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.
Specification
The specification and drawings have been reviewed and no clear informalities or objections have been noted.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 1-22) in the reply filed on 7/14/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that both groups could be searched without a search burden. This is not found persuasive. The two groups are distinct for the reasons set forth in the restriction requirement mailed 6/16/2026 and have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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) 1-3, 5, 9-11, 13-15 and 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN 104617318 A with references made to the machine translation) in view of Lugtigheid (US 2011/0286913).
Regarding claims 1 and 21, Yang discloses a system for zero-emission propulsion for a vehicle (this limitation recited an intended use of the system and does not further define a structure of the claimed system, see MPEP §2111.02), said system comprising:
an aluminum/water reaction assembly (as depicted in Figs. 1-2), said aluminum/water reaction assembly comprising:
an aluminum/water reactor (reaction chamber 3) configured to react an aluminum-containing reactant from an aluminum-containing reactant source (such as the aluminum loaded into the reactor described in paragraph 43) with a water reactant from a water reactant source (water is pumped from booster pump 1/11 and described in paragraph 45) to form an aluminum-containing reaction product (as a result of the reaction of water with aluminum which produces aluminum oxide as described in paragraph 53) , and a hydrogen-containing gas mixture (as described in paragraph 53);
a first heat exchanger in thermal communication with the aluminum/water reactor (heat exchanger 2/12 which is described in paragraph 55 and teaches that it exchanges heat with the reactor to produce superheated steam);
a mechanical assembly (turbine 4) in communication with the hydrogen-containing gas mixture (see Fig. 1 which illustrates hydrogen flowing to turbine 4 to generate electricity in generator 5);
a fuel cell assembly (fuel cell 8/19) in communication with the aluminum/water reactor (as depicted in the figures), said fuel cell assembly comprising:
a fuel cell (8/19) configured to react an amount of hydrogen-containing gas mixture from the aluminum/water reactor with an amount of oxygen directed to the fuel cell to form electricity and a water byproduct (seeing that water is produced in the fuel cell, there must be a source of oxygen to produce water with an electrochemical reaction with hydrogen);
a second heat exchanger in thermal communication with the fuel cell (heat exchanger 21).
Yang, however, does not expressly teach a collector for the aluminum-containing reaction product or teaching a motor in communication with the fuel cell.
Lugtigheid also discloses a system for hydrogen generation (see abstract).
Lugtigheid, like Yang, teaches a solid material that reacts with water to produce hydrogen and a solid byproduct. In the case of Yang, the solid byproduct is aluminum oxide (as discussed above) and in the case of Lugtigheid, the solid byproduct is an aluminum hydroxide (paragraph 248). Lugtigheid goes on to teach that after reaction, this solid byproduct is collected in a spent fuel compartment (5) and goes on to teach that this spent fuel is collected and regenerated (paragraph 276). Lugtigheid, like Yang, also discloses a fuel cell which utilizes the hydrogen produced and goes on to teach that this fuel cell can power an electric motor of a vehicle (paragraphs 288-290).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to add the aluminum solid product collector of Lugtigheid to the system of Yang in order to collect the solid byproduct and regenerate it. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize the fuel cell power of Yang to power a motor, as disclosed by Lugtigheid, in order to generate power for a vehicle.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Yang, as modified above, further discloses the mechanical assembly further comprises a mechanical propulsion assembly, said mechanical propulsion assembly configured to convert thermal energy into mechanical power (the turbine 4 of Yang converts a portion of the thermal energy of the hydrogen stream into mechanical energy which turns a generator to generate electricity).
Regarding claim 5, Yang further discloses the water byproduct produced in the fuel cell is configured to recirculate from the fuel cell to the aluminum/water reactor (see Figs. 1 and 2 which illustrate water out of the fuel cell 8 be recirculated back to the reactor 3).
Regarding claim 9, Yang further discloses the first heat exchanger is configured to harvest waste heat from at least one of the aluminum-containing reaction product collectors and the aluminum/water reactor (as a result of it surrounding the reactor, as depicted in the figures where the heat exchanger/jacket 2 surrounds the reactor 3).
Regarding claim 10, Yang further discloses the second heat exchanger (21) is configured to harvest waste heat from the water byproduct from the fuel cell (see Fig. 2 where the second heat exchanger 21 is in thermal contact with the water byproduct from the fuel cell)
Regarding claim 11, Yang does not teach where the oxygen comes from for the fuel cell. More specifically, Yang does not teach an amount of oxygen reacted in the fuel cell with the hydrogen reaction product is delivered to the fuel cell as atmospheric oxygen.
Lugtigheid teaches that the fuel cell gets its oxygen from air/atmospheric oxygen (paragraph 201).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize atmospheric air for the fuel cell, as taught by Lugtigheid, in order to provide a reactant to react with hydrogen in the fuel cell of Yang.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Yang, as modified above, further discloses at least one of the first heat exchanger and the second heat exchanger is configured to direct at least a portion of waste heat generated in the system to address a thermal demand of a different vehicle system (the first heat exchanger (2) sends superheated steam to a steam turbine/different vehicle system (6) where electricity is produced).
Regarding claim 15, Yang, does not expressly teach a heat to power device comprising a thermoelectric device.
Lugtigheid teaches utilizing recovered heat in a thermo-electric device to generation of electricity (paragraph 41).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize the recovered heat form the first heat exchanger in Yang to produce electricity with the thermoelectric configuration of Lugtigheid. Furthermore, such a modification is nothing more than a simple substitution of one known generator (turbine) for another (thermo-electric generator) to yield entirely predictable results.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Yang further discloses a fluid medium (such as water, as depicted in Fig. 1) in communication with at least one of the first heat exchanger (2) and the second heat exchanger, said at least one of the first heat exchanger and the second heat exchanger configured to increase a temperature of said fluid medium from an initial fluid medium temperature to a second fluid medium temperature (see paragraph 15 which discloses heating the water to superheated steam).
Regarding claim 19, Yang further discloses the system produces zero hydrocarbon emissions (Yang does not produce any emissions other than hydrogen and water).
Regarding claim 20, Yang, as modified above, further discloses T said system is further in communication with a rechargeable battery (see paragraph 247 of Lugtigheid).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN 104617318 A with references made to the machine translation) in view of Lugtigheid (US 2011/0286913) and further in view of Godart (WO 2024/097986 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Yang, as modified above, teaches the generation of hydrogen out of the reactor which is then sent to the mechanical assembly (turbine 4), but does not teach the inclusion of a water separator in communication with the mechanical assembly.
Godart also discloses a process for generating hydrogen via a reaction of aluminum with water and then sending the generated hydrogen to a fuel cell (paragraph 13). Godart goes on to teach placing a steam separator in between the aluminum reactor and the fuel cell in order to remove water and purify the hydrogen prior to the fuel cell (paragraph 13 and 149-153).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to add the water separator of Godart to the system of modified Yang in order to remove water from the hydrogen stream prior to entrance into the fuel cell. Such a modification would place the water separator in communication with the mechanical assembly.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN 104617318 A with references made to the machine translation) in view of Lugtigheid (US 2011/0286913) and further in view of LeVan (US 2007/0017369).
Regarding claim 6, Yang does not teach recycling the unreacted hydrogen that exits the fuel cell back to the fuel cell.
LeVan also discloses a fuel cell (see abstract).
Yang teaches a fuel cell system which includes a separator (swing adsorption) on the anode exhaust (which contains unreacted hydrogen) in order to separate the hydrogen out of the exhaust and recycle it back to the inlet of the fuel cell to produce more power with the same initial amount of hydrogen (paragraph 5).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to add the hydrogen recycle of LeVan to the system of modified Yang in order to convert more hydrogen in the fuel cell and generate more power from the hydrogen generated in the aluminum reactor.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN 104617318 A with references made to the machine translation) in view of Lugtigheid (US 2011/0286913) and further in view of Gervasio (US 2020/0243888).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Yang teaches a fuel cell for generating electricity, but does not explicitly teach a solid oxide fuel cell or a proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell.
Gervasio also discloses a fuel cell system (see abstract).
Gervasio teaches a number of fuel cell types are capable of being utilized for propelling a vehicle including solid oxide fuel cells and proton exchange membrane fuel cells (see paragraph 314).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize either of the fuel cell technologies of Gervasio (solid oxide or PEM) in the system of modified Yang, in order to produce electricity and power an electric motor/vehicle.
Claim(s) 12, 16 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN 104617318 A with references made to the machine translation) in view of Lugtigheid (US 2011/0286913) and further in view of Rosenband (US 2010/0173225).
Regarding claim 12, Yang does not teach where the oxygen comes from for the fuel cell. More specifically, Yang does not teach an amount of oxygen reacted in the fuel cell with the hydrogen reaction product is delivered to the fuel cell enriched oxygen or pure oxygen.
Rosenband also discloses a fuel cell system (see abstract).
Rosenband teaches that the fuel cell gets its oxygen from a tank comprising pure oxygen (paragraph 201).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize pure oxygen, as taught by Rosenband, in order to provide a reactant to react with hydrogen in the fuel cell of Yang.
Regarding claim 16, Yang does not teach that the aluminum is in powder form.
Rosenband teaches that the aluminum-water reaction can be achieve with a known variety of configuration of the aluminum reactant, including powders, flakes, chips, pieces, plates, sheets, etc. (paragraph 39). Rosenband also discloses that powders can result in fast reaction times due to their large surface areas (paragraph 22).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize the aluminum powder of Rosenband in the system of modified Yang in order to react the aluminum with the water at a high reaction rate.
Regarding claim 22, Yang does not teach an aircraft containing the disclosed fuel cell system.
Rosenband teaches that the fuel cell system can be utilized to power an airplane (see paragraph 201).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize the system of modified Yang in order to power an aircraft as in Rosenband. Such a modification is nothing more than a simple substitution of one know fuel cell electricity use (vehicle) for another (airplane) to yield entirely predictable results.
Relevant Prior Art
US 6,908,699 – Discloses a power system in which Al reacts with an aqueous solution to generate hydrogen which is then supplied to a fuel cell, similar to the instant invention.
US 2024/0159170 – Discloses an aluminum/water system having a collector to remove the solid byproduct as well as a heat exchanger to remove heat and subsequently generate electricity from both the heat and the hydrogen, similar to the instant invention.
WO 2014/113880 A1 - Discloses an aluminum/water reactor which produces aluminum oxide which is collected and regenerated, similar to the instant invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J MERKLING whose telephone number is (571)272-9813. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8am-6pm.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/MATTHEW J MERKLING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights