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 .
Drawings
The previous objections to Figure 3 and Figure 4 have been withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Specification
The previous objections in [0013] line 29, and [0014] line 15 are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 1, Claim 1 recites that “the fuel supply path is connected to the fuel container, extends parallel to the end plate…” [emphasis added]. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim to distinguish which end plate is being referenced. For compact prosecution, “the end plate” is interpreted to mean the end plate of the fuel cell stack to which the fuel circulation path extends parallel after the position that merges with the fuel supply path.
Regarding Claim 1, Claim 1 recites that “the fuel circulation path extends parallel to an end plate after the position that merges with the fuel supply path, and includes a bent portion downstream of a merging portion with the fuel supply path” [emphasis added]. The use of an indefinite article for “a merging portion” renders the scope of the claim unclear. The recitation of “the position that merges with the fuel supply path” implies that the fuel circulation path and fuel supply path merge once and once only. Introducing “a merging portion” subsequently in the recitation creates ambiguity as to whether more than one merging portion is being claimed.
Claim 2, by virtue of its dependence on Claim 1 also lacks sufficient antecedent bases.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karnik et al. (“Control Analysis of an Ejector Based Fuel Cell Anode Recirculation System” - copy furnished with Office Action) in view of Ichida et al. (JP2018106977A - copy furnished with previous Office Action).
Regarding Claim 1, Karnik discloses a fuel cell system configured to recirculate fuel off gas that has not been used for power generation of a fuel cell (see Figure A), wherein: the fuel cell system includes a fuel cell stack (see Figure A) a fuel container (see Figure A), a fuel supply path (see Figure A) and a fuel circulation path (see Figure A); the fuel circulation path is connected to a fuel outlet of the fuel cell stack (see Figure A) the fuel supply path is connected to the fuel container (see Figure A), extends parallel to the end plate ((see Figure A), and the fuel circulation path extends parallel to an end plate after the position that merges with the fuel supply path (see Figure A), and includes a bent portion downstream of a merging portion with the fuel supply path (see Figure A), and is connected to a fuel inlet of the fuel cell stack downstream of the bent portion (see Figure A). Karnik does not however disclose that the fuel supply path merges with the fuel circulation path at a position in which a center of the fuel supply path is offset from a center of the fuel circulation path.
PNG
media_image1.png
841
1429
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A: Annotated Figure 1 from Karnik et al.
Ichida discloses a fuel cell system configured to recirculate fuel off gas that has not been used for power generation of a fuel cell (abstract). Ichida further discloses wherein the fuel supply path merges with the fuel circulation path at a position in which a center of the fuel supply path is offset from a center of the fuel circulation path ([0030-0031] for the purposes of promoting mixing of the anode gas and the anode off gas to achieve a uniform concentration ([0007]). Karnik and Inaba are each analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely fuel cell systems configured to recirculate fuel off gas. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to have modified the fuel cell system of Karnik with the offset of a fuel supply path center relative to a fuel circulation path center as taught by Ichida for the purposes of promoting mixing for a uniform concentration of anode gas and anode off gas.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karnik et al. (“Control Analysis of an Ejector Based Fuel Cell Anode Recirculation System”) in view Ichida et al. (JP2018106977A) as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Inaba et al. (JP2005361420 – copy furnished with previous Office Action).
Regarding Claim 2, Ichida discloses the fuel cell system according to Claim 1 (20 – see Figure B) wherein in the fuel circulation path (160 – see Figure B), a hydrogen pump (165 – see Figure B) is disposed upstream of the merging portion (Cn1 – see Figure B) but does not disclose an injector disposed upstream of the merging portion.
PNG
media_image2.png
505
745
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure B: Annotated Figure 3 from Ichida et al. (JP2018106977A)
Inaba discloses a fuel cell system configured to recirculate fuel off gas that has not been used for power generation of a fuel cell (1 – see Figure C). Inaba further discloses a hydrogen pump (39 – see Figure C) disposed in the fuel circulation path (32 – see Figure C) upstream of the merging portion (A1 – see Figure C) with the fuel supply path (31 – see Figure C) and an injector (35 – see Figure C) in the fuel supply path disposed upstream of the merging portion, the latter of which rapidly adjusts fuel gas supply pressure and consequently improves power generation responsiveness ([0006-0007]). Karnik, Ichida, and Inaba are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely fuel cell systems configured to recirculate fuel off gas. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify the fuel cell system of Karnik in view of Ichida to dispose an injector upstream of the merging portion of the two paths as taught by Inaba to more rapidly adjust fuel gas supply pressure and improve power generation responsiveness.
PNG
media_image3.png
825
1402
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure C: Annotated Figure 1 from Inaba et al. (JP2005361420)
Response to Applicant remarks
Applicant’s remarks filed June 30, 2026 with respect to the amendments to Claim 1 and the prior rejections of Claim 1 and Claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 respectively have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous claim rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon reconsideration, the claims are now rejected as discussed above.
References cited but not relied upon
The additional prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Baaser et al. (US8129056B2) discloses a fuel cell system with a fuel cell circulation path that extends after the position that merges with the fuel supply path.
Liso et al. (“Influence of anodic gas recirculation on solid oxide fuel cells in a micro combined heat and power system” – copy furnished with Office Action) discloses a fuel cell system with a fuel cell circulation path that extends parallel to a fuel cell stack end plate after the position that merges with the fuel supply path.
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 Kent G. Mendoza whose telephone number is (571)482-9953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00 EST.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1487. 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.
/K.G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights