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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-10) in the reply filed on 4/10/26 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation of “a humidifier provided in the first supply line at the downstream side of the cooler” is indefinite, as the first supply line has a first end connected with the inflow line for receiving wake air, and a second end connected with the air supply line at an upstream side of the cooler (see claim 3). Note that the first supply line is not at the downstream of the cooler, and it appears that applicant is intending to claim the air supply line (see fig 2, humidifier 150 downstream cooler 140 at air supply line 110, not first supply line 214). For examination purposes, the limitation is treated as a humidifier provided in --the air supply line at the downstream side of the cooler.--
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Quan (CN 113224356 A).
Regarding claim 1, Quan teaches a fuel cell system (paragraph [n0001], fuel cell vehicle technology, fig 1, fuel cell stack 11), comprising:
an air supply line (fig 1, see pipeline that includes compressor 3) configured to supply inflow air to a fuel cell stack (fig 1, see pipeline beginning with filter 1, compressor 3, supplying air to fuel cell stack 11); and
a rotor air supply line (fig 1, see pipeline that includes steam turbine 15) connected with the air supply line (fig 1, note that the steam turbine 15 connects via a pipeline to air ejector 8 of the first supply line) and configured to supply rotor air generated by a rotation of a rotor associated with the fuel cell system (functional limitation, note the air inlet of the steam turbine 15 and its rotors, paragraph [n0033]), to the air supply line (fig 1, see pipeline connecting steam turbine to air ejector 8 of the first supply line).
Note that the use of the supply line for wake air is a limitation directed to the intended use of the fuel cell system, and that that wake air is not a structural feature of the fuel cell system. Similarly, note that the rotor is not a required feature of the fuel cell system, which only requires a supply line that is configured to supply air generated by a rotor.
Regarding functional limitations, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997). MPEP 2114(I). "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114(II).
Regarding claim 9, Quan teaches a filter member provided in the rotor air supply line and configured to filter the rotor air (fig 1, second filter 14 connected to air inlet of steam turbine 15, paragraph [n0033]). Note again that the use of wake air is directed to the intended use of the rotor air supply line, and not a positively structure of the fuel cell system.
Regarding claim 10, note that the limitation of “wherein the rotor is provided to generate one or more of a lift force and a propulsive force of an object associated with the rotor” is not directed to the fuel cell system, but directed to a rotor that is associated with the fuel cell system during its intended use of supplying wake air, which is a material worked upon by a structure being claimed. Claim analysis is highly fact-dependent. A claim is only limited by positively recited elements. Thus, "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935). See MPEP 2115.
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.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quan in view of Qu (CN 112928306 A).
Regarding claim 2, Quan teaches an air compressor (fig 1, compressor 3) provided in the air supply line and configured to compress the air, but is quiet to a cooler provided in the air supply line positioned at a downstream side of the air compressor, the cooler being configured to cool the air.
Qu teaches an air supply system for a fuel cell system (paragraph [n0001]). Qu teaches an air delivery pipeline (201) including an air booster (204) and a heat exchanger (206) downstream from the air booster (fig 1-2). The air booster pressurizes the air and increases the air flow rate before delivering it to the heat exchanger for gas cooling (paragraph [n0040]). A controller monitors the temperature of the gas cooled by the heat exchanger in real time through the temperature sensor, and if the detected temperature is higher than the gas temperature range required by the fuel cell stack, the controller controls the heat exchanger to increase the cooling power (paragraph [n0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Quan so as to include a cooler provided in the air supply line positioned at a downstream side of the air compressor, as Qu teaches positioning a heat exchanger downstream of an air booster, for the purpose of cooling the gas, and that the heat exchanger can be controlled in real-time so as to cool the gas to a temperature range required by the fuel cell stack (paragraph [n0040]).
Regarding claim 3, Quan teaches wherein the rotor air supply line comprises: an inflow line configured to receive the rotor air (Quan, fig 1, air inlet of steam turbine 15); and a first supply line (Quan, fig 1, pipeline connected steam turbine 15 to air supply line), wherein a first end thereof is connected with the inflow line (Quan, fig 1, filter 14 to air inlet of steam turbine 15 at one end), and wherein a second end thereof is connected with the air supply line (Quan, fig 1, air ejector 8 of air supply line).
Quan is quiet to the first supply line connected at an upstream side of the cooler; and a second supply line, wherein a third end thereof is connected with the inflow line, and wherein a fourth end thereof is connected with the air supply line at a downstream side of the cooler.
Qu teaches a recovery system (5) including a pipeline that supplies air pressure and flow to the air delivery line (2) (paragraph [n0024]) at a point upstream of a heat exchanger (206) (figs 1-3) when the air booster (204) cannot meet the air requirements of the fuel cell stack (paragraph [n0042]). Quan additionally teaches the pipeline of the recovery system further including a purge pipe (4), that connects the air delivery line (2) downstream of the heat exchanger (figs 1-3, paragraph [n0024]). The purpose of purging is to purge the water inside the fuel cell stack after the fuel cell system is shut down, so as to prevent the water inside the stack from freezing and damaging the stack in low-temperature environments (paragraph [n0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Quan such that the air from the steam turbine is supplied to a point upstream of the heat exchanger in the combination, so that air can be cooled to the required temperature range of the fuel cell stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination to further include a second supply line with an end connected with the air supply line downstream of the cooler, as Qu teaches that the additional line can be used as a purge line so as to purge water inside the fuel cell stack (Qu, paragraph [n0043]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches a switching valve provided in the wake air supply line, the switching valve being configured to selectively switch a flow path of the wake air to one of the first supply line or the second supply line (note combination, where Qu teaches in figs 1-3 shut-off valve 508 and shut-off valve 401 for controlling the direction of the air, whether to be used to supplement airflow through pipeline 5 when the air booster cannot meet the fuel cell stacks needs (paragraph [n0042]), or for uses as an air purge through pipeline 4 (paragraph [n0043])).
Regarding claim 6, note that the limitation of “wherein the switching valve is configured to selectively switch the flow path of the wake air to one of the first supply line or the second supply line according to a wake air temperature” is a functional limitation. See MPEP 2114(I) and (II) regarding functional limitations, as discussed above. Note that the combination teaches valves for switching the flow path (Qu, valves 508 and 401), temperature sensors (Qu, temperature sensors 205 and 207, paragraph [n0040]), and a controller that controls the valves (Qu, controller 1, paragraph [n0040]), and thus would be capable of performing the claimed function. The claims do not positively require a controller that is programmed to control the switching of the valves in response to temperature.
Regarding claim 7, note that the limitation of “wherein the switching valve is configured to switch the flow path of the wake air to the first supply line when the wake air temperature is higher than a cooling fluid temperature of a cooling fluid passing through the cooler, and wherein the switching valve is configured to switch the flow path of the wake air to the second supply line when the wake air temperature is lower than the cooling fluid temperature” is a functional limitation. See MPEP 2114(I) and (II) regarding functional limitations, as discussed above. Note that the combination teaches valves for switching the flow path (Qu, valves 508 and 401), temperature sensors (Qu, temperature sensors 205 and 207, paragraph [n0040]), and a controller that controls the valves (Qu, controller 1, paragraph [n0040]), and thus would be capable of performing the claimed function. The claims do not positively require a controller that is programmed to control the switching of the valves in response to temperature.
Regarding claim 8, the combination suggests a first flow rate adjustment valve configured to connect the first supply line and the air supply line and further configured to selectively adjust a flow rate of one of the inflow air or wake air to be supplied to the fuel cell stack (note combination, where Quan teaches proportional valve 7 for controlling flow rate and pressure of the infeed, paragraph [n0039], also note Qu et al teaches valve 508); and a second flow rate adjustment valve configured to connect the second supply line and the air supply line and further configured to selectively adjust a flow rate of the inflow air or wake air to be supplied to the fuel cell stack (note combination, Qu teaches valve 401 in figs 1-3).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quan as modified by Qu as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Kobayashi (US 2002/0146606 A1).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Quan as modified by Qu is quiet to a humidifier provided in the first supply line at the downstream side of the cooler, the humidifier being configured to humidify the inflow air, wherein the second supply line is disposed between the cooler and the humidifier, and wherein the second supply line is connected with the air supply line.
Kobayashi teaches a fuel cell comprising a compressor (22) for feeding supply gas A to the fuel cell, a main passage W1, an intercooler (23) (abstract), and a humidifier (24) (fig 1). Kobayashi teaches the humidifier disposed upstream of the fuel cell (abstract), with a bypass pipeline that connects between the intercooler and the humidifier (fig 1) so as to supply warm air.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination to further include a humidifier, as it is known in the art to include a humidifier to humidify the process gases so as to avoid drying out of the electrolyte membranes of the fuel cells. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to dispose the second supply line between the cooler and the humidifier, such that the second supply line of the combination can perform the function of purging the water from both the humidifier and the fuel cell stack so that the water does not freeze and damage the components in low temperatures.
All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416, 82 USPQ2d at 1395. MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACKY YUEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5749. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/JACKY YUEN/
Examiner
Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights