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 .
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 is 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 5 recites the phrase "the portion in which the groove is provided" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner has interpreted this as “a portion in which the groove is provided”.
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.
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(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aono (US 20220384819 A1) in view of Okabe et al. (US10340532B2).
Regarding claim 1, Aono teaches a separator for a fuel cell, comprising: multiple gas passages arranged side by side on a facing surface (Fig. 20, 447, [0348]) configured to face a power generating unit of the fuel cell (Fig. 20, 412 [0352]), the gas passages being configured to allow reactant gas to flow through the gas passages (Fig. 20, 447, [0348]); and
multiple cooling passages provided on a cooling surface that is on a side opposite to the facing surface, each cooling passage being located between adjacent ones of the gas passages and being configured to allow a coolant to flow through the cooling passage (Fig. 20, 448, [0348]), wherein
an upstream side and a downstream side in a flow direction of the reactant gas in each gas passage are defined as an upstream side and a downstream side, respectively (Fig 21, see figure below),
the gas passages include:
multiple upstream passages arranged side by side (Fig. 21, 437, [0324], see figure below);
a merging portion that is configured such that the reactant gas flowing through at least two of the upstream passages merges at the merging portion (Fig. 21, 471a, 471b, 471c, [0353]); and
a downstream passage that extends from the merging portion toward the downstream side (Fig. 21, 437A. [0340], see figure below), and
the cooling surface includes:
a downstream end portion, the downstream end portion being a section in one of the cooling passages, the section being located between adjacent ones of the upstream passages and at an end portion of the cooling passage on a downstream side in a flow direction of the coolant ([0341]-[0342], see figure below). However, Aono does not teach that there is a groove that connects the downstream end portion to another one of the cooling passages that is adjacent to the downstream end portion with one of the gas passages in between.
PNG
media_image1.png
327
595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Okabe teaches a separator for a fuel cell comprising of gas passages that configured to face a power generating cell (Fig. 6, AS, Col. 13, lines 41-45) and coolant passages on a side opposite to the facing surfaces and adjacent to gas passages (Fig. 6, CS, Col. 13, lines 34-41). Okabe also teaches that there is a groove that connects cooling passages with each other (Fig. 6, 314, Col. 14, lines 1-5).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the gas passages to include grooves that connect the downstream end portion to another one of the cooling passages that is adjacent to the downstream end portion with one of the gas passages in between. This is because grooves allow flexible arrangement of the flow paths for the coolant without increasing the total number of parts (Okabe et al. Col. 2, lines 28-42).
Regarding claim 2, modified Aono teaches the separator for the fuel cell according to claim 1, wherein the groove is one of at least two grooves, the grooves being provided in portions of the cooling surface that are on a side opposite to two of the upstream passages adjacent to the downstream end portion (Okabe et al. Fig. 6, 314, Col. 14, lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 3, modified Aono teaches the separator for the fuel cell according to claim 2, wherein
the downstream end portion includes an axis that extends linearly, and
the arrangement of two of the upstream passages that are adjacent to the downstream end portion is symmetrical with respect to the axis (Aono Fig. 26, see figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
156
225
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, modified Aono teaches the separator for the fuel cell according to claim 1, wherein
the downstream end portion includes an axis that extends linearly (Aono Fig. 26, see figure below),
two of the upstream passages that are adjacent to the downstream end portion respectively include diagonal portions, the diagonal portions being diagonal with respect to the axis such that the distance between the diagonal portions decreases toward the merging portion (Aono Fig. 26, see figure below), and
the groove is provided in a portion of the cooling surface that is on a side opposite to each of the diagonal portions (Okabe et al. Fig. 6, 314, Col. 14, lines 1-5, see figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
240
199
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Since Okabe teaches that the grooves are placed throughout the gas passages, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add multiple grooves on the gas passages of Aono, including grooves that are on a portion of the cooling surface that is on a side opposite to each of the diagonal portions.
Regarding claim 5, modified Aono teaches the separator for the fuel cell according to claim 1, wherein
the facing surface includes a protrusion in a portion of the facing surface that is on a side opposite to the portion in which the groove is provided, the protrusion protruding into the gas passage (Okabe et al. Fig. 14, 314, Col. 23, lines 14-27), and
the protrusion is inclined such that a protruding amount increases toward the downstream side (Okabe et al. Fig. 14, 314, Col. 23, lines 14-27).
Since the protrusion amount is increasing in either direction, it means that it is inclined toward the downstream side.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YVONNE WEI whose telephone number is (571)270-0870. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30am-5pm, Friday 7:30am-4pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/YVONNE WEI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights