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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted 06/30/2023 and 07/172024 were received and have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the other end" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the other end" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the other end" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2, 4-5, and 7-11 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 1, the closest pieces of prior art Bauer et al. (U.S. 20200161678), An et al. (KR 20190035002 A, Espacenet translation provided for reference), and Oh et al. (WO 2016208878 A1, Espacenet translation provided for reference) all disclose humidifiers for use within fuel cells. However, none of the above cited pieces of prior art disclose the use of packing members used within sub-cases to airtightly couple through mechanical means to the ends of humidifying modules, wherein the packing members comprise a first packing body and a first projecting member configured to be inserted into a fist insertion groove of the sub-case. According to applicant’s specification, it is possible to increase the distance that dry gas and wet gas must move so as to leak through the airtight structure implemented as the result of the first packing member being inserted into the first sub-case, whereby it is possible to increase force capable of preventing leakage of the dry gas and the wet gas. Also, in the humidifier for fuel cells according to the present disclosure, it is possible to prevent leakage of both dry gas and wet gas through the airtight structure implemented as the result of the first packing member being inserted into the first sub-case ([0060]). There is no obvious modification to the humidifiers of the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention that yields the results of the packing member, and no prior art was found that can modify the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention. Therefore, claim 1 contains allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN E BERRESFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-0641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (572)272-1330. 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.
/J.E.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727