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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 05/22/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/22/2026.
Status of the Claims
The claims submitted 06/27/2023 have been entered and fully considered. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 19-20 are withdrawn. Claims 1-18 are examined herein.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: said claims recite “securing the support layer to the separator plate via a field-assisted sintering or spark plasma sintering (FAST) process.” The specification as filed states in [0039]: “At step 608, the support layer 22 is bonded to the separator plate 20 via a field assisted sintering technology (FAST) process, also known as spark plasma sintering or direct current sintering.” The acronym FAST should be placed immediately behind field assisted sintering technology. Moreover, as field assisted sintering technology and spark plasma sintering appear to be synonyms for the same process, applicant may wish to delete one from the claims. Claims 2-13 and 15-18 depend from claims 1 or 14 and are objected to for the same reason. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8, 13-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0328235 A1 (“Zhu”) in view of CN 116130697 A (“Ekawa” – machine translation cited herein).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Zhu discloses a method of forming a fuel cell layer 18 comprising: forming a separator plate 20 including a plurality of curved portions 34 separated by flat support portions 36, defining a plurality of anode flow channels 30 at a first side of the separator plate 20 and a plurality of cathode flow channels 32 at a second side of the separator plate 20 opposite the first side (Fig. 3; [0034]); forming a support layer 22, the support layer 22 including a porous section 48 and a non-porous or solid section 50, with the solid section 50 surrounding the porous section 48 and defining an outer perimeter of the support layer 22 ([0037]); and stacking the support layer 22 and the separator plate 20 (Fig. 3; [0033], [0037]).
Zhu further discloses forming a stacked solid oxide fuel cell 10, where each fuel cell layer is formed as above and stacked along a stacking axis 60 (Fig. 2; [0032]-[0033]).
Zhu discloses the support layer 22 is secured to the separator plate 20 and that joining the support 22 to the separator plate 20 increases their individual strength and rigidity, and allows for using thinner, lighter materials in forming the support 22 and the separator plate 20 than would be otherwise feasible ([0033]). However, Zhu does not expressly disclose securing the support layer to the separator plate via a field-assisted sintering or spark plasma sintering (FAST) process.
Ekawa discloses a method for producing a biplate (Abstract; [0001]). The method comprises disposing a first carbon material on a surface of the hydrogen flow channel 1011 of hydrogen flow channel metal plate 101; disposing a second carbon material on a surface of the air flow channel 1031 of air flow channel metal plate 103; stacking the hydrogen flow channel metal plate 101, cooling flow channel metal plate 102 and the air flow channel metal plate 103, with the cooling flow channel metal plate 102 located between the hydrogen flow channel metal plate 101 and the air flow channel metal plate 103, to obtain a pre-finished product; and subjecting the pre-finished product to spark plasma sintering ([0059]). During the spark plasma sintering, the plates 101 to 103 are fused together by surface atomic diffusion, which achieves a good bonding effect. There is no need to use additional sealing materials such as a traditional sealant, which results in poor bonding performance and low durability of bipolar plates. Bipolar plates obtained by spark plasma sintering not only have good bonding effects but also significantly improved durability. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use spark plasma sintering to secure the support layer 22 to the separator plate 20 in Zhu because Ekawa teaches spark plasma sintering achieves good bonding effects and also significantly improved durability.
Regarding claim 2, modified Zhu discloses the method of claim 1. Zhu further discloses disposing a metal catalyst foam layer 52 between the separator plate 20 and the support layer 22 (Fig. 5; [0014], [0024], [0037]).
Regarding claims 3 and 15, modified Zhu discloses the method of claims 1 and 14. Ekawa discloses the spark plasma sintering is performed at a temperature of 730°C to 850°C ([0064]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Zhu discloses the method of claim 1. Zhu further discloses the porous section 48 is formed by laser drilling of a metal sheet ([0037]).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, modified Zhu discloses the method of claims 1 and 14. Zhu further discloses stacking an anode 24, an electrolyte 26 and a cathode 28 atop the support 22 in that order (Fig. 3; [0033]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Zhu discloses the method of claim 1. As Ekawa teaches the concept of joining layers via spark plasma sintering to achieves good bonding effects and also significantly improved durability, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one or more of the anode, electrolyte and cathode via spark plasma sintering process because Ekawa teaches spark plasma sintering achieves good bonding effects and also significantly improved durability.
Regarding claim 13, modified Zhu discloses the method of claim 1. Zhu further discloses the separator plate 20 is formed from a stainless steel ([0035], [0038]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0328235 A1 (“Zhu”) in view of CN 116130697 A (“Ekawa” – machine translation cited herein) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2003/0015431 A1 A1 (“Barker”).
Regarding claim 7, modified Zhu discloses the method of claim 6. Zhu discloses the electrolyte is formed from a ceramic material ([0032]-[0033]). Modified Zhu is silent regarding at least one of the anode, electrolyte and cathode are formed as tape casted ceramic layers.
Barker a solid oxide fuel cell (Abstract) and discloses it is known in the art to form the anode, electrolyte, and cathode by tape-casting ([0020], [0022], [0026]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form at least one of the anode, electrolyte and cathode as tape casted ceramic layers because Barker discloses this is a technique known in the art for deposition of ceramic layers and would therefore amount to applying a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claims 9-12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0328235 A1 (“Zhu”) in view of CN 116130697 A (“Ekawa” – machine translation cited herein) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2002/0187379 A1 (“Yasuo”).
Regarding claims 9-11 and 18, modified Zhu discloses the method of claims 1 and 14. Zhu does not expressly disclose the method further comprises applying a thin conductive layer having a thickness in the range of 5 micrometers to 1 millimeter to the support layer, the thin conductive layer formed primarily of elements from groups 7-12 of the periodic table.
Yasuo discloses a fuel cell separator which has a metal substrate 31, an intermediate layer 32 on the surface of the substrate, and a conductive layer 33 on top of the metal layer (Abstract; Figs. 2, 3; [0046]). The intermediate layer 32 consists of a metal layer 321 and an oxide layer 322 ([0053]). The metal layer 321 contains no less than 20wt % of Cr and is made of an alloy containing a material whose conductivity is higher than that of the substrate 31 (e.g. Ni) ([0053]). The conductive layer 33 is composed of the conductive particles 330 which are fusion-bonded with each other and with the metal layer 321 ([0057]). The conductive particles 330 are made of a transition metal. It is preferable that the transition metal has a higher conductivity than a material for the substrate 31 to reduce the contact resistance. Those materials include Ni–Mo steel (64%Ni-30%Mo) ([0058]). The separator is highly corrosion-resistant and has high conductivity ([0014], [0053], [0057]). Yasuo discloses the metal layer 321 is formed by physical vapor deposition, such as sputtering ([0069]) and the conductive layer 33 is formed by physical vapor deposition ([0071]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the intermediate layer and conductive layer of Yasuo to provide high corrosion resistance and conductivity.
The conductive layer 33 has a thickness ranging from 1 µm to 50 µm to provide a sufficient water holding capacity ([0063]). The thickness would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the thickness disclosed by Yasuo overlaps the thickness as claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). Furthermore, “[t]he normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages.” In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See also In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 12, modified Zhu discloses the method of claim 9. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the thin conductive layer prior to securing the support layer to the separator plate for ease of manufacturing as the layers of Yasuo are applied to the anode side of the separator (Fig. 2; [0044]) and the support layer of Zhu is secured to the anode side of the separator (Fig. 3; [0034]). Moreover, selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946). See also Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. App. 1959); In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930); and MPEP 2144(IV)(C).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 16 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 and if the claim objection above is overcome.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 4 and 16 recite “performing the securing at a pressure in the range of 5 to 100 Megapascals.” Ekawa discloses the pressure of the spark plasma sintering is 0.5 kg/cm2 to 5 kg/cm2 (about 0.05 MPa to 0.5 MPa) ([0023], [0065], [0069]).
The prior art does not disclose or render obvious the method of claims 4 or 16.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2013/0082421 A1 (“Allemand”) discloses a process for manufacturing at least one elementary electrochemical cell comprising a first and a second electrode between which an electrolyte is disposed, the method comprising a) producing at least one structure comprising a layer of a powder of a first electrode material and a layer of a powder of a second electrode material between which a layer of a powder of an electrolyte material is intercalated; and b) simultaneously sintering all the powder layers by an electric field sintering (Abstract).
US 2015/0004521 A1 (“Ramesh”) discloses a method of forming a porous article using spark plasma sintering ([0084]-[0085]).
US 2015/0099190 A1 (“Holme”) discloses a method of producing an electrolyte film using field assisted (FAST) sintering (Abstract).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Scott Carrico whose telephone number is (571)270-5504. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:15AM-6PM 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.
Robert Scott Carrico
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/Robert S Carrico/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights