Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/351,143

FUEL CELL SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jul 12, 2023
Examiner
RAYMOND, BRITTANY L
Art Unit
1722
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
774 granted / 1006 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1039
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.8%
+12.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1006 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . 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. Claims 1-3 are 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. The term “highly likely” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “highly likely” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Claim 1 does not describe how to determine when failure determination is highly likely. Claim 2 describes this is in more detail and it is believed that these limitations should be added to claim 1 to show that failure determination is highly likely when the pressure measured by the pressure sensor exceeds a predetermined threshold value. Regarding claims 1-3, it is unclear what a current quick cut-off circuit consists of or how it is performed. 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. 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. Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasuka (JP Publication 2007-311304). Regarding claims 1-3, Hasuka discloses a fuel cell system comprising: a fuel cell 10, a hydrogen gas piping system 3 for supplying hydrogen gas as a fuel gas, and a pressure sensor 43 at the inlet of the fuel cell, wherein the hydrogen gas piping system comprises a shutoff valve 33, a regulator 34, and an injector 35 that uses a solenoid valve, and wherein the system comprises a control device 4 that detects an inlet gas pressure, determines a deviation between the inlet gas pressure and a target pressure, determines if the deviation is greater than a first threshold value, sends out a signal to fully open the injector if it is greater and if not, a second deviation is checked and then proceeds to a regular feedback control, detects the inlet gas pressure again, determines the deviation again, determines if the deviation is higher than a second threshold value, and if it is, sends out a signal to fully close the injector (Paragraphs 0021, 0025, 0045-0051). Hasuka fails to specifically state that the control device switches to a current quick cut-off circuit, and that the inlet pressure is compared to the threshold value. Hasuka teaches that the deviation between the inlet gas pressure and the target pressure is determined when the inlet gas pressure is higher than the target pressure (Paragraph 0050). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that even though Hasuka teaches that the deviation of the pressure values is used to change the opening and closing of the valves, Hasuka also states that this occurs when the inlet pressure is higher than the target pressure, which shows that the inlet pressure is also being compared to the target pressure. It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the fully opening of the solenoid valve in the first adjustment step of Hasuka can be equivalent to the current quick cut-off because the change in flow rate and pressure of the fuel gas will affect the current and the first step is used to prepare for the next check prior to shutting the valve completely. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY L RAYMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-6545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-6 pm. 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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. BRITTANY L. RAYMOND Primary Examiner Art Unit 1722 /BRITTANY L RAYMOND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 12, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603324
LOCALIZED HIGH SALT CONCENTRATION ELECTROLYTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598747
FABRICATING THREE-DIMENSIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592434
Apparatus and Method for Shaping Pouch Film for Secondary Batteries
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586807
FUEL CELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585192
IMPRINT METHOD FOR FABRICATION OF LOW DENSITY NANOPORE MEMBRANE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+10.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1006 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month