POWER GENERATION CELL AND FUEL CELL STACK
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 1/8/2024 and 12/4/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 (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.
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.
Claims 1-3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sugita et al. (US 2012/0258377 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 5, Sugita et al. teach a power generation cell comprising (Figs. 1-2 show a fuel cell, element 10, as a part of a stack, element 12.):
a resin-framed membrane electrode assembly including a membrane electrode assembly and a resin frame provided on an outer periphery of the membrane electrode assembly (Paragraph 0052; Figs. 1 and 5 disclose a resin frame, element 28 b, framing the outer circumferential edges of the membrane electrode assembly, element 18.);
a first separator stacked on a first surface of the resin-framed membrane electrode assembly (Fig 1, element 16);
a second separator stacked on a second surface of the resin-framed membrane electrode assembly (Fig. 1, element 20); and
a reactant gas passage extending through the first separator and the second separator to allow a reactant gas to flow in a stacking direction (Fig. 1 discloses an oxygen-containing gas supply passage, element 30 a, which flows in the stacking direction of the second separator, element 20, the MEA, element 18, and the first separator, element 16.), wherein
the second separator includes a reactant gas flow field configured to allow the reactant gas to flow along an electrode surface of the membrane electrode assembly (Figs. 1 and 9 show the second separator, element 20, comprising ax oxygen-containing gas flow field, element 84. Fig. 1 further shows element 84 flowing along the electrode surface of the adjacent MEA, element 18.),
the first separator includes a connection flow path in communication with the reactant gas passage, and the resin frame includes a through-hole connecting the reactant gas flow field and the connection flow path to each other (Fig. 7 shows the first separator, element 16, which comprises inlet grooves, element 87 a, which correspond to the claimed connection flow path. Paragraph 0081 discloses the inlet grooves, element 87 a, below the oxygen-containing gas supply passage, element 30 a. Further, Fig. 5 discloses the resin frame, element 28 b, which comprises inlet grooves, element 56 a, and correspond to the claimed through-hole, which are connected to the oxygen-containing supply passage, element 30a. Paragraph 0102 discloses the inlet grooves, element 87a, of the first separator, element 16, communicate with the inlet grooves, element 56 a, of the resin frame, element 28 b.).
Regarding claim 2, Sugita et al. teach the power generation cell according to claim 1, wherein
the reactant gas passage includes a reactant gas supply passage (Fig. 5 discloses an oxygen-containing gas supply passage, element 30a.) and a reactant gas discharge passage (Fig. 5 discloses an oxygen-containing gas discharge passage, element 30 b.),
the connection flow path includes:
a first connection flow path connected to the reactant gas supply passage (Fig. 7 discloses inlet grooves, element 87 a); and
a second connection flow path connected to the reactant gas discharge passage (Fig. 7 discloses outlet grooves, element 87 b.), and
the through-hole includes:
a first through-hole connecting the reactant gas flow field and the first connection flow path to each other (Paragraph 0102; Fig. 5, element 56 a.); and
a second through-hole connecting the reactant gas flow field and the second connection flow path to each other (Paragraph 0102; Fig. 5, element 56 b.).
Regarding claim 3, Sugita et al. teach the power generation cell according to claim 2, wherein the second separator (Fig. 9 shows the second separator, element 20.) includes:
an introduction flow path for introducing the reactant gas introduced from the first through-hole into the reactant gas flow field (Paragraph 0087 discloses an inlet buffer, element 104 a, provided on the upstream side of the oxygen-containing gas flow field, element 84.), and
a lead-out flow path for discharging the reactant gas having flowed through the reactant gas flow field to the second through-hole (Paragraph 0087 discloses an outlet buffer, element 104 b provided on the downstream side of the oxygen-containing gas flow field.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugita et al. (US 2012/0258377 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sato et al. (US 2020/0381749 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Sugita et al. teach the power generation cell according to claim 1. However, they do not teach wherein an adhesive layer that bonds the first separator and the resin frame to each other, and the adhesive layer individually surrounds the reactant gas flow field and the reactant gas passage while blocking the reactant gas.
Sato et al. teach a first resin frame of a power generation cell (Abstract; Fig. 2, element 25), wherein the power generation cell includes a pair of first gas separators (Fig. 2, elements 40, 50), a membrane electrode assembly placed between the first gas separators (Fig. 2, element 18). Further, they disclose an adhesive layer that bonds the first separator and the resin frame to each other, and the adhesive layer individually surrounds the reactant gas flow field and the reactant gas passage while blocking the reactant gas (Paragraph 0042; Fig. 3 disclose positions of adhesive sealing portions, elements 24, 26, 27, provided on a back side to the surface illustrated in FIG. 3 and formed linearly between the gas separator, element 50, and the first resin frame, element 25, overlapping each other are indicated by broken lines. At the adhesive sealing portions, elements 24, 26, 27, the first resin frame, element 25, is airtightly bonded to the gas separators, elements 40, 50. The adhesive sealing portion, element 24, seals the refrigerant manifolds constituted by the manifold holes, elements 32, 35. The adhesive sealing portions, element 26, surround and seal the gas manifolds constituted by the manifold holes, elements 31, 33, 34, 36.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sugita with Sato in order to restrain a decrease in flow of fuel and oxidation gases.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Sugita et al. teach the fuel cell stack according to claim 5. However, they do not teach wherein between the first separator and the second separator adjacent to each other, a coolant flow field through which a coolant flows is provided, a passage seal surrounding the reactant gas passage is provided, and a flow field seal surrounding the coolant flow field is provided, and wherein the passage seal and the flow field seal are provided only on the first separator out of the first separator and the second separator.
Sato et al. teach a first resin frame of a power generation cell (Abstract; Fig. 2, element 25), wherein the power generation cell includes a pair of first gas separators (Fig. 2, elements 40, 50), a membrane electrode assembly placed between the first gas separators (Fig. 2, element 18). Wherein between the first separator and the second separator adjacent to each other (Fig. 2, elements 40 and 50 are adjacent.), a coolant flow field through which a coolant flows is provided (Figs. 2 and 3 discloses manifolds, element 32, to form a refrigerant supply.) , a passage seal surrounding the reactant gas passage is provided (Paragraph 0040; Fig. 3 disclose gaskets, element 60, which seal gas manifold holes, elements 31, 33, 34, and 36.) , and a flow field seal surrounding the coolant flow field is provided (Paragraph 0040; Fig. 3 discloses a gasket, element 86, collectively seals refrigerant manifolds, elements 32, 35.), and wherein the passage seal and the flow field seal are provided only on the first separator out of the first separator and the second separator (The entire reference discloses only one separator comprises gaskets.). Further, both the passage seal and the flow field seal are made of a rubber material (Paragraph 0040 discloses the gaskets are made of an elastic body such as rubber.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sugita with Sato in order to restrain a decrease in flow of fuel and oxidation gases.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL S GATEWOOD whose telephone number is (571)270-7958. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, Ula Tavares-Crockett can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
Daniel S. Gatewood, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1729
/DANIEL S GATEWOOD, Ph. D/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729 May 27th, 2026
Prosecution Insights