DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The amendment filed 06/02/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-8, 10, and 12-19 remain pending.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 10 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive because Chae et al. (US 8,114,548) does not expressly teach a clamping device. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Uchiyama et al. (US 2021/0226244), previously presented. See Response to Arguments.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 10, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae et al. (US 8,114,548) in view of Uchiyama et al. (US 2021/0226244).
Regarding claim 1, Chae teaches a fuel cell with auxiliary electric power supply comprising:
an end plate on the side of the anode 114 substituted (structurally integrated) by the auxiliary electric power supply 120 (storage device for storing electrically energy) (col. 3, line 20-22).
Moreover, while the present embodiment presents an example of substituting the end plate on the side of the anode 114 with the auxiliary electric power supply 120, it is also possible that the end plate on the side of the cathode 116 is substituted by the auxiliary electric power supply 120 or both end plates on the sides of the anode 114 and the cathode 116 are substituted by the auxiliary electric power supply 120 (col. 3 lines 23-31). Figure 1 to Chae is provided below.
PNG
media_image1.png
816
784
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chae does not expressly teach a clamping device including the end plate and fuel cells.
Uchiyama, directed to a fuel cell module, teaches end plate 12, fuel cell stack 11 in which one or more fuel cell unit cells 11a, and fastening members 13 (clamping device) (Fig. 1). Figure 1 to Uchiyama is provided below.
PNG
media_image2.png
828
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have a clamping device because fuel cell modules are known to have end plates clamping the fuel cell stack and are provided with a load-applying mechanism (para 0002).
Regarding claim 2, Chae does not teach the end plate is made of a carbon fiber reinforced polymer.
Uchiyama teaches the material of each end plate is not particularly restricted, and it may be a metal such as stainless steel, or fiber-reinforced plastic such as carbon fiber reinforced plastic or glass fiber reinforced plastic (para 0056).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to select any of the recited material based on the desired strength and weight requirements.
Regarding claim 10, Chae teaches opening 132 is formed in the end plate 130 such that the outside air is supplied to the cathode 116 (col. 3, line 38-col. 4, line 2).
Regarding claim 18, Uchiyama teaches a pair of end plates 12 clamping the fuel cell stack 11 in the stacking direction of the fuel cell stack 11, and fastening members 13 that are fastened to the pair of end plates 12, thereby constraining the fuel cell stack 11 (Fig. 1).
Claims 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae et al. (US 8,114,548) in view of Uchiyama et al. (US 2021/0226244) as applied to claim 1 above, and further view in view of Linde et al. (US 2019/0181452).
Regarding claim 3, Chae teaches the auxiliary electric power supply can be a lithium polymer battery (col. 1, lines 49-50). Chae does not expressly teach two electrode piles separated by a separator ply (i.e., the construction of the battery).
Linde, directed to a battery cell, teaches the battery cell comprises an anode, a cathode, and a separator (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that lithium batteries include essential elements including an anode, a cathode, and a separator.
Regarding claim 4, Linde teaches at least one of the anode or the cathode may comprise a carbon fiber laminate comprising a plurality of carbon fiber plies (para 0037).
Regarding claim 5, Chae teaches the auxiliary electric power supply can be a lithium polymer battery (col. 1, lines 49-50); therefore, must contain lithium. Official Notice is taken with respect that common positive active materials for lithium-ion batteries include LiCoO2, NMC-oxides, and LiFePO4, all which include lithium ions.
Regarding claim 6, Linde teaches separator 5 may have been obtained by the lamination of eight plies of glass fiber spread tow tapes, impregnated with a matrix such as for example a resin of HexFlow® RTM6 commercialized by Hexcel® (para 0101).
Regarding claim 7, Linde teaches other elements of the battery include charge (current) collectors (para 0102).
Regarding claim 8, Linde teaches a plurality of a cathode 3, an anode 4, and a separator 5 (Fig. 2). A battery commonly contains stacks of these alternating elements.
Claims 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae et al. (US 8,114,548) in view of Uchiyama et al. (US 2021/0226244) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Li et al. (CN 109904486), machine translation.
Regarding claim 12, Chae does not teach a heating device producing heat when fed with electrical energy.
Li, directed to a bipolar fuel battery, teaches a heating resistance layer in the galvanic pile of a bipolar plate surface, at the same time through the circuit design, the heating resistance layer is connected with the external power supply (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further comprise resistive heating as a way to realize the fast warm-up of the galvanic pile itself through the fuel cell in order to solve the problem for starting fuel battery with low temperature, raising low temperature environment adaptability of the fuel cell (abstract).
Regarding claim 13, Li teaches a heating resistor layer 3 attached to the perimeter of a bipolar plate (Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 14, Chae teaches end plate includes a lithium polymer battery (col. 1, lines 49-50) and Li teaches heating done through external power supply.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the battery of Chae as the external power supply to provide the resistive heating.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Li teaches the end plate assists the one or more fuels cells in operating an electrical consumer (Fig. 3).
Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae et al. (US 8,114,548) in view of Uchiyama et al. (US 2021/0226244) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Deguchi (JP 2001-28807), machine translation.
Regarding claim 17, Chae does not teach wherein the one or more of fuel cells are electrically connected to the end plate for charging the one or more integrated storage devices with electrical energy produced in the fuel cell.
Deguchi, directed to a hybrid battery, teaches charging a secondary battery with a fuel cell (para 0011).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to charge the battery with surplus electric power generated by a fuel cell (para 0011) when the power demand on the fuel cell is low.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae et al. (US 8,114,548) in view of Uchiyama et al. (US 2021/0226244) as applied to claim 18 above, and in further view of Guenther et al. (US 2023/0387443).
Regarding claim 19, Chae in view of Uchiyama does not teach a clamping device including a rod tension.
Guenther, directed to a fuel cell assembly with improved contact pressure distribution, teaches a fuel cell stack assembly utilizing tension rods and washers and end-plates to apply compressive force to a fuel stack (Fig. 16A-B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a clamping device such as tension rods in order to hold the fuel cell together and provide uniform contact pressure distribution across the active area of fuel cells in a fuel cell stack (abstract). Moreover, a tension rod and through-hole clamping device is viewed as design choice given multiple clamping devices known in the prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues Chae does not teach the at least one or more storge devices structurally integrated into the end plate; and that the auxiliary electric power supply in Chae is laminated on the MEA. In response, Applicant’s invention, as recited in claim 1, is essentially wherein the end plates of the fuel cell module are batteries. In Chae, because the end plate is a battery, Chae meets the claimed limitation of “structurally integrated into the end plate”. This is exemplified in Applicant’s Fig. 2. In Applicant’s Figure 2, the fuel cell module includes a pair of end plates clamped together, where the end plates are electrical storage devices. Moreover, Figure 2 also appears to show the end plates are similarly laminated on the MEA. For theses reasons, the prior art rejections are made.
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 CARLOS BARCENA whose telephone number is (571)270-5780. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8-5 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571)272-3066. 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.
/CARLOS BARCENA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights