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 Objections
Claims 5, 10, 13-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 5 and 10, “the partition walls for partition into the first space” is grammatically incorrect and lacks antecedent basis. The examiner suggests writing simply “the partition walls”.
Regarding claims 13 and 17, “comprise” and “a potting portions” are grammatically incorrect. The examiner suggests a corrected version of the claim that would read: “The fuel cell membrane humidifier of claim 1, wherein the humidification module comprises at least one cartridge including a plurality of hollow fiber membranes and potting portions that fix the hollow fiber membranes to each other.”
Regarding claims 14 and 18, “the potting portions formed” is grammatically incorrect. The examiner suggests “the potting portions are formed” as a correction.
Regarding claims 15, 16, 19, and 20, “comprises” is grammatically incorrect. The examiner suggests “comprising” as a correction.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The examiner would like to set forth the plain English definitions which will be used to interpret the language of the claims of the instant. Neither “inclined” nor “a preset angle” are defined in the specification. The plain English definition that will be used to interpret “inclined” is “making an angle with a line or plane”. No specific angle or range of angles are provided in the specification; therefore, the preset angle may be any angle.
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, 6, 13, and 17 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.
Claims 1 and 6 recite the limitation "the other surface" in line 5 of claim 1 and line 6 of claim 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 13 and 17 recite the limitation "the humidification module" in line 1 of each claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US-20220029180-A1, Lee et. al., 2020.
Regarding claim 1, Lee et. al. teaches a fuel cell membrane humidifier (Fig. 1, 100) comprising:
a mid-case (Fig. 1, 110);
a first off-gas inlet (Fig. 6, 212) formed on one side (Fig. 6, A, see annotated version below) of one surface (Fig. 6, surface of 210 to the left of 120, see arrow pointing left on annotated version below) of the mid-case and a second off-gas inlet (Fig. 6, 122) formed on the other side (Fig. 6, B, see annotated version below) of the one surface of the mid-case;
and an off-gas outlet (Fig. 6, 214) formed on the other surface (Fig. 6, surface of 210 to the right of 120, see arrow pointing right on annotated version below) of the mid-case.
PNG
media_image1.png
840
1437
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Lee et. al. teaches the first off-gas inlet and the second off-gas inlet are formed in a direction inclined at a preset angle (Fig. 6).
As mentioned in the Claim Interpretation section of this correspondence, no definition for “inclined” or “preset angle” were provided. The examiner has interpreted first and second gas inlets that are at right angles with either of the length or width of a humidifier are still inclined at a preset angle.
Regarding claim 3, Lee et. al. teaches the fuel cell humidifier comprises partition walls (Fig. 6, 210 and 120) configured to partition an inner space of the mid-case (Fig. 6, interior of 110) into a first space (Fig. 6, interior of 210) and a second space (Fig. 6, 110a and 110b combined), wherein the first off-gas inlet is formed in the first space, and the second off-gas inlet is formed in the second space (Fig. 6, see annotated version above).
Regarding claim 4, Lee et. al. teaches the off-gas outlet is formed between the first space and the second space (Fig. 6, 214).
Regarding claim 5, Lee et. al. teaches the off-gas outlet is formed between the partition walls (Fig. 6, 120 and 210).
The cartridge casing on which the off-gas outlet is formed (Fig. 6, 210) is centered between the partition wall ring 120, so the off-gas outlet is between both the partition walls (Fig. 6, 120 and 210).
Regarding claim 13, Lee et. al. teaches the humidifier comprises a cartridge (Fig. 6, 200) including a plurality of hollow fiber membranes (Fig. 6, 220) and potting portions (Fig. 6, 130).
Regarding claim 14, Lee et. al. teaches the hollow fiber membranes are formed in an inner case (Fig. 6, 210) and the potting portions are formed at ends of the inner case (Fig. 6, 130 and identical structure on other side of figure, see annotated version below).
PNG
media_image2.png
497
793
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Lee et. al teaches a gasket assembly for airtight coupling through a mechanical assembly (Paragraph 77).
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.
Claims 6-12, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20220029180-A1, Lee et. al., 2020 in view of US-20140186727-A1, Kim et. al., 2014.
Regarding claim 6, Lee et. al. teaches a fuel cell system comprising:
an inflow gas supply port (Fig. 6, 116) and inflow of gas (Fig. 6, DG) to be humidified;
a fuel cell stack (Fig. 6, 20); and
a fuel cell membrane humidifier (Fig. 1, 100) comprising:
a mid-case (Fig. 1, 110);
a first off-gas inlet (Fig. 6, 212) formed on one side (Fig. 6, A, see annotated version below) of one surface (Fig. 6, surface of 210 to the left of 120, see arrow pointing left on annotated version below) of the mid-case and a second off-gas inlet (Fig. 6, 122) formed on the other side (Fig. 6, B, see annotated version below) of the one surface of the mid-case;
and an off-gas outlet (Fig. 6, 214) formed on the other surface (Fig. 6, surface of 210 to the right of 120, see arrow pointing right on annotated version below) of the mid-case.
Lee et. al. does not teach a blower to supply a dry gas.
However, Kim et. al. teaches a fuel cell humidifier (Fig. 6, 10) with a blower that passes external dry air through the membrane humidifier so that it is humidified (Paragraph 45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention to combine the blower of Kim et. al. with the fuel cell system of Lee et. al. because the blower was a known method of supplying dry gas to a humidifier.
PNG
media_image1.png
840
1437
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Lee et. al. teaches the first off-gas inlet and the second off-gas inlet are formed in a direction inclined at a preset angle (Fig. 6).
As mentioned in the Claim Interpretation section of this correspondence, no definition for “inclined” or “preset angle” were provided. The examiner has interpreted first and second gas inlets that are at right angles with the length and width of a humidifier are still inclined at a preset angle.
Regarding claim 8, Lee et. al. teaches the fuel cell humidifier comprises partition walls (Fig. 6, 210 and 120) configured to partition an inner space of the mid-case (Fig. 6, interior of 110) into a first space (Fig. 6, interior of 210) and a second space (Fig. 6, 110a and 110b combined), wherein the first off-gas inlet is formed in the first space, and the second off-gas inlet is formed in the second space (Fig. 6, see annotated version above).
Regarding claim 9, Lee et. al. teaches the off-gas outlet is formed between the first space and the second space (Fig. 6, 214).
Regarding claim 10, Lee et. al. teaches the off-gas outlet is formed between the partition walls (Fig. 6, 120 and 210).
The cartridge casing on which the off-gas outlet is formed (Fig. 6, 210) is centered between the partition wall ring 120, so the off-gas outlet is between both the partition walls (Fig. 6, 120 and 210).
Regarding claim 11, Lee et. al. teaches a fuel cell system (Fig. 6, in its entirety), comprising:
a humidified gas supply flow path (Fig. 6, arrow from 118 to 20) configured to supply a gas humidified in the fuel cell membrane humidifier (Fig. 6, 100) to the fuel cell stack (Fig. 6, 20);
an off-gas supply flow path (Fig. 6, Q2) configured to supply the off-gas discharged from the fuel cell stack to the fuel cell membrane humidifier;
and a first off-gas branch flow path (Fig. 6, WG1) branched from the off-gas supply flow path and connected to the first off-gas inlet (Fig. 6, 212), and a second off-gas branch flow path (Fig. 6, WG2) branched from the off-gas supply flow path and connected to the second off-gas inlet (Fig. 6, 122).
Regarding claim 12, Lee et. al. teaches a flow adjustment means (Fig. 6, 300) for adjusting a flow rate of the off-gas to the first off-gas branch flow path (Fig. 6, WG1) and the second off-gas branch flow path (Fig. 6, WG2), the flow adjustment means being formed between the first off-gas branch flow path and the second off-gas branch flow path (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 17, Lee et. al. teaches the humidifier comprises a cartridge (Fig. 6, 200) including a plurality of hollow fiber membranes (Fig. 6, 220) and potting portions (Fig. 6, 130).
Regarding claim 18, Lee et. al. teaches the hollow fiber membranes are formed in an inner case (Fig. 6, 210) and the potting portions are formed at ends of the inner case (Fig. 6, 130 and identical structure on other side of figure, see annotated version below).
PNG
media_image2.png
497
793
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Lee et. al teaches a gasket assembly for airtight coupling through a mechanical assembly (Paragraph 77).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20220029180-A1, Lee et. al., 2020 in view of US-20080237902-A1, Namugo et. al., 2008.
Lee et. al. teaches a fuel cell humidifier (100) with a cartridge (200) that is fixed at both ends to a mid-case (Fig. 6, 110). Lee et. al. teaches that the cartridge has potting material at both ends (Fig. 6, 130), which connects the cartridge to the mid-case (Fig. 6).
Lee et. al. does not teach a resin layer for fixing the cartridge which is formed between both ends of the cartridge and the mid-case.
However, Namugo et. al. teaches a fuel cell humidifier with potting members that may be made
out of thermosetting resin, such as epoxy resin (Paragraph 52). It would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention to form the potting members of Lee et. al. out of the resin of Namugo et. al. because it amounts to nothing more than a use of a known
material for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish entirely expected results.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20220029180-A1, Lee et. al., 2020 in view of US-20140186727-A1, Kim et. al., 2014, and in further view of US-20080237902-A1, Namugo et. al., 2008.
Lee et. al. teaches a fuel cell system (Fig. 6, in its entirety) comprising a fuel cell (Fig. 6, 20) and a fuel cell humidifier (100) with a cartridge (200) that is fixed at both ends to a mid-case (Fig. 6, 110). Lee et. al. teaches that the cartridge has potting material at both ends (Fig. 6, 130), which connects the cartridge to the mid-case (Fig. 6).
Lee et. al. does not teach a resin layer for fixing the cartridge which is formed between both ends of the cartridge and the mid-case.
However, Namugo et. al. teaches a fuel cell humidifier with potting members that may be made
out of thermosetting resin, such as epoxy resin (Paragraph 52). It would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention to form the potting members of Lee et. al. out of the resin of Namugo et. al. because it amounts to nothing more than a use of a known
material for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish entirely expected results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUISE JAMES IANNUCCI whose telephone number is (571)272-6917. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M..
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/LOUISE JAMES IANNUCCI/Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721