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 .
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.
Claim 1, 3, 7-11, and 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20030207166-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Hara’
Regarding Claim 1,
Hara teaches a solid oxide cell comprising (Hara, “The present invention relates to a thin-film solid oxide fuel cell using a metal support”, see [0002]): a fuel electrode (Hara, fuel electrode, 7, Fig. 2B); an electrolyte including a base portion disposed on the fuel electrode (Hara, electrolyte layer, 5, Fig. 2B), a dam portion disposed on edge of the base portion (see annotated figure below), and a recess portion surrounded by the dam portion; and an air electrode disposed in the recess portion of the electrolyte (Hara, air electrode, 6, Fig. 2B)(the examiner notes that the fuel electrode is disposed in the recess portion, but exchanging the air and fuel electrodes being exchanged would be obvious as a matter of rearrangement of parts (MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C))) , wherein a region in which the fuel electrode and the electrolyte overlap each other in a thickness direction of the electrolyte is greater than or equal to a region in which the air electrode and the electrolyte overlap each other (The examiner interprets this limitation as the electrode thickness is less than the dam on the electrolyte).
PNG
media_image1.png
290
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3,
Hara teaches the solid oxide cell according to claim 1, wherein the base portion and the dam portion are integrated (see annotated figure above ).
Regarding Claim 7,
Hara teaches the solid oxide fuel cell according to claim 1, wherein the fuel electrode and the air electrode have substantially the same width (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
284
498
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8,
Hara teaches the solid oxide fuel cell according to claim 1, wherein the fuel electrode is wider than the air electrode (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
212
588
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
290
574
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10,
Hara teaches the solid oxide cell according to claim 1, wherein a thickness of the dam portion is less than or equal to a thickness of the air electrode (see annotate figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
276
486
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 11,
Hara teaches a solid oxide cell stack (Hara, “The present invention relates to a thin-film solid oxide fuel cell using a metal support.”, see [0002]) comprising: first and second interconnects (Hara, collector plate, 8, Fig. 6); and a solid oxide cell disposed between the first and second interconnects (Hara, air and fuel electrode, 6 and 7, Fig. 6) wherein the solid oxide cell comprises: a fuel electrode (Hara, fuel electrode 7, Fig. 6) ; an electrolyte including a base portion disposed on the fuel electrode (Hara, electrolyte, 5, Fig. 6) , a dam portion disposed on the base portion, and a recess portion surrounded by the dam portion; and an air electrode disposed in the recess portion of the electrolyte ,wherein a region in which the fuel electrode and the electrolyte overlap each other in a thickness direction of the electrolyte is greater than or equal to a region in which the air electrode and the electrolyte overlap each other electrolyte (Hara, air electrode, 6, Fig. 2B)(the examiner notes that the fuel electrode is disposed in the recess portion, but exchanging the air and fuel electrodes being exchanged would be obvious as a matter of rearrangement of parts (MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C))).
Regarding Claim 17,
Hara teaches the solid oxide cell stack according to claim 11, wherein each of the first and second interconnects includes a flow path through which gas is diffused (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image6.png
540
638
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 2, 9, 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20030207166-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Hara’ in view of (US-20150357655-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Choi’
Regarding Claim 2,
Hara does not teach wherein the air electrode is spaced apart from the dam portion.
Choi teaches where the air electrode is spaced apart from the dam portion (see annotated figure below) .
PNG
media_image7.png
536
692
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Choi teaches that the maintenance of the gap prevents further shorting from occurring between layers of the fuel cell (Choi, “In addition, in the stack structure 1000, the frame 200 and the interconnector 100 can be electrically shorted even though the insulating combined functional layer 210 is disposed between the frame 200 and the interconnector 100 in the edge region EA. In order to completely exclude this, the stack structure 1000 may further include at least one gap maintaining unit 500 uniformly maintaining the gap between them.”, see [0050]).
Hara and Choi are analogous as they are both of the same field of fuel cell arrangements. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added a gap between the electrolyte and the cathode in order to prevent any possibility of short circuit between the layers of the fuel cell.
Regarding Claim 9,
Hara does not teach the solid oxide cell according to claim 1, wherein the solid oxide cell according to wherein the fuel electrode and the electrolyte have substantially the same width.
Choi teaches wherein the solid oxide cell according to wherein the fuel electrode and the electrolyte have substantially the same width (see annotated figure below).
Choi teaches that electricity in generated through a reaction at the electrode and movement through the electrolyte (Choi, “when an air including oxygen and a fuel gas including hydrogen are supplied to the cathode layer 14 and the anode layer 16, respectively, electricity is generated by an electrochemical reaction of the hydrogen and the oxygen through ion conduction in the electrolyte layer 12.”, see [0030]).
Hara and Choi are analogous as they are both of the same field of fuel cells.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the width of the fuel electrode as taught in Hara to the length of the electrolyte as taught in Choi, in order to increase the area of transport of ions and reaction area of the electrode, in turn, increasing electricity generation.
Regarding Claim 12,
Hara does not teach a sealing material disposed outside of the solid oxide cell between the first and second interconnects.
Choi teaches a sealing material disposed outside of the solid oxide cell between the first and second interconnects (Choi, second sealing units, 300 and 400, Fig. 2)
Choi teaches that the sealing units prevent leakage and mixing of air and fuel gas (Choi, “The first and second sealing units 300 and 400 may prevent leakage and mixing of an air and a fuel gas flowing to the cathode layer 14 and the anode layer 16 of the fuel cell 10.”, see [0040]).
Hara and Choi are analogous as they are both of the same field of fuel cell electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structure as taught in Hara to include the seal as taught in Choi in order to prevent leakage.
Regarding Claim 13,
Modified Hara teaches the solid oxide cell stack according to claim 12, wherein the sealing material is in contact with the dam portion (Choi, second sealing units, 300 and 400, Fig. 2)(The examiner notes that the combined structure would be in contact the same way Choi is in contact with the frame and functional layer 210 in Fig. 2)
Regarding Claim 14,
Modified Hara teaches the solid oxide cell stack according to claim 12, wherein the sealing material is in contact with an upper surface and an external side surface of the dam portion (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image8.png
292
542
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 15,
Modified Hara teaches the solid oxide cell stack according to claim 12, wherein the sealing material is in contact with the upper surface, the external side surface, and an internal side surface of the dam portion (see annotated figure above).
Regarding Claim 16,
Modified Hara teaches the solid oxide cell stack according to claim 12, wherein the air electrode is spaced apart from the sealing material (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image7.png
536
692
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20030207166-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Hara’ in view of (US-20120021325-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’
Regarding Claim 4,
Hara does not teach the solid oxide cell according to claim 1, wherein the base portion and the dam portion include different materials.
Kim teaches wherein the base portion and the dam portion include different materials (Kim electrolyte membrane, 21, Fig. 4) (Kim protective layer, 23, Fig. 4).
Kim teaches that the protective layer prevents gas diffusion from contacting the electrolyte and the generation of pin holes (Kim, “According to the exemplary embodiments of the present invention, because the protrusion contacts the inner side of the edge protective layer to prevent the gas diffusion layer from directly contacting the polymer electrolyte membrane, it is possible to prevent pin holes from being generated in the polymer electrolyte membrane.”, see [0021]).
Hara and Kim are analogous as they are both of the same field of fuel cell membranes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrolyte as taught in Hara to replace it with a protective layer of a different material in order to prevent degradation of the electrolyte.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20030207166-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Hara’ in view of (US-20160172702-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Batawi’
Regarding Claim 5,
Hara teaches the solid oxide cell according to claim 1 wherein the base portion includes 8 mol% yttria-stabilized zirconia (8YSZ) (Hara, “(a mixed composite of NiO and 8 mol % yttria-stabilized zirconia in a mass ratio of 75:25) was deposited by the RF sputtering method at a heat of 700° C”, see [0052]) (Hara, “As to the solid electrolyte, materials conventionally known in public, for example, material that contains, as a main component, stabilized zirconia containing neodymium oxide (Nd 2O3), samarium oxide (Sm2O3), yttrium oxide (Y2O3),”, see [0045]),
Hara does not teach the dam portion includes 3 mol% yttria- stabilized zirconia (3YSZ)
Batawai teaches 3 mol% yttria- stabilized zirconia (3YSZ) (Batawai, “Electrolyte 5 may be made of a highly ionically conductive material, such as SSZ, while electrodes 3 and 7 may be made of a higher strength, lower ionic conductivity material, such as YSZ. For example, 3 molar percent yttria YSZ (3YSZ) is used for the electrodes 3, 7.”, see [0028]).
Batwai teaches that 3 mol% yttria- stabilized zirconia (3YSZ) is higher strength and lower conductivity (Batawai, “Electrolyte 5 may be made of a highly ionically conductive material, such as SSZ, while electrodes 3 and 7 may be made of a higher strength, lower ionic conductivity material, such as YSZ. For example, 3 molar percent yttria YSZ (3YSZ) is used for the electrodes 3, 7.”, see [0028]).
Hara and Batawai are analogous as they are both of the same field of fuel cells.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the dam portion of the electrolyte with 3% yttria- stabilized zirconia in order to strengthen the dam portion while allowing it to act as a lower ion conductor.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20030207166-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Hara’ in view of (US-20190376193-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Liu’
Regarding Claim 6,
Hara teaches the solid oxide cell according to claim 1, The solid oxide cell according to wherein the base portion includes a Yttria Stabilized Zirconia-based (YSZ-based) ion conductor (Hara, “(a mixed composite of NiO and 8 mol % yttria-stabilized zirconia in a mass ratio of 75:25) was deposited by the RF sputtering method at a heat of 700° C”, see [0052]),
Hara does not teach that the dam portion includes alumina includes alumina.
Liu teaches alumina in the fuel cell (Liu, “One function of the membrane separator 108 in an electrochemical conversion device is to keep the electrodes 104, 106 of opposite charges insulated from each other. Thus, durable insulating materials, such as zirconia oxide, ceria, alumina oxide, and silicone oxide, are preferred”, see [0071]).
Liu teaches that aluminum is durable and allows the electrodes to be separated preventing short circuit (Liu, “One function of the membrane separator 108 in an electrochemical conversion device is to keep the electrodes 104, 106 of opposite charges insulated from each other. Thus, durable insulating materials, such as zirconia oxide, ceria, alumina oxide, and silicone oxide, are preferred”, see [0071]).
Hara and Liu are analogous as they are both of the same field of fuel cells.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the dam to include alumina which would strength the dam region while additionally providing insulation to prevent a short circuit between the electrodes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 5pm.
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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752