DETAILED ACTION
The response filed May 12, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are pending, as Applicant has canceled claim 4.
Drawings
In response to Applicant’s request, the drawings filed 7/29/23 are accepted by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (“Ahn”, US 2021/0111420 A1) in view of Kim et al. (“Kim”, US 2016/0240870 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ahn discloses a fuel cell humidifier including a humidification module including a housing and a plurality of hollow fiber membranes arranged in the housing, a first cap having an air discharge port for supplying the humidified air to the fuel cell stack and coupled to a first termination end of the humidification module, the air discharge port being spaced apart from the humidification module, and a bypass tube for transferring the condensate water generated from the humidified air to the interior space of the housing through with the off-gas flows, and a first end of the bypass tube is positioned in the air discharge port, and the bypass tube is in fluid communication with the interior space of the housing through a second end of the bypass tube ([0015]).
The fuel cell humidifier may further include a second cap having an air inlet port for receiving the air supplied form the outside and coupled to a second termination end of the humidification module at the opposite side of the first termination end ([0016]).
Ahn teaches an air outlet port, which would expand the humidified air and induce condensation.
Ahn does not expressly teach a condensation induction portion formed to extend from the air outlet port.
However, Kim is also directed to fuel cells ([0003]) and teaches the use of a diffuser ([0055]; see also Figs. 3-6) which causes sudden adiabatic expansion of the high-temperature and high-humidity fluid, thus lowering the temperature of the fluid based on the first law of thermodynamics ([0055]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the air outlet port of Ahn with the diffuser of Kim to uniformize pressure distribution of the fluid and overcome decrease of efficiency (Kim, [0057]).
Ahn teaches it is possible to form the air discharge port (OP1’) so that the humidified air may flow upwards at a predetermined angle, thereby blocking most of the condensate water discharged in the longitudinal direction of the hollow fiber membrane 112 by a rib 121’ ([0058]) and depicts the air outlet port at an angle (see Fig. 2). Ahn modified by Kim, as discussed above, would read on the claimed limitation of the air outlet port and the condensation induction portion being at a preset angle.
As to the arc-shaped hollow structure limitation, one of ordinary skill would appreciate that the diffuser could be various shapes so long as the volume increased to cause sudden adiabatic expansion, as discussed above.
As to claims 2 and 3, Kim teaches a diffuser (Figs. 3-6), which has a larger diameter and cross-sectional area than the air outlet port.
As to claim 5, Ahn teaches the first cap may have a rib configured to prevent the condensate water from being transferred to the fuel cell stack through the air discharge port, the reb being disposed in the air discharge port ([0023]).
As to claims 6 and 8, Ahn teaches the rib and screw thread are both formed on an inner surface of the air outlet port ([0024]). Since the diffuser of Kim is formed extending from the air outlet port, Ahn modified by Kim as discussed above would read on claims 6 and 8.
As to claim 7, Ahn teaches a screw thread for providing a spiral path to the condensate water may be formed on the inner surface of the air discharge port ([0024]).
As to claim 9, Ahn teaches the bypass tube may include a first tube fixed to the first cap and a second tube fixed to the humidification module, and the first and second tubes may be detachably coupled ([0026]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
In addressing the newly added limitation to claim 1, the Examiner points to Fig. 2 and [0058] of Ahn, where Ahn teaches it is possible to form the air discharge port (OP1’) so that the humidified air may flow upwards at a predetermined angle, thereby blocking most of the condensate water discharged in the longitudinal direction of the hollow fiber membrane 112 by a rib 121’ ([0058]) and depicts the air outlet port at an angle (see Fig. 2). Ahn modified by Kim, as discussed above, would read on the claimed limitation of the air outlet port and the condensation induction portion being at a preset angle.
Conclusion
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 DANIEL H. LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2548. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at 5712705038. 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.
DANIEL H. LEE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1746
/DANIEL H LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights