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
Claims 11-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method of making a flow field component, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 22 April 2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of the flow field component in the reply filed on 22 April 2026.
In addition, a telephonic election without traverse of species B, drawn to the flow field component comprising a plate that is a single piece of stainless steel, was made on 02 June 2026 by the attorney of record, Stephen A. Sequin II.
Claim 8 is withdrawn from further consideration, as well, pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species of the flow field component comprising a plate that is a single piece of titanium. Election was made without traverse in the telephonic election made on 02 June 2026.
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 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hercz et al (WO 2024/209212 A2). This prior art reference being cited to as Hercz hereinafter in this Office Action.
Regarding claim 1, Hercz discloses a flow field component (2512 Fig. 25C; “separator plate 2512” p. 55 L 25), comprising a plate having a first side (the bottom of separator plate 2512 shown in Fig. 25C, or “the protrusions 1337 and ribs 2538 form a convex surface on the second side of the separator plate” p. 55 LL 32-33 with italics added for emphasis on the feature corresponding to the claimed first side of the claimed plate and “the second fluid flow region in a second fluid volume 1365 is defined between the outer surface of the electrochemically active cell area 1350 of the adjacent cell unit and the (concave or depressed side of the) ribs 1337” p. 46 LL 25-27) and an oppositely facing second side (the top of separator plate 2512 shown in Fig. 25C, or “a concave surface on the first side of the separator plate” p. 55 L 33 with italics added for emphasis on the feature corresponding to the claimed second side of the claimed plate and “The concavity forms a first fluid volume 1360” p. 57 L 15 and indicated as 1360 in Fig. 25C), the plate having an undulating profile defining a plurality of segments (2538 Fig. 25C; “ribs 2538” p. 55 L31) and a plurality of channels between the segments (1337 shown in Fig. 25C has a space in its convex portion; “protrusions 1337 define the height of the first fluid flow region 1360” p. 55 L 34-p. 56 L1) on at least the first side of the plate (the height of protrusions 1337 is in the direction upward from the bottom surface of separator plate 2512), the undulating profile including some of the segments in a first reference plane (“The network of interconnected ribs may include end ribs 2538a, b, which are fluidicaliy connected to a protrusion 1337 at only one end” p. 56 LL 5-6, or the distal ends of the network of ribs shown in Fig. 25C) and others of the segments in a second reference plane that is parallel to and spaced from the first reference plane (the plane at a higher elevation than the previously cited end ribs that all of the other ribs in the middle portion of the separator plate 2512 are disposed on).
Regarding claim 2, Hercz discloses the flow field component with all the features set forth in claim 1 above, and wherein the some of the segments remain in the first reference plane and the others of the segments remain in the second reference plane in a first condition wherein the plate is under a first compressive load (compressive loads are understood in the art to be a pushing force applied to a structure inwardly – in the case of the Hercz prior art, the corresponding compressive load acts along the thickness direction of the disclosed cell unit 300 in a stack. Therefore, pertaining to this limitation, “a separation between the second side of the separator plate and the first side of the cell layer. In a non-operational mode, when the pressure on each of the first and second sides of the separator plate is the same, the separation may decrease.” p. 19 LL 7-8 where no compressive load is applied because pressure on the top and bottom of the disclosed separator plate is the same and is in a static or net zero condition), the others of the segments being at least partially in the first reference plane in a second condition wherein the plate is under a second compressive load that is greater than the first compressive load (“(for fuel cell operation, for electrolysis cell operation only a first fluid may be provided).” p. 8 LL 19-22 with italics added for emphasis on the corresponding second condition of Hercz such that the net force applied on the disclosed separator plate is in the downward direction of the separator plate shown from the perspective of Fig. 25C).
Regarding claim 3, Hercz discloses the flow field component with all the limitations set forth in claim 2 above, and wherein all of the segments are in the first reference plane in the second condition (“The cell stack may also be configured such that the first side of the separator plate contacts an outermost layer of the electrochemically active cell area of an adjacent cell unit, providing electrical contact therebetween and having a contact resistance that decreases as the pressure difference between the first side and the second side of the separator plate increases.” p. 9 LL 25-28, “a higher pressure in the first fluid volume relative to the second fluid volume increases the contact force between the separator plate and the electrochemically active cell area of an adjacent cell unit thereby decreasing the contact resistance” p. 55 LL 16-19, and “By bringing the downward protrusions into contact with the electrochemically active area of an adjacent neighbouring cell unit the contact resistance decreases, i.e. conductivity through the stack is improved.” p. 10 LL 3-5).
Regarding claim 4, Hercz discloses the flow field component with all the features set forth in claim 3 above, and wherein the first compressive load corresponds to zero compressive force (as cited in claim 2 above, , “a separation between the second side of the separator plate and the first side of the cell layer. In a non-operational mode, when the pressure on each of the first and second sides of the separator plate is the same, the separation may decrease.” p. 19 LL 7-8 where no compressive load is applied because pressure on the top and bottom of the disclosed separator plate is the same and is in a static or net zero condition), the second compressive load corresponds to at least one of a load associated with positioning the flow field component within an electrolysis assembly and a load associated with operation of the electrolysis assembly (as cited in claim 2 above, “(for fuel cell operation, for electrolysis cell operation only a first fluid may be provided).” p. 8 LL 19-22 with italics added for emphasis on the corresponding second condition of Hercz such that the net force applied on the disclosed separator plate is in the downward direction of the separator plate shown from the perspective of Fig. 25C).
Regarding claim 5, Hercz discloses the flow field component with all the features set forth in claim 1 above, and wherein the plate is elastically deformable such that the others of the segments are repeatedly moveable between the first reference plane and the second reference plane (“The separator plate may, for example, be a planar metal sheet that is non-porous, or any other planar sheet that is non-porous, and which acts to separate one ceil unit from an adjacent cell unit in a stack.” p. 57 LL 8-10 where planar metal sheets are known in the art to have properties inherent to the material of being elastically deformable).
Regarding claim 6, Hercz discloses the flow field component with all the features set forth in claim 1 above, and including a plurality of second segments and a plurality of second channels on a second side of the plate that is opposite from the first side (the top surface of the ribs 2538 and protrusions 1337 formed in separator plate 2512 shown in Fig. 25C corresponds to the claimed plurality of second segments and plurality of second channels, while the bottom surface of ribs 2538 and protrusions 1337 formed in separator plate 2512 shown in Fig. 25C corresponds to the claimed plurality of segments and plurality of channels as recited in claim 1), wherein at least some of the second segments are at least partially oriented at an oblique angle relative to the first reference plane (the protrusions 1337 closer to the end ribs 2538a, b on the top surface of the separator plate 2512 shown in Fig. 25C is oblique to electrochemically active cell area 1350).
Regarding claim 7, Hercz discloses the flow field component with all the features set forth in claim 6 above, and wherein the at least some of the second segments move toward being parallel with the first reference plane when the plate is subjected to a compressive load (“By bringing the downward protrusions into contact with the electrochemically active area of an adjacent neighbouring cell unit the contact resistance decreases, i.e. conductivity through the stack is improved.” p. 10 LL 3-5 and “a higher pressure in the first fluid volume relative to the second fluid volume increases the contact force between the separator plate and the electrochemically active cell area of an adjacent cell unit thereby decreasing the contact resistance” p. 55 LL 16-19).
Regarding claim 10, Hercz discloses the flow field component with all the features set forth in claim 1 above, and wherein the plate is stamped into a shape establishing the undulating profile with the segments in the respective reference planes (“a separator plate having a first side and a second side is provided. The separator plate may be produced by cutting or stamping.” p. 57 LL 7-8).
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hercz (WO 2024/209212 A2) in view of Ohara et al (US 2004/0170882 A1). The latter prior art reference cited to as Ohara hereinafter in this Office Action.
Regarding claim 9, Hercz discloses the fluid flow component with all the features set forth in claim 1 above, but does not disclose wherein the plate comprises a single piece of stainless steel.
However, Ohara discloses a fluid flow component comprising a plate (10 Fig. 1; “a corrugated metal plate 10” [0052]) having an undulating profile (“plurality of conductive Separator plates, each comprising a corrugated metal plate having ridges and grooves that are alternately formed in parallel” [0010]).
Ohara teaches wherein the plate comprises a single piece of stainless steel (The material used for the corrugated metal plate in accordance with the present invention is preferably a thin plate … such as Stainless Steel” [0049]).
Ohara furthermore teaches that stainless steel is a suitable material for single piece undulating plates used as a fluid flow component because of its good electric conductivity properties and is capable of easy formation into the undulating profile by press working or the like ([0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to replace the fluid flow component of Hercz with the fluid flow component of Ohara from the perspective of wherein the plate comprises a single piece of stainless steel, in order to achieve a fluid flow component that has good electric conductivity and has capabilities of being easily formed into the undulating profile by press working or the like.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLENE BERMUDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0610. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday generally from 12 PM to 5 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/CHARLENE BERMUDEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights