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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the 2nd line of claim 2, replace “comprises” with “comprise” after “at least two support protrusions”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 2021/0135253), cited in the Information Disclosure Statement dated January 15, 2024, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2017/0170491).
Regarding independent claims 1 and 16, as well as claim 2, Yoo et al. disclose a unitized fuel cell (see abstract; paragraphs [0033]-[0065]; and Figures 1, 2, 3A, 3B, and 4A), in which the unitized fuel cell includes the following structural features:
a cell frame (200) comprising an electricity generating assembly (EGA) in the form of a membrane-electrode assembly (110) bonded to a frame, the cell frame (200) comprising a manifold hole (reaction surface through-hole (201)) disposed at an end part of the frame and a reaction gas guide part (in the form of reactant gas through-holes (210a,210b)) extending from the manifold hole (201), wherein the manifold hole (201) is configured to allow a reaction gas to pass therethrough (see abstract; paragraphs [0035] and [0036]; and Figure 1);
a plurality of (at least two) support protrusions (230) extending in a direction in which the reaction gas flows and spaced apart from one another in a width direction, wherein the plurality of (at least two) support protrusions (230) are disposed on the reaction gas guide part (210a,210b) of the cell frame (200) – see Figures 2, 3A, 3B, and 4A;
flow paths through which the reaction gas flows defined between adjacent support protrusions (230) of the plurality of support protrusions (230) – see Figures 2, 3A, 3B, and 4A; and
a pair of bipolar plates (120a,120b) respectively laminated on both sides of the cell frame (200), the pair of bipolar plates (120a,120b) comprising:
a first bipolar plate (120a) configured to form a flow path of the reaction gas together with the reaction gas guide part (210a,210b) of the cell frame (200), the first bipolar plate (120a) having a recessed hole disposed on a part corresponding to the reaction gas guide part (210a,210b) to expose a part of the reaction gas guide part (210a,210b) therethrough (see Figure 1); and
a second bipolar plate (120b) bonded to the cell frame (200) – see Figure 1.
Yoo et al. do not disclose the new limitations (of independent claims 1 and 16) that the reaction gas guide part is a planar structure, and at least two support protrusions disposed on the planar structure of the reaction gas guide part of the cell frame.
However, Kim et al. disclose a fuel cell (abstract; paragraphs [0029]-[0041]; and Figures 1-3), in which the fuel cell includes gas diffusion layers (140), cathode and anode bipolar plates (300,400), and a reaction gas guide part (gas channel (420)) having a planar structure in portions thereof, wherein at least two support protrusions (located adjacent cooling channel (440) and gas channel (420) in Figures 2 and 3) extend from the planar structure portion of the reaction gas guide part (420) of the cell frame, wherein these additional features are advantageous for reducing a pressure difference due to cooling medium flow, thus increasing cooling efficiency (see paragraphs [0042] and [0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants’ invention was made to modify the structure of the unitized fuel cell disclosed by Yoo et al., by including that the reaction gas guide part has a planar structure with at least two support protrusions disposed on the planar structure, as taught by Kim et al., in order to reduce a pressure difference due to cooling medium flow, thus increasing cooling efficiency (Kim et al.; paragraphs [0042] and [0043]).
Regarding claim 3, Yoo et al. disclose that the first bipolar plate (120a) is supported by the support protrusions (230) on the reaction gas guide part (210a,210b), and the reaction gas flow paths are defined through adjacent support protrusions (230) of the plurality of support protrusions (230) and the first bipolar plate (120a) – see paragraphs [0035] and [0058]; and Figures 1 and 2.
Regarding claims 4-6, Yoo et al. disclose that the support protrusions (230) are covered by the first bipolar plate (120a) of the pair of bipolar plates (120a,120b), and at least one support protrusion (230) of the plurality of support protrusions (230) extends up to the manifold hole (201) and is exposed through the recessed hole, wherein a height of a point exposed through the recessed hole is higher than a height of a point covered by the first bipolar plate (120a), and a difference in height between the point covered by the first bipolar plate (120a) and the point exposed through the recessed hole is equal to a thickness of the first bipolar plate (120a) – see paragraphs [0035] and [0058]; and Figures 1 and 2.
Regarding claim 7, Yoo et al. disclose that the support protrusions (230) are covered by the first bipolar plate (120a), and at least one support protrusion (230) of the plurality of support protrusions (230) extends to a point spaced apart for a predetermined distance from the manifold hole (201) and is exposed through the recessed hole – see paragraphs [0035] and [0058]; and Figures 1 and 2.
Regarding claims 8-10, Yoo et al. disclose that the support protrusions (230) are all covered by the first bipolar plate (120a), at least two support protrusions (230) of the plurality of support protrusions (230) extend toward the manifold hole (201), and a partition wall is disposed between the adjacent support protrusions (230) of the plurality of support protrusions (230) in the direction in which the reaction gas flows, wherein the partition wall is disposed at a point exposed through the recessed hole on the reaction gas guide part (210a,210b) – see paragraphs [0035], [0058], and [0061]-[0064]; and Figures 1, 2, 3A, 3B, and 4A.
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Yoo et al. disclose that the manifold hole (201) comprises an inlet manifold hole and an outlet manifold hole disposed at both end parts of the frame, respectively, and the reaction gas guide part comprises an inlet guide part disposed on an inlet manifold hole side, an outlet guide part disposed on an outlet manifold hole side, and the plurality of support protrusions (230) are disposed on the inlet guide part and the outlet guide part, respectively (see paragraphs [0058]-[0064]; and Figures 2, 3A, 3B, and 4A).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Yoo et al. disclose that the support protrusions (230) of the inlet guide part and the support protrusions (230) of the outlet guide part have different separation distances in the width direction, and the support protrusions (230) of the outlet guide part have different widths at a point exposed by the recessed hole and at a point covered by the bipolar plates (120a,120b) – see paragraphs [0058], [0064], and [0065]; and Figures 1, 2, 3A, 3B, and 4A.
Regarding claim 14, Yoo et al. disclose that, on the outlet guide part, the plurality of support protrusions (230) extend toward the manifold hole (201) and are exposed through the recessed hole, and a partition wall is disposed between exposed points of the adjacent support protrusions (230) of the plurality of support protrusions (230) along the direction in which the reaction gas flows (see paragraphs [0058], [0064], and [0065]; and Figures 1, 2, 3A, 3B, and 4A).
Regarding claims 15 and 19, Yoo et al. disclose that the frame comprises a plastic material (see paragraphs [0035] and [0039]-[0041]).
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Yoo et al. disclose that a projection part is disposed along the support protrusions (230) on the second bipolar plate (120b), and the projection part of the second bipolar plate (120b) is inserted into and supported by the support groove of the frame, in which the support groove and the projection part are shaped to extend along the support protrusions (230) – see paragraphs [0058], [0064], and [0065]; and Figures 1, 2, 3A, 3B, and 4A.
Response to Arguments
The examiner acknowledges the applicants’ amendment received by the USPTO on September 17, 2026. The amendments to the specification and abstract overcome the prior objections to the drawings and abstract, respectively. A new objection is also raised for amended claim 2 (see above section 1). Although the amendments to independent claims 1 and 16 overcome the prior 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection, a newly provided reference to Kim et al. (US 2017/0170491) is now applied in combination with You et al. (US 2021/0135253) in a new 35 USC 103 rejection for all claims of record. Claims 1-20 remain under consideration in the application.
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection includes a new reference to Kim et al. (US 2017/0170491), and thus does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicants' 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 KEVIN P KERNS whose telephone number is (571)272-1178. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/KEVIN P KERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735 October 13, 2026
