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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 4/19/23 and 2/20/24 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshitomi et al. (US 2020/0122579).
Regarding claim 1, Yoshitomi teaches a fuel cell system comprising:
a stack in which fuel cells are laminated, or fuel cell stack (52); an anode system which supplies fuel gas to the stack, or fuel gas circulation apparatus (30); and a cathode system which supplies oxidant to the stack, or oxidant gas supply apparatus (10);
wherein the cathode system includes a pump which pressure feeds the oxidant gas and a pump drive device, or power drive unit PDU (14), electrically connected to the pump via a power wire, or cable (19) (Figure 2B, [0019], [0022]) (the examiner finds that the skilled artisan will easily understand that a power cable inherently provide voltage);
wherein the pump and pump drive device are arranged side by side (Figures 2B and 3B).
Further regarding claim 1 and with regard to claim 2, Yoshitomi fails to teach the specific structural arrangement of the pump and pump drive device; however, Yoshitomi teaches that the elements of the system can be arranged with different orientations to mount the apparatuses within the fuel cell vehicle in the spaces that are available ([0034]). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan at the time of the invention to arrange the apparatuses of the fuel cell system of Yoshitomi in the space available, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI C)
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshitomi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Castleman et al. (US 2022/0250485).
The teachings of Yoshitomi as discussed above are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 3, Yoshitomi teaches the fuel cell system of claim 1 including a pump discharge port which provides oxidant gas to the fuel cell stack (see Figure 1) but is silent on the frame as claimed.
Castleman teaches a fuel cell system including a frame, or frame structure (34), defining an interior cavity configured to retain a fuel cell assembly and secure the assembly to a powertrain carrier assembly ([0008]). Castleman teaches that the fuel cell assembly may include various components including pumps ([0038]).
Castleman further teaches that the use of frames for holding fuel cell assemblies is desirable to provide an improved assembly and design for easily installing and removing multiple stacks/assemblies from a vehicle in a single process for improved serviceability ([0005]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide a frame for encompassing the fuel cell assembly of Yoshitomi such as suggested by Castleman in order to provide an improved assembly and design for easily installing and removing multiple stacks/assemblies from a vehicle in a single process for improved serviceability.
With further regard to claim 3, concerning the arrangement of the discharge port relative to other components in the assembly and the frame, the examiner maintains that it is within the ordinary level of skill in the art to arrange the apparatuses of the fuel cell system of Yoshitomi in view of Castleman in the space available, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI C)
Regarding claim 4, Castleman teaches providing at least two fuel cell systems (Figures 6-7) and an air cleaner, or filter ([0046]). The skilled artisan will understand that providing additional systems would have been obvious to provide additional power to meet the demands of the vehicle. It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI B)
The examiner finds that the pump of Yoshitomi has an inlet (see Figure 1) that the skilled artisan will easily understand to be a suction port, in order to intake air from the outside of the pump, and since the structure recited in the reference, i.e. a pump, is substantially identical to the claimed structure. MPEP 2112.01 I
As to the arrangements of the pumps, suction ports, and air filter, the examiner finds, as discussed above, that it is within the ordinary level of skill in the art to arrange the apparatuses of the fuel cell system of Yoshitomi in view of Castleman in the space available, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI C)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALIX ECHELMEYER EGGERDING whose telephone number is (571)272-1101. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 4:30pm.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
/ALIX E EGGERDING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights