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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received on May 13, 2026:
Claims 1-20 are pending;
The drawing objection to Fig. 2 set forth in the previous Office Action has been withdrawn in light of Applicant’s clarifying remarks;
The claim objections to claims 16-18, set forth in the previous Office Action have been withdrawn in light of the amendment;
The 112 rejections set forth in the previous Office Action have been withdrawn in light of the amendment;
The prior art rejections too Lee et al. (WO 2013/077488) set forth in the previous Office Action are withdrawn in light of the amendment;
The prior art rejections to Albert and Aono set forth in the previous Office Action stand as modified in light of the amendment.
Drawings
The drawings received June 1, 2023 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-6, 8-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Albert et al. (DE 10247010A1).
As to claim 1, Albert discloses an assembly (for an electrochemical system, intended use) comprising:
a first separator plate 3a which is a single layered stack terminating plate, and
a support element 13b,
wherein the first separator plate 3a has a first sealing bead 15 for sealing off an area of the first separator plate 3a, wherein the first sealing bead 15 projects out of a plate plane defined by the first separator plate 3a and has a bead interior, which is open on a rear side of the first separator plate 3a, and a bead top, which is offset from the plate plane of the first separator plate, wherein the support element 13b projects into the bead interior in order to support the bead top (see annotated section of Fig. 7 below). The bead projects outwardly from the plate and it can also be seen that one end of the bead (outer edge adjacent to opening 11) is free and therefore offset from the plate plane of the first separator plate.
PNG
media_image1.png
491
1295
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown above, Albert teaches of a discrete support element 13b that is arranged between the first separator plate 3a and adjacent end plate 8a. This support element is only arranged between the first separator plate 3a and end plate 8a, and it is not between the first separator plate 3a and adjacent separator plate in the stack.
As to claim 2, the sealing element above 13b is held to be rigid to some degree, expectedly rigid, even if in a compressed state.
As to claim 3, the sealing bead includes portions 13a and 13b the comprehensive design of which surrounds a through hole opening interior of area 15, effectively sealing off the through-hole opening 11 (Fig. 4).
PNG
media_image2.png
460
768
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As to claim 4, the support element 13a/13b and the sealing bead has at least one fluid passage 11 for passage of fluid (Fig. 4 above).
As to claim 5, the support element 13a/13b extends along an entire course of the first sealing bead 15 (Fig. 4).
As to claim 6, the support element 13a/13b has a rounded-rectangular cross-section (Fig. 4).
As to claim 8, plate 3a is made of metal (see bottom of page 4 of the machine translation).
As to claim 9, a contacting plate 8a is connected to the first separator plate in a media tight manner (see annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
460
1062
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As to claim 10, the support element 13b and the contacting plate 8a are formed as individual parts and the support element 13b is arranged between the beads 15 of first separator plate 3a and the contacting plate 8a (see Fig. 7 above).
As to claim 11, the contacting plate has an exterior surface which has a fastening possibility to additional plates and therefore has a fastening ability for fastening the contacting plate to another plate if need be, that additional plate constituting an end plate. Note that claim 11 does not require fastening to an end plate only that the contacting plate has a structure that provides for the possibility of fastening to another plate (i.e., intended use).
As to claim 12, the sealing bead 15 includes passages which route fluid from manifold region 11 to the internal flow field structure of the separator plate 3a (Figs. 4, 5 and 7, for example).
As to claim 14, the assembly includes a first end plate 8a (see annotated Fig. 7 below) and the first sealing bead 15 of the first separator plate points with its bead top away from the first end plate 8a and the support element 13b is arranged between the first separator plate 3a and the first end plate 8a.
PNG
media_image3.png
460
1062
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-2, 4, 8-11 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Aono et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0416271).
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216. Pending such, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
If foreign priority is perfected, Aono would further apply under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as having an earlier effective filing date.
As to claim 1, Aono discloses an assembly (for an electrochemical system, intended use) comprising:
a first separator plate which is a single layered stack terminating plate, and
a support element (see annotated Fig. 1 below),
wherein the first separator plate has a first sealing bead for sealing off an area of the first separator plate, wherein the first sealing bead projects out of a plate plane defined by the first separator plate and has a bead interior, which is open on a rear side of the first separator plate, and a bead top, which is offset from the plate plane of the first separator plate, wherein the support element projects into the bead interior in order to support the bead top (see annotated section of Fig. 1 below). The bead projects outwardly from the plate and can also be seen that one end of the bead (outer edge) is free and therefore offset from the plate plane of the first separator plate.
PNG
media_image4.png
618
1031
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As shown above, Aono teaches of a discrete support element that is arranged between the first separator plate and adjacent end plate 11. This support element is only arranged between the first separator plate and end plate 11, and it is not between the first separator plate and adjacent separator plate in the stack.
As to claim 2, the gasket above is held to be rigid to some degree.
As to claim 4, the end plate has at least one fluid passage opening for passage of fluid (fuel or oxidant or coolant through passages 29, 30, for example (Fig. 1).
As to claim 8, the separators are metal (para. [0020]).
As to claim 9, a contacting plate 15 is connected to the first separator plate in a media tight manner (see Fig. 1 above).
As to claim 10, the support element and the contacting plate 15 are formed as individual parts and the support element is arranged between the beads of the first separator plate 20 and the contacting plate 15 (see Fig. 1 above).
As to claim 11, the contacting plate 15 is directly adjacent to an end plate 16 and therefore has a fastening ability for fastening the contacting plate 15 to the end plate 16 (see Fig. 1 above). Note that claim 11 does not require fastening to an end plate only that the contacting plate has a structure that provides for the possibility of fastening to another plate (i.e., intended use).
As to claim 14, the assembly includes a first end plate 17 (see Fig. 1 above) and the first sealing bead of the first separator plate points with its bead top away from the first end plate 17 and the support element is arranged between the first separator plate and the first end plate 17.
As to claim 15, as shown in annotated Fig. 1 above, a contacting plate 15 is adjacent to the first end plate 17 and arranged between the first end plate 17 and the first separator plate (Fig. 1 above).
As to claim 16, the assembly includes additional separator plates 20 including one of the layers in the additional separator plates of the same material and have the same bead and support element design as identical to the first separator plate and the second separator plates arranged on the front side of the first separator plate, include two layers a where any of the additional separator plates in the stack define a second separator (see Fig. 1).
As to claim 17, the second separator place facing the first separator plate (end most separator plate 20), includes an outer sealing bead, including the gaskets 36 therein and the bead tops extend towards each other and are in parallel to each other and the additional separator plates are arranged such that the sealing beads of the adjacent separator plates and sealing materials have a higher elasticity than the first sealing beat of the first separator plate given the relative placement of the first separator plate, sealing bead and end plate compared to the additional separator plates provided along the stack, distal from the first separator plate and end plate and therefore subjected to more flex or elasticity compared to the first separator plate (Fig. 1).
As to claim 18, Aono discloses an electrochemical system in Fig. 1 comprising a plurality of separator plates 20 and a second bottom end plate 17 wherein the first and plate 17 has a plurality of media ports for (fuel, oxidant and coolant) and the media ports on the first end plate 17 are fluidically connected to through-openings of the first separator plate 20 (where passages such as passages 29 and 30 reside) and the separator plates 20 are arranged and compressed between the two end plates 17 to form the stack as shown in Fig. 1.
As to claim 19, a support frame 19 and film electrode assembly 18 constitute any number of further assemblies between the separator plates and second end plate 17 (Fig. 1).
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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Albert et al. (DE 10247010A1) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Takada et al. (JP 2007-311081A).
Albert teaches of the contacting plate 8a is connected to the first separator plate 3a in a media tight manner, thus sealing off an area between the contacting plate 8a and the first separator plate (see Fig. 7 above).
Albert does not teach of welding the contacting plate 8a to the first separator plate.
Takada is drawn to the same field of endeavor to fuel cell stack designs for coupling an end plate to a separator of a stack. Takada teaches of including providing a first (end) separator to and adjacent end plate structure (including a contacting plate therein) where the separator is effectively welded along contact points between the separator and the contacting plate of the end plate structure. Directly welding the first separator plate 7A to an adjacent contacting plate 14 was shown to reduce electrical resistance and improve power generation performance.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Albert by welding the first separator plate to the contacting plate as taught by Albert since it would have provided the predictable benefit of reducing electrical resistance and improved power generation performance.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aono et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0416271) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Takada et al. (JP 2007-311081A).
Aono teaches of the contacting plate 15 is connected to the first separator plate in a media tight manner, thus sealing off an area between the contacting plate 15 and the first separator plate (see Fig. 1 above).
Aono does not teach of welding the contacting plate 15 to the first separator plate.
Takada is drawn to the same field of endeavor to fuel cell stack designs for coupling an end plate to a separator of a stack. Takada teaches of including providing a first (end) separator to and adjacent end plate structure (including a contacting plate therein) where the separator is effectively welded along contact points between the separator and the contacting plate of the end plate structure. Directly welding the first separator plate 7A to an adjacent contacting plate 14 was shown to reduce electrical resistance and improve power generation performance.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Aono by welding the first separator plate to the contacting plate as taught by Aono since it would have provided the predictable benefit of reducing electrical resistance and improved power generation performance.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aono et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0416271) as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Wariishi et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0158604).
Aono teaches of a stack assembly comprising first and second end plates 17.
Aono does not teach of the second end plate non having through-hole opening for fluid passage.
Aono teaches of providing end plates to permit both end plates to have through-openings for fluid flow. Wariishi teaches of providing end plates with one end plate 20a having through-openings for passage of fluid and an opposing end plate 20b in solid form without through-holes (Fig. 1). Wariishi is drawn to the same field of endeavor, fuel cell stack body designs including fluid flow design for the stack body. Providing through openings in both end plates (Aono) or only one end plate with the other end plate being without through-openings (Wariishi) would have been conventional alternative design choices for fluid passages in a fuel cell stack and the implementation of either would have been a matter of design choice for the purpose of effectively flowing fluid in a corresponding stack as needed.
Repositioning or varying the arrangement of fluid flow whether through both end plates or only through one end plate would have been of routine skill in the art as a matter of design choice. Each design would perform the same function of fluid flow to and through a fuel cell stack regardless of relative orientation and would expectedly behave similarly regardless of whether one end plate or both end plates permit fluid flow therethrough.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second end plate of Aono to not have through openings for fluid flow as needed as a matter of design choice for the purpose of providing a suitable fluid flow arrangement to and through a fuel cell stack. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 13, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Albert teaches that seals 13a and 13b are present on either side of the separator plate 3a and does not disclose the claimed arrangement where a support element is positioned between a terminal separator plate in a stack and an end plate but not between adjacent separator plates.
The Examiner appreciates Applicant’s position but does not find the argument persuasive.
According to Albert:
PNG
media_image1.png
491
1295
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown above, Albert teaches of a discrete support element 13b that is arranged between the first separator plate 3a and adjacent end plate 8a. This support element is only arranged between the first separator plate 3a and end plate 8a, and it is not between the first separator plate 3a and adjacent separator plate in the stack.
As far as the claims are expressed, Albert still anticipates the claim as the discrete support element 13b of Albert itself is arranged only between the first separator plate and end plate as noted above. And to that extent element 13b of Albert reads on the claimed support element.
Furthermore, the claim does not preclude the presence of additional support elements but only requires that the support element arranged between the first separator plate and first end plate is further not between the first separator plate and an adjacent separator plate. It is plain to see that element 13b is only provided between the first separator plate and an adjacent end plate and for that element 13b itself, is not additionally between the first separator plate and an adjacent separator plate.
Therefore, element 13b still reads on the support element of modified claim 1 and the rejection stands.
Applicant similarly argues that Aono discloses gaskets 36 between separator plates 20 of the stack of elements.
The Examiner appreciates Applicant’s position but does not find the argument persuasive.
Aono teaches:
PNG
media_image4.png
618
1031
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As shown above, Aono teaches of a discrete support element that is arranged between the first separator plate and adjacent end plate 11. This support element is only arranged between the first separator plate and end plate 11, and it is not between the first separator plate and adjacent separator plate in the stack.
As far as the claims are expressed, Aono still anticipates the claim as the discrete support element of Aono itself is arranged only between the first separator plate and end plate as noted above. And to that extent the discrete element of Aono reads on the claimed support element.
Again, as stated above, the claim does not preclude the presence of additional support elements but only requires that the claimed support element arranged between the first separator plate and first end plate is further not between the first separator plate and an adjacent separator plate. It is plain to see that one element (see annotated figure above) is provided between the first separator plate and an adjacent end plate and for that element itself, is not additionally between the first separator plate and an adjacent separator plate.
The outermost gasket/support element in the stack of Aono is only between the outer separator plate and adjacent end plate and still reads on the support element of modified claim 1. Therefore the rejection stands.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is 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: none of the cited prior art of record, alone or in combination, are held to reasonably teach, suggest or render obvious the invention of claim 7, including all of the limitations of the base claim and
wherein a height direction is defined perpendicular to the plate plane, wherein a maximum height of the support element is smaller than a height of the first sealing bead measured from the plate plane to a neutral axis of the bead top in a non-compressed state of the assembly.
Lee, previously applied to claim 7, no longer applies as claim 1 has been amended to preclude the application of Lee. Furthermore, there is no reasonable motivation to modify, Albert, Aono or any other cited prior art of record to meet the features of claim 1 wherein a height direction is defined perpendicular to the plate plane, wherein a maximum height of the support element is smaller than a height of the first sealing bead measured from the plate plane to a neutral axis of the bead top in a non-compressed state of the assembly and including all of the limitations of base claim 1.
According to the invention (para. [0077]): a height direction is defined perpendicular to the plate plane. A maximum height of the support element 40 is often smaller than a height of the first sealing bead 12 measured from the plate plane to the neutral axis of the metal sheet in the region of the bead top 36 in the non-compressed state of the assembly 30. In the compressed state of the assembly 30, the first sealing bead 12 is compressed to the operating point and comes into contact with the support element 40. The support element thus acts as a mechanical stop for the sealing bead 12. The height of the support element 40 may be at least 60%, at least 70%, at least 75%, or at least 80% of the bead height in the non-compressed state of the assembly 30.
Therefore the features of claim 7 pertaining to the maximum height of the support element is smaller than a height of the first sealing bead measured from the plate plane to a neutral axis of the bead top in a non-compressed state of the assembly provides for a design wherein the support element acts as a mechanical stop for the sealing bead in the compressed state to effectively form a compressed assembly while effectively providing a mechanical stop from the support element in the compressed state.
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 GREGG CANTELMO whose telephone number is (571)272-1283. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7am to 5pm.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at (571) 272-1453. 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.
/GREGG CANTELMO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights