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 statements (IDS) submitted on 5/19/23, 7/2/24, and 9/10/24 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 5/19/23. These drawings are acceptable.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2019/132141 A1 (“WO’141”).
As to Claim 1:
WO’141 discloses:
a fuel cell membrane humidifier (Title; Abstract; [0002]–[0005]) comprising:
a mid-case, wherein the humidifier housing includes an upper case 110, a mid-case 120, and a lower case 130 ([0023]–[0026]; Figs. 2–5);
an off-gas inlet through which off-gas discharged from the fuel cell stack is introduced, wherein WO’141 teaches that the second connecting portion 330 of the assembly member serves as the gas-inlet portion through which the second fluid (off-gas) is introduced into the humidifier ([0028]; Figs. 23–24);
which is formed in an inclined direction at a predetermined angle with respect to one surface of the mid-case, wherein WO’141 describes that the second connecting portion 330 includes an inclined portion 332 formed on the inner surface, and the potting portion 132 includes an inclined portion formed at an end edge and in close contact with the inclined portion of the second connecting portion ([0028]; Figs. 23–24);
at least one cartridge disposed in the mid-case, wherein WO’141 teaches that a plurality of cartridges 200 are disposed within the mid-case 120 of the housing ([0060]–[0063]; Figs. 10–15);
comprising an inner case for accommodating a plurality of hollow fiber membranes therein, wherein WO’141 further discloses that each cartridge includes an inner case C1 accommodating a plurality of hollow-fiber membranes H ([0068]–[0070]; Figs. 16–19);
and a potting part for fixing ends of the hollow fiber membranes, wherein WO’141 teaches that potting portions 130 and 132 are provided at both ends of the inner case for fixing and sealing the ends of the hollow-fiber membranes ([0068]–[0070]; Figs. 16–19).
As to Claim 2:
WO’141 further discloses:
a lower end of the off-gas inlet is inclined toward the potting part. Specifically, the second connecting portion 330 of the assembly member (gas inlet region) includes an inclined portion 332 formed on the inner surface, and the potting portion 132 includes a corresponding inclined portion formed at an end edge and in close contact with the inclined portion of the second connecting portion ([0028]; Figs. 23–24); and
the off-gas flows into the potting part through this inclined interface. The inclined portion 332 of the second connecting portion presses against and is sealed with the inclined portion 132 of the potting part during assembly, thereby guiding the off-gas downward into the cartridge region where the potting part is located ([0136]–[0138]; Fig. 23).
As to Claim 3:
WO’141 further discloses:
the inner case comprises a first mesh hole through which the off-gas flows. Specifically, the humidifier cartridge includes a first mesh portion (M) formed on one side of the hollow-fiber membrane cartridge (C) to allow the second fluid (off-gas) introduced into the humidifier to flow into the interior of the cartridge ([0068]–[0069]; Figs. 16–19);
the inner case comprises a second mesh hole through which the off-gas introduced through the first mesh hole exchanges moisture and is discharged to an outside. In particular, WO’141 describes that a second mesh portion is formed on the opposite side of the cartridge to allow the second fluid that has undergone moisture exchange inside the cartridge to flow out of the cartridge ([0068]; [0096]; Figs. 18–21); and
the first mesh hole and the second mesh hole are formed in an asymmetrical shape, as the first and second mesh portions are located on opposite sides of the cartridge in different geometrical orientations and surface areas to control gas flow distribution ([0069]; Figs. 16–21).
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.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over WO 2019/132141 A1 (“WO’141”), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 2002-298895 A (“JP’895”).
As to Claim 4:
WO’141 further discloses that the inner case comprises a first mesh portion (M) through which the off-gas flows into the cartridge and a second mesh portion through which the gas, after moisture exchange, is discharged to the outside ([0068]; [0096]; Figs. 18–21). The first and second mesh portions are disposed on opposite sides of the inner case and are asymmetrical in shape ([0069]; Figs. 16–21), thereby corresponding to the claimed inner-case structure.
However, WO’141 does not explicitly disclose that the total area of mesh-hole windows on the side of the first mesh hole is larger than the total area of mesh-hole windows on the side of the second mesh hole. Although Figures 16–21 show asymmetrical inlet and outlet mesh geometries, the reference does not quantify or expressly compare the total mesh-hole areas.
JP’895 discloses a hollow-fiber membrane humidifier in which the total area of the inlet-side holes (S_in) differs from the total area of the outlet-side holes (S_out) to control gas flow velocity and achieve uniform humidification ([0013]–[0015]; Figs. 5A–5B). JP’895 explicitly teaches that the sum of the areas of the introduction holes (S_in) and delivery holes (S_out) is designed to be unequal, thereby establishing a relationship between hole-area ratios on opposite sides of the membrane bundle. This directly corresponds to the presently claimed feature of a total area of mesh-hole windows on a side of the first mesh hole being larger than a total area of mesh-hole windows on a side of the second mesh hole.
The combination of WO’141 and JP’895 is proper because both references relate to membrane-type humidifiers used in fuel-cell systems, and both address gas flow and moisture-exchange optimization within hollow-fiber membrane modules. Thus, they are in the same field of endeavor and directed to solving similar problems of flow distribution and humidity efficiency, making them analogous art.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the humidifier of WO’141 to include the quantitative mesh-area relationship taught by JP’895—specifically, configuring the total mesh area of the inlet (first mesh portion) to be larger than that of the outlet (second mesh portion)—in order to control flow velocity, improve humidification uniformity, and optimize gas distribution through the membrane bundle, as JP’895 demonstrates these design principles directly enhance humidifier performance.
As to Claim 5:
WO’141 further discloses that the inner case comprises a first mesh portion (M) formed on one side of the cartridge to allow the second fluid (off-gas) to enter and a second mesh portion on the opposite side to allow the gas to discharge after moisture exchange ([0068]; [0096]; Figs. 18–21). The first and second mesh portions are asymmetrical in shape ([0069]; Figs. 16–21), meeting the structural requirements of Claim 3 and Claim 4.
However, WO’141 does not explicitly disclose that, when the size of each mesh hole of the first and second mesh portions is equal, the number of mesh holes on the first side is greater than the number of mesh holes on the second side. While WO’141 shows asymmetrical mesh portions, it does not teach a quantitative relationship between hole count and hole size to define total flow area differences.
JP’895 discloses a hollow-fiber membrane humidifier (Title; [0013]–[0016]; Figs. 5A–5B) in which the sum of the areas of the introduction holes (S_in) is intentionally set to differ from the sum of the areas of the delivery holes (S_out) to achieve uniform gas distribution and stable humidification performance. JP’895 further teaches that, when individual hole sizes (diameters) are equal, the number of holes on one side (inlet side) is made larger than that on the other side (outlet side) to adjust the total flow area ([0015]; Figs. 5A–5B). This teaching directly corresponds to the claimed relationship where, for equal-size mesh holes, the first mesh portion (inlet) has more holes than the second mesh portion (outlet).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the humidifier of WO’141 by adopting the mesh-hole configuration principle taught by JP’895—specifically, designing the mesh portions so that, when the mesh-hole size is equal between the first and second sides, the number of holes on the first side is greater than on the second side—in order to control flow resistance, ensure uniform gas distribution, and improve moisture-exchange efficiency within the cartridge, as JP’895 clearly teaches that this design improves humidifier performance.
As to Claim 6:
WO’141 further discloses that the inner case comprises a first mesh portion (M) on one side through which off-gas enters, and a second mesh portion on the opposite side through which the off-gas, after moisture exchange, is discharged to the outside ([0068]; [0096]; Figs. 18–21). The first and second mesh portions are formed in asymmetrical shapes to optimize flow distribution ([0069]; Figs. 16–21), thereby corresponding to the inner-case structure recited in Claims 3–4.
However, WO’141 does not disclose that, when the number of mesh-hole windows of the first mesh portion is equal to the number of mesh-hole windows of the second mesh portion, the area of each mesh hole of the first mesh portion is greater than the area of each mesh hole of the second mesh portion. Although WO’141 shows first and second mesh portions of differing shapes and relative open areas, it does not explicitly describe or quantify the relationship between the individual mesh-hole size and the number of holes for each side.
JP’895, however, discloses a hollow-fiber membrane humidifier (Title; [0013]–[0016]; Figs. 5A–5B) having inlet and outlet hole arrays (S_in and S_out) with different total areas to regulate gas flow and achieve uniform humidification. JP’895 explicitly teaches that, when the number of holes on the inlet and outlet sides is equal, the diameter (and hence the area) of each hole on one side is made larger than the holes on the opposite side to establish the desired area ratio and flow balance ([0015]; Figs. 5A–5B). Thus, JP’895 discloses the claimed feature that when hole counts are equal, the holes on one side (corresponding to the first mesh portion) are larger in area than those on the other side (corresponding to the second mesh portion).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the asymmetrical mesh portions of WO’141 in light of JP’895’s teaching—specifically, to design the first and second mesh portions so that, when the number of mesh-hole windows is equal, the area of each hole on the first side is larger than that on the second side—in order to control flow resistance, adjust gas distribution, and enhance moisture-exchange performance across the hollow-fiber bundle, as JP’895 demonstrates that such structural adjustments achieve improved flow and humidification uniformity.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 2001202977 discloses multiple hollow fiber pipes (HF) of water permeability are arranged inside the housing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY K VO whose telephone number is (571)272-3242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/JIMMY VO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/JIMMY VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723