Introductory Notes
Any paragraph citation of the instant is in reference to the U.S. published patent application.
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 .
Joint Inventors
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and Species C, claims 1-14 and 16, in the reply filed on 8/17/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 15 and 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and/or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 8/17/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 11 states “a least one” as opposed to “at least one”.
Claim 1 establishes plural versions of a first and second “range of operating positions”, however claims 2-6 each utilize a singular version of the first and second “operating position range”. The claims should be amended to use consistent terms for the ranges.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 9-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the channel system for supplying an anode gas to the fuel cell stack or to the channel system for discharging an anode gas from the fuel cell stack".
Similarly, claim 10 recites the limitation "the channel system for supplying a cathode gas to the fuel cell stack or to the channel system for discharging a cathode gas from the fuel cell stack".
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the respectively associated channel system”.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “a channel system of the fuel cell system”
It is unclear if these are the same or different channel systems than that of claim 1 which includes an OR statement and states “a channel system for at least one of i) supplying a fluid medium to the fuel cell stack and ii) discharging a fluid medium from the fuel cell stack”. It is notably unclear if the instant claims are to a single channel system or multiple channel systems.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 introduces a first and a second range of operating positions. The phrase “range of operating positions” is defined by the instant in as being the inclination of the fuel cell system, see instant [0084]. Therefore “range of operating positions” is being interpreted as the physical inclination of the fuel cell system and is not, for example, various other operating states such as initial startup, idling, etc.
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.
(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 1-11, 13-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CHIKUGO (US 20130202976 A1).
Regarding claim 1, CHIKUGO discloses a fuel cell system (Abstract), comprising at least one fuel cell stack and a channel system for at least one of i) supplying a fluid medium to the fuel cell stack and ii) discharging the fluid medium from the fuel cell stack (as shown in Fig. 1),
a first water collection region in which water collects in a first range of operating positions of the fuel cell system (as shown in Fig. 3, water buffer 6B), and
a first water discharge port by which the water is able to be discharged from the first water collection region (as shown in Fig.3, drainage path 1B),
wherein the fuel cell system comprises at least one second water collection region in which the water collects in a second range of operating positions of the fuel cell system (as shown in Fig. 3, water buffer 6A), and
a least one second water discharge port by which the water is able to be discharged from the second water collection region (as shown in Fig. 3, drainage path 1A).
Regarding claims 2 and 4, CHIKUGO teaches the operating position ranges comprise partial ranges in which no water collects in the one of the water collection regions (time chart shown in Fig. 11B demonstrates situations in which “a fuel cell stack shown in Part (A) is tilted with its right side down” and the reverse would hold true for a tilt to the left; furthermore CHIKUGO discloses multiple teachings toward the tilt of the vehicle, whether that is left to right as discussed in [0112] or front to rear as discussed in [0114]).
Regarding claim 3 and 5, CHIKUGO discloses operating position partial ranges where the lowest point of the channel system is located in each of the water collection regions (as discussed in the rejection of claims 2 and 4, CHIKUGO discloses multiple teachings toward the tilt of the vehicle which involve situations in which water is not collecting in the first water buffer, these situations of CHIKUGO are the same situations in which the second region is lowest; these teachings hold true for the inverse situation for the opposite tilt).
Regarding claim 6, CHIKUGO discloses the first operating position range and the second operating position range together comprise all operating positions of the fuel cell system (the system of CHIKUGO includes situations where “a vehicle equipped with the fuel cell system is abruptly tilted or when the vehicle is subjected to large acceleration” [0043] as such CHIKUGO envisions all operating positions of the fuel cell system with emphasis being placed on “operating” because, as with the instant, in a catastrophic event such as a vehicle rollover there may be ranges outside which the tilt is beyond operational range).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, CHIKUGO discloses the first water discharge port is arranged closer to an anode end plate of the fuel cell stack than to a cathode end plate of the fuel cell stack and that the second water discharge port is arranged closer to a cathode end plate of the fuel cell stack than to an anode end plate of the fuel cell stack (“the anode-gas supply unit (reference sign 2 in FIG. 1) and the cathode-gas supply unit (reference sign 3 in FIG. 1)” [0041]).
Regarding claim 9, CHIKUGO discloses at least one of i) the first water discharge port and ii) the second water discharge port is connected to the channel system for supplying an anode gas to the fuel cell stack or to the channel system for discharging the anode gas from the fuel cell stack (anode-off-gas discharge manifold M, as shown in Fig. 1 and described in [0037]).
Regarding claim 10, CHIKUGO discloses at least one of i) the first water discharge port and ii) the second water discharge port is connected to the channel system for supplying a cathode gas to the fuel cell stack or to the channel system for discharging the cathode gas from the fuel cell stack (anode-off-gas discharge manifold M, as shown in Fig. 1 and described in [0037] which connects to the cathode gas supply via the fuel cell stack S).
Regarding claim 11, CHIKUGO discloses a gaseous medium is at least one of i) able to be discharged from the respectively associated channel system and ii) suppliable to the respectively associated channel system by at least one of i) the first water discharge port and ii) the second water discharge port (anode-off-gas discharge manifold M, as shown in Fig. 1 and described in [0037]).
Regarding claim 13, CHIKUGO discloses the fuel cell system comprises a device for determining a filling state of at least one of i) the first water collection region and ii) the second water collection region (“the amount of the resultant water generated is estimated from the temperature or current value of the fuel cell stack S … ” [0062] where the claimed device is one of the temperature sensor, the current sensor, and/or the control device connected to these sensors) and comprises a control apparatus (“control devices” [0032] which controls the timing of valves 7A and 7B where timing is shown in at least Figs. 9B and 12B), which controls at least one of i) a first valve for closing the first water discharge port (control valve 7B) and ii) a second valve for closing the second water discharge port (control valve 7A) in dependence on at least one of i) the determined filling state of the first water collection region and ii) the determined filling state of the second water collection region (“… determine the required drainage times tA and tB at that point of time” [0062]).
Regarding claims 14 and 16, CHIKUGO discloses the first water collection region and the second water collection region are connected to one another by at least one water compensation channel and the at least one water compensation channel is configured as a water compensation line formed separately from a medium channel of the channel system of the fuel cell system (common exhaust piping 5, as shown in Fig. 1).
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHIKUGO in view of NAGANUMA (US 20160141655 A1).
Regarding claim 12, CHIKUGO discloses a control apparatus (“control devices” [0032] which controls the timing of valves 7A and 7B where timing is shown in at least Figs. 9B and 12B), which comprises at least one of i) a first valve for closing the first water discharge port (control valve 7B) and ii) a second valve for closing the second water discharge port (control valve 7A).
CHIKUGO does not expressly teach a device for determining an operating position of the fuel cell system.
NAGANUMA is directed to discharging water from a vehicle with a fuel cell, like CHIKUGO. NAGANUMA discloses inclination angle detector 70 which “inclination angle detector 70 detects an inclination angle of the fuel cell vehicle 110” [0044] and that the “scavenging processor 15 of the controller 10 executes the scavenging processing based on the detection result from the inclination angle detector 70” [0044].
NAGANUMA teaches inclination angle detector 70 allows for the determination of when the “outlet of the discharging manifold 25 on the anode side is directed upward against the direction of gravity” [0051] as well as whether the system is to perform either a first or second scavenging control step as outlined in Figs. 3 and 6. NAGANUMA further teaches a step involving increasing the supply flow rate of the scavenging gas “when the mobile object is in a predetermined inclined state in which an outlet of the gas flow path is directed upward against a direction of gravity” [0010]. As a result of the inclination angle detector NAGANUMA “even when the rotational speed of the circulation pump is increased for the scavenging at the second supply flow rate, the exhaust water is prevented from being sucked up by the circulation pump” [0010].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the inclination angle detector of NAGANUMA to further refine the timing of control valves of CHIKUGO. The motivation to do so being an increase in the amount of scavenged gas while still preventing exhaust water from being sucked up by the circulation pump.
Therefore, modified CHIKUGO discloses the fuel cell system comprises a device for determining an operating position of the fuel cell system and controlling the valve(s) depending on the determined operating position (as taught by NAGANUMA).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
FUKUMA (US 20230027958 A1) directed to a fuel cell system with “a gas-liquid separator 20 configured to separate moisture in the unreacted hydrogen gas discharged from the anode-side” [0043] as well as “first gas-liquid separator 29 configured to separate the moisture (generated water) in the unreacted oxygen gas discharged from the cathode-side” [0049], as shown in Fig. 1.
MAZZOTTA (US 20130209902 A1) directed to a fuel cell system with water level sensor 22 as described in [0022] and shown in Fig. 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS L MARTIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm ET.
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.
/T.L.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
