also, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the hydrogen jet pump of Kobayashi such that “wherein the cylindrical piston does not axially overlap with the first flow in opening when the nozzle cross section is closed by the tapered tip of the needle and the nozzle needle is pressed into axial contact with the first nozzle body component by the spring” as taught by Killion to achieve desirable stable and continuous flow control. The piston axially overlapping the opening would lead to a sudden, uncontrolled change in gas glow. If the piston were to overlap the opening, it would act like a valve, abruptly restricting or un-restricting the flow, thus also creating undesirable pressure spike or drop.
In reference to claim 3, Kobayashi, as modified, teaches (see Kobayashi) a fuel cell system (1; see ¶27 or fig. 1), comprising: the hydrogen jet pump (24) according to claim 1 (as discussed above) configured to control a hydrogen feed (hydrogen feed in this case being “mixed gas” in passage 22b + “hydrogen off-gas” in passage 23, see ¶46) of a fuel cell (2).
In reference to claim 4, Kobayashi, as modified, teaches (see Kobayashi) a method (see ¶40-¶45) for controlling a gaseous propellant nozzle geometry (geometry of opening shown in fig. A above) of a hydrogen jet pump (24) according to claim 1, wherein the nozzle cross section (cross-section at opening of the nozzle, see fig. A above) is adjustable by an indirect control of the nozzle needle (61+62) [indirect control = control due to differential pressure of the gases on the asserted needle, as per disclosure in ¶11 or ¶40)].
In reference to claim 5, Kobayashi, as modified, teaches (see Kobayashi) the method (see ¶40-¶41),
wherein a position of the nozzle needle (61+62) and the nozzle cross section is adjustable by forces impacting the first pressure surface (62a) and the second pressure surface (62b), and
wherein the gaseous propellant (“new hydrogen gas”) generates a first force in the opening direction (← in view of fig. A above) and the secondary medium (“hydrogen off-gas”) and the compression spring (63) generate a second force in the closing direction (→ in view of fig. A above).
In reference to claim 6, Kobayashi, as modified, teaches (see Kobayashi) the method, wherein the first force and the second force at the nozzle needle are in equilibrium for a predetermined operating point of the hydrogen jet pump so that the nozzle needle (61+62) assumes a defined position (this claimed limitation/features of claim 6 being implicitly present since the asserted needle is caused to move from “a state of equilibrium” as per discussion in ¶42 and ¶44).
In reference to claim 8, Kobayashi, as modified, teaches the hydrogen jet pump (see fig. D below),
wherein the second nozzle body component (modified second nozzle body component of Kobayashi) axially overlaps (axial direction being ↔) the first nozzle body component (modified first nozzle body component of Kobayashi), so that the second nozzle body component radially envelops the first nozzle body component and a radially inner surface (labelled “r.i.s.”) of the second nozzle body component contacts a radially outer surface (labelled “r.o.s.”) of the first nozzle body component, and
wherein a diameter of the cylindrical piston (62; of Kobayashi) that is in contact (interpreted as “direct contact”) with the first nozzle body component (modified first nozzle body component), but not in contact (interpreted as “direct contact”) with the second nozzle body component (modified second nozzle body component) is greater than a diameter of the needle (61).
PNG
media_image4.png
662
974
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. D: Edited fig. 2 of Kobayashi that shows a proposed modification in view of Subuen’s teaching.
In reference to claim 9, Kobayashi, as modified, teaches the hydrogen jet pump (see fig. D above), wherein the second nozzle body component (modified second nozzle body component) axially overlaps with the cylindrical piston (62), but does not axially overlap with the needle (61).
In reference to claim 10, Kobayashi, as modified, teaches the hydrogen jet pump (see fig. D above), wherein the spring (63) axially overlaps with the first nozzle body component (modified first nozzle body component) and the second nozzle body component (modified second nozzle body component).
In reference to claim 11, Kobayashi, as modified, teaches the hydrogen jet pump (see fig. D above), wherein the cylindrical piston (62) moves through an axial face (viewed as right side face; labelled “A1”) of the second nozzle body component (modified second nozzle body component), but does not move through an axial face (viewed as left or right side face; labelled “A2” or “A2’” respectively) of the first nozzle body component (modified first nozzle body component).
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed September 15, 2025 have been fully considered but they are moot. The amendment to independent claim 1 changed the scope of the claim. As a result, the prior art of Kobayashi has been re-evaluated and re-applied to claim 1, in view of newly relied upon secondary reference of Killion.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yamagishi et al. teaches a similar hydrogen jet pump.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIRAG JARIWALA whose telephone number is (571)272-0467. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM-5 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, ESSAMA OMGBA can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/CHIRAG JARIWALA/Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/BRYAN M LETTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746