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 .
CELL-MONITORING CONNECTOR FOR FUEL CELL
Examiner: Adam Arciero S.N. 18/312,127 Art Unit 1727 December 22, 2025
DETAILED ACTION
The Application filed on May 04, 2023 has been received. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoon et al. (US 2013/0316560 A1; as found in IDS dated 05/04/2023).
As to Claim 1, Yoon discloses a cell-monitoring connector 100 for a fuel cell, configured to be mounted to a plurality of unit cells 10 stacked in a first direction, the connector comprising:
a housing 110 configured to be coupled to a plurality of terminals 11 protruding from side portions of separators of said unit cells toward the connector in a second direction intersecting the first direction (Fig. 1 and 8 and paragraphs [0046, 0048]);
a connector and terminal position assurance (CTPA) configured to be detachably coupled to the housing, the CPTA comprising:
a connector position assurance (CPA) 140 configured to be locked in a groove portion 11a defined by receiving recesses provided in the plurality of terminals overlapping each other in the first direction to secure the housing to the terminals (Fig. 1-2 and 8 and paragraph [0047]);
a terminal position assurance (TPA) 130 configured to be detachably coupled to a front surface of the housing and to allow connection terminals to be press-fitted into the housing (Fig. 1-2 and 8 and paragraph [0047]); and
a connecting portion 115,117 interconnecting the CPA and TPA (Fig. 1 and 8).
As to Claim 3, Yoon discloses wherein the housing comprises a body 110a that is configured to be coupled with the terminals; wherein the body comprises the claimed upper and lower portions extending from respective upper and lower sides of the body in a third direction and each portion comprising an insertion opening (see reproduced Fig., 8 below and paragraph [0055]).
PNG
media_image1.png
514
562
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (US 2013/0316560 A1; as found in IDS dated 05/04/2023).
As to Claim 2, Yoon does not specifically disclose wherein the CPA, TPA and the connecting portion are integrally formed. However, the courts have held that “that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice." See MPEP 2144.04, V, B. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the connector of Yoon to comprise an integrally formed CPA, TPA and connecting portion because Yoon teaches that a connector that may be prevented from detaching from separators of a fuel cell is provided (Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior arts of record, Yoon and Ohm (US 2021/0143449 A1), do not specifically disclose, teach, or fairly suggest wherein the CPA comprises: a first CPA configured to be detachably coupled to the first upper portion in the second direction through the first insertion opening and to be locked in the groove portion defined by the receiving recesses provided in upper portions of the plurality of terminals overlapping each other in the first direction; and a second CPA configured to be detachably coupled to the first lower portion in the second direction through the second insertion opening and to be locked in the groove portion defined by the receiving recesses provided in lower portions of the plurality of terminals overlapping each other in the first direction (claim 4). Ohm teaches of a cell connector, comprising: first and second CPA 312a,312b each respectively connected to upper and lower portions of the body 310 of the housing (Fig. 4a and paragraph [0098]). However, the CPA 312a,b of Ohm are connected to levers 314a,314b which are configured to lock in the groove portions of the terminals of separator 600 (Fig. 10c). Therefore, the first and second CPA of Ohm are not configured to be locked in the groove portion defined by the receiving recesses provided in the lower portions of the terminals overlapping each other in the first direction (claim 4).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ARCIERO whose telephone number is (571)270-5116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5 ET.
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 (571)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.
/ADAM A ARCIERO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727