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.
Claim Interpretation
It is noted that the limitation “the fuel non-explosion-proof electrical equipment is disposed below the at least one fuel gas leakage risk portion” is a subjective limitation that relies either upon the fuel cell system’s orientation in gravity at a particular moment or the subjective perspective of the viewer, either of which are trivial to change. As a result, this limitation shall be considered met so long as there is a perspective which satisfies the claimed limitation.
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 6 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 6 recites the limitation “the first section" in lines 4, 5, and 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the limitations of claim 6 shall be considered met so long as the parts which claim 6 recites as being provided “in the first section” are provided anywhere.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kimura (US 20220393202 A1).
The applied reference has a common inventor or assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claim 1, Kimura discloses a fuel cell system [0021] comprising:
a fuel cell module including a fuel cell stack ([0037] discloses a fuel cell stack configured by stacking a plurality of cells, the fuel cell system including the fuel cell stack is reasonably interpreted as a fuel cell module despite Kimura not explicitly using the same language as applicant);
a fuel gas system that supplies a fuel gas to the fuel stack ([0049] discloses a fuel gas supply pipe which connects a fuel tank to the fuel cell); and
a ventilation flow generator ([0129] discloses an air supply device 75 which [0130] discloses is configured by, for example, a fan, reading as a ventilation flow generator), wherein
the fuel gas system includes a fuel gas leakage risk portion ([0088] and [0129] discloses a possible fuel gas leak from fuel gas supply pipe 32, reasonably being interpreted as a fuel gas leakage risk portion), and
the ventilation flow generator generates a ventilation flow directed toward the fuel gas leakage risk portion ([0129] discloses that the air supply device which includes the ventilation flow generator (see above) supplies air to the lower duct compartment 70, thus ventilating the lower duct compartment 70. [0129] discloses that as a result, retention of fuel gas in the case where fuel gas supply pipe 32 leaks can be suppressed. As a result, it is understood that the ventilation flow generated generates a ventilation flow directed toward the fuel gas leakage risk portion. This can also be seen in fig. 2, where the air supply device 75 and the fuel gas leakage risk portion 32 can are both depicted, along with the flow direction of the ventilation flow, which can be seen as being in the direction of the fuel gas leakage risk portion).
Regarding claim 2, Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, wherein the fuel gas leakage risk portion includes at least one of a fuel gas pipe joint ([0088] and [0129] list the fuel gas pipe 32 as a place fuel gas might leak from. While Kimura does not explicitly disclose the portion of the pipe that a leak might occur in, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the fuel gas pipe would include pipe joints, and that such joints would be considered a fuel gas leakage risk portion. [0041] additionally discloses a fuel cell side shutoff valve in the fuel gas supply pipe 21 which can also be considered the claimed fuel gas leakage risk portion).
Regarding claim 3, Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, further comprising
non-explosive-proof electrical equipment against the fuel gas ([0159] discloses a non-explosion proof device that does not comply with a predetermined explosion-proof structure standard as peripheral equipment 11, and discloses that peripheral equipment 11 may include DC/DC converter 311 arranged in the fuel cell compartment 30 or valve assembly attached to the fuel tank 41 arranged in the tank compartment 40, thus these parts reasonably read as “against the fuel gas”), wherein
the ventilation flow generator directs the ventilation flow in a direction different from a direction of the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment (as can be seen in fig. 2, 75 and 74, the ventilation flow generator directs ventilation flow in a direction different from a direction of non-explosion-proof electrical equipment in fuel cell compartment 30 or fuel tank 41).
Regarding claim 4, as best understood based on the claim interpretation provided above Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 3, wherein
the fuel gas is a hydrogen gas [0004], and
the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment is disposed below the at least one fuel gas leakage risk portion which is included as the fuel gas leakage risk portion (It is noted that the limitation “the fuel non-explosion-proof electrical equipment is disposed below the at least one fuel gas leakage risk portion” is a subjective limitation that relies either upon the fuel cell system’s orientation in gravity at a particular moment or the subjective perspective of the viewer, either of which are trivial to change (see claim interpretation above). In the instant case, Kimura identifies in [0159] a non-explosion proof device that does not comply with a predetermined explosion-proof structure standard as peripheral equipment 11, and discloses that peripheral equipment 11 may include DC/DC converter 311 arranged in the fuel cell compartment 30 or valve assembly attached to the fuel tank 41 arranged in the tank compartment 40. Both the fuel cell compartment 30 and tank compartment 40 is disposed in a direction with respect to the fuel gas leakage risk portion/fuel gas supply pipe 32 (see fig. 5) and as a result the limitations of the instant claim 4 can be considered met).
Regarding claim 6, Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 3, further comprising:
an intake port and a ventilation port ([0067] discloses an air supply port 30g and an exhaust port 30h which can be considered the claimed intake port and ventilation port);
a ventilation device that ventilates ([0166]; and
a gas detector that detects a fuel gas concentration (abstract discloses a first detector that detects a concentration of fuel), wherein
an operation of the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment is stopped, when the gas detector detects the fuel gas concentration equal to or higher than a predetermined value (abstract).
Regarding claim 7, Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, wherein
the ventilation flow generator is a blower fan ([0130] discloses the duction compartment air supply device being configured by, for example, an air supply fan. A blower fan is traditionally understood in the art to be a fan which, rather than circulating normal air, leads air forcefully through a small outlet to a particular region. As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would understand the ventilation flow generator of Kimura to be a blower fan (see fig. 2 and [0130]).
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lanzinger (US 20190245228 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lanzinger discloses a fuel cell system (abstract) comprising:
a fuel cell module including a fuel cells stack [0017]-[0018];
a fuel gas system that supplies a fuel gas to the fuel cell stack generator ([0017] discloses a hydrogen fuel gas supplied to the fuel cell stack); and
a ventilation flow generator ([0038] discloses a means by which forced ventilation can be initiated, such as, for example, a blower), and
the ventilation flow generator generates a ventilation flow toward the fuel gas leakage risk portion ([0038] discloses that hydrogen sensors monitor whether hydrogen is diffusing or leaking from a piping system, and that if hydrogen is detected, forced ventilation is immediately initiated, thus reasonably reading on a ventilation flow being generated toward the fuel gas leakage risk portion).
Regarding claim 2, Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, wherein the fuel gas leakage risk portion includes at least one of a fuel gas pipe joint ([0038] lists the fuel gas piping system as a place fuel gas might leak from. While Lanzinger does not explicitly disclose the portion of the pipe that a leak might occur in, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the fuel gas pipe would include pipe joints, and that such joints would be considered a fuel gas leakage risk portion. [0005] additionally discloses that hydrogen leakage may occur at interfaces between the tank module and supply line and between the supply line and fuel cell module, as well as valves and regulators, and these locations be also be considered as fuel gas leakage risk portions).
Regarding claim 3, Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, further comprising
non-explosive-proof electrical equipment against the fuel gas ([0014] discloses that a goal of Lanzinger is minimize the risk of an explosion in order to partially or completely dispense of the use of expensive explosion-protected components. As a result, the electrical equipment of Lanzinger is reasonably considered non-explosion-proof. [0022]-[0023] discloses that there is a risk of hydrogen gas accumulating from a leak and the, when the system is turned on, sparks from the electrical components of the fuel cell system can cause the hydrogen-air mixture to explode, and thus the non-explosive-proof electrical equipment can reasonably be considered to be “against the fuel gas”), wherein
the ventilation flow generator directs the ventilation flow in a direction different from a direction of the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment ([0038] hydrogen sensors which enable the immediate initiation of forced ventilation when hydrogen is detected, with [0021] disclosing that ventilation lowers the hydrogen concentration in the area of the fuel cell system. As a result, it can reasonably be interpreted that the ventilation flow generated directs the ventilation flow in a direction different from a direction of the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment).
Regarding claim 4, Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 3, wherein
the fuel gas is a hydrogen gas (see claim 3 rejection above). Lanzinger does not explicitly disclose in what direction the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment is disposed in relative to the fuel gas leakage risk portion, however it is noted that the limitation “the fuel non-explosion-proof electrical equipment is disposed below the at least one fuel gas leakage risk portion” is a subjective limitation that relies either upon the fuel cell system’s orientation in gravity at a particular moment or the subjective perspective of the viewer, either of which are trivial to change (see claim interpretation above). Further, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would know that as the fuel cell system of Lanzinger includes both the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment and the fuel gas leakage risk portion, that the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment must necessarily be disposed in a direction from the fuel gas leakage risk portion, and as a result the claimed limitation is considered met. It is also noted that even if the limitation “blow the fuel gas leakage risk portion” was redefined in a non-subjective way, because the specific location of the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment relative to the fuel gas leakage risk portion is not explicitly provided, choosing one would be a matter of routine selection to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 5, Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, further comprising:
A first section that stores the fuel cell module, the fuel gas system, and the ventilation flow generator ([0003] discloses that typical fuel cell systems involve a fuel cell stack and multiple other components such as lines for supplying fresh operating gasses (fuel gas system), sensors, valves, and more assembled compactly and accommodated in a common housing which includes most or all of the previously mentioned components. Fig. 1 shows a housing 14 [0037] that can be considered the claimed first section which includes fuel cell assembly 30, hydrogen feed lines 31 and 32 (fuel gas system, see [0034]), and ventilation flow generator ([0038] discloses that the ventilation flow generator is not included in the illustration, but ventilate the housing 14 and therefore would also be provided in the first section);
a second section that stores an air intake portion of a cathode air system to be connected to the fuel cell module ([0036] discloses that cathode operating gas enters through an air supply line 10 which is depicted in fig. 1. The section that stores the cathode operating gas (not depicted) can be considered the claimed second section); and
a barrier wall that blocks a flow of air between the first section and the second section in a portion other than the cathode air system (the side wall which forms the housing 14 and is interposed between the inside of the first section and the storage for the cathode operating gas can be considered the claimed barrier wall).
Regarding claim 7, Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, wherein the ventilation flow generator is a blower fan [0038].
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(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura (US 20220393202 A1), in view of Matsuda (JP 2022026242 A, a machine translation from espacenet is used as an English equivalent).
Regarding claim 5, Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, further comprising:
a first section that stores the fuel cell module, the fuel gas system, and the ventilation flow generator (Kimura discloses a fuel cell ship which can be considered the claimed first section [0033]), but does not disclose a first section that stores the fuel cell module, the fuel gas system, and the ventilation flow generator, a second section that stores an air intake portion of a cathode air system to be connected to the fuel cell module; and
a barrier wall that blocks a flow of air between the first section and the second section in a portion other than the cathode air system.
However, these features were known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement in the fuel cell system of Kimura. For example, Matsuda discloses a fuel cell system [0001] fueled by hydrogen gas and comprising a fuel cell stack [0017], wherein the fuel cell system comprises a first section that stores a fuel cell module [0015], a fuel gas system ([0017], [0026], and a ventilation flow generator [0021];
a second section that stores an air intake portion of a cathode air system to be connected to the fuel cell module [0025]; and
a barrier wall that blocks a flow of air between the first section and the second section in a portion other than the cathode air system ([0019], [0083]-[0084]). Matsuda discloses that this results in a configuration where multiple fuel cells with high power output that are highly mass producible are installed in parallel and are effective [0005]. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the first and second sections and barrier wall of Matsuda in the invention of Kimura, for at least the motivations mentioned above, resulting in a fuel cell system according to claim 5.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanzinger (US 20190245228 A1) in view of Suematsu (US 20070224473 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 3, further comprising:
an intake port and a ventilation port provided in a first section ([0034] discloses a connection point 6 which can be considered the claimed intake port, as can be seen in fig. 1 the connection point 6 connects the hydrogen supply line 4 to the fuel cell module [0033] and as a result can be considered a port for the intake of hydrogen fuel. [0023] discloses a 3/2-way valve which can be considered the claimed ventilation port. [0023] discloses that the 3/2-way valve opens a flow path between the fuel cell assembly and the surrounding atmosphere, and therefore can be considered a ventilation port);
a ventilation device that ventilates the first section [0038]; and
a gas detector that detects a fuel gas concentration within the first section [0021].
Lanzinger does not disclose that an operation of the non-explosion-proof electrical equipment is stopped when the gas detector detects the fuel gas concentration equal to or higher than a predetermined value, however Lanzinger does disclose that the fuel cell system can be monitored by hydrogen sensors, and that appropriate safety measures can be immediately initiated in response to an increased hydrogen concentration [0021]. Stopping the operation of electrical equipment in response to a detection of a hydrogen gas is a known safety measure in the art which would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement in the invention of Lanzinger.
For example, Suematsu discloses a gas leak detection device and fuel cell system (title), wherein sensors/a leak detection execution portion detects a hydrogen gas leak and stops the operation of the fuel cell, and that as a result, a waste of hydrogen due to the leak can be prevented [0086]. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature of Suematsu wherein operation of the fuel cell is stopped once a detection of a concentration of hydrogen reaches a certain amount in the invention of Lanzinger, both as an appropriate safety measure to shut down electrical equipment in response to increased hydrogen concentration ([0021] of Lanzinger) as well as a method of preventing a waste of hydrogen due to a gas leak ([0086] of Suematsu), and doing so would result in a fuel cell system according to claim 6).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura (US 20220393202 A1), in view of Nakamura (JP 2011029117 A, a machine translation from Espacenet is used as an English equivalent).
Regarding claim 8, Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, wherein the ventilation flow generator is a fan [0130], but does not disclose that the ventilation flow generator is a suction fan. However, using a suction fan as a ventilation flow generator for a fuel cell system was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement in the fuel cell system of Kimura.
For example, Nakamura discloses a fuel cell device (title), wherein the fuel cell device is provided with a supply power adjustment part ([0008]) on which an air intake (suction) port and intake (suction) fan is provided which serves the function of preventing dust or rain or the like from entering into the power supply adjustment part [0010] and in providing ventilation [0047]. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the ventilation flow generator fan of Kimura as a suction fan as nothing more than a matter of routine selection of one known ventilation fan for fuel cell systems for another to achieve the predictable results of providing a ventilation flow generator, and also to achieve the functions outlined above.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanzinger (US 20190245228 A1) in view of Nakamura (JP 2011029117 A, a machine translation from Espacenet is used as an English equivalent).
Regarding claim 8, Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, wherein the ventilation flow generator is a blower fan [0038], but does not disclose that the ventilation flow generator is a suction fan. However, using a suction fan as a ventilation flow generator for a fuel cell system was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement in the fuel cell system of Lanzinger.
For example, Nakamura discloses a fuel cell device (title), wherein the fuel cell device is provided with a supply power adjustment part ([0008]) on which an air intake (suction) port and intake (suction) fan is provided which serves the function of preventing dust or rain or the like from entering into the power supply adjustment part [0010] and in providing ventilation [0047]. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the ventilation flow generator fan of Kimura as a suction fan as nothing more than a matter of routine selection of one known ventilation fan for fuel cell systems for another to achieve the predictable results of providing a ventilation flow generator, and also to achieve the functions outlined above.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanzinger (US 20190245228 A1) in view of Hoffjann (US 20080038597 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, wherein the fuel cell module and the fuel gas system are accommodated in a common housing ([0037] discloses a housing 14, as can be seen in fig. 1 the fuel cell module 3 [0034] and the hydrogen feed lines 31/32 [0034] (fuel gas system) are accommodated in a common housing,
the housing is connected to an external fuel gas pipe disposed outside the housing ([0033] discloses hydrogen supply line 4, as can be seen in fig. 1, the hydrogen supply line 4 is disposed outside the housing.
Lanzinger does not disclose that the external fuel gas pipe includes an inner pipe and an outer pipe, with the space between the two being ventilated by a ventilation flow generator, wherein the fuel gas leakage risk portion is located to overlap the gap between the inner pipe and the outer pipe, however such a ventilated dual-pipe configuration is known in the art and would have been obvious to implement into the design of Lanzinger.
For example, Hoffjann discloses a known method of mitigating hydrogen-line leak risk wherein a hydrogen line is designed in double-walled fashion and provided with a ventilation system between an inner and an outer pip in order to blow off the escaping hydrogen in case the inner pipe develops a leak [0005]. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the ventilated double-walled hydrogen pipe of Hoffjann as the hydrogen supply line of Lanzinger as an extra method of mitigating hydrogen leak risk. This would result in a configuration where the inner pipe is connected to the fuel gas system within the housing, the outer pipe is disposed with a predetermined gap with respected to an outer peripheral surface of the inner pipe, the ventilation flow generator includes a fluid introduction portion that introduces fluid into a gap of the external pipe, and the fuel gas leakage risk portion is located to overlap the gap between the inner pipe and the outer pipe, when viewed from a connection side of the external gas pipe with respect to the housing.
Neither Lanzinger or Hoffjann explicitly disclose that the gap between the inner pipe and the outer pipe is opened into the housing, however after modifying Lanzinger to include the double-walled ventilated pipe of Hoffjann, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that the between the inner pipe and the outer pipe must necessarily open somewhere on either end of the pipe, and would find it obvious to routinely select a spot to put it, such as within the portion of the pipe present within the housing, satisfying the limitations of claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, modified Lanzinger discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 9, wherein
the fuel cell module is located within the housing [0037] and on a side opposite to a connection side between the housing and the external fuel gas pipe with respect to the fuel gas leakage risk portion (as can be seen in fig. 1, the fuel cell module is located on a side opposite to a connection side between the housing and the external fuel gas pipe (see fuel cell assembly 30 in fig. 1)), and
a shielding plate is disposed between the fuel cell module and the fuel gas leakage risk portion ([0037] discloses a cover 7 which protects the hydrogen supply line which can be considered the claimed shielding plate).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura (US 20220393202 A1) in view of Hoffjann (US 20080038597 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 1, wherein
the fuel cell module and the fuel gas system are accommodated in a common housing ([0040] discloses a fuel cell side shutoff and fuel gas supply pipe (fuel gas system) provided in a fuel cell compartment 30 (common housing) along with fuel cell stack 31 [0040], [0037] (fuel cell module)),
the housing is connected to an external fuel gas pipe disposed outside the housing (fuel gas supply pipe 32 supplies the fuel from an external tank to the fuel cell module and fuel gas system, see fig. 5).
Kimura does not disclose that the external fuel gas pipe includes an inner pipe and an outer pipe, with the space between the two being ventilated by a ventilation flow generator, wherein the fuel gas leakage risk portion is located to overlap the gap between the inner pipe and the outer pipe, however such a ventilated dual-pipe configuration is known in the art and would have been obvious to implement into the design of Kimura.
For example, Hoffjann discloses a known method of mitigating hydrogen-line leak risk wherein a hydrogen line is designed in double-walled fashion and provided with a ventilation system between an inner and an outer pip in order to blow off the escaping hydrogen in case the inner pipe develops a leak [0005]. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the ventilated double-walled hydrogen pipe of Hoffjann as the fuel gas supply pipe of Kimura as an extra method of mitigating hydrogen leak risk. This would result in a configuration where the inner pipe is connected to the fuel gas system within the housing, the outer pipe is disposed with a predetermined gap with respected to an outer peripheral surface of the inner pipe, the ventilation flow generator includes a fluid introduction portion that introduces fluid into a gap of the external pipe, and the fuel gas leakage risk portion is located to overlap the gap between the inner pipe and the outer pipe, when viewed from a connection side of the external gas pipe with respect to the housing.
Neither Kimura or Hoffjann explicitly disclose that the gap between the inner pipe and the outer pipe is opened into the housing, however after modifying Kimura to include the double-walled ventilated pipe of Hoffjann, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that the between the inner pipe and the outer pipe must necessarily open somewhere on either end of the pipe, and would find it obvious to routinely select a spot to put it, such as within the portion of the pipe present within the housing, satisfying the limitations of claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, modified Kimura discloses the fuel cell system according to claim 9, wherein
the fuel cell module is located within the housing ([0041, fig. 6) and on a side opposite to a connection side between the housing and the external fuel gas pipe with respect to the fuel gas leakage risk portion (as can be seen in fig. 6, the fuel cell module spans the length of the housing and therefore is located on a side opposite to a connection side between the housing and the external fuel gas pipe), and
a shielding plate is disposed between the fuel cell module and the fuel gas leakage risk portion ([0062] discloses that the outer wall of the fuel cell compartment may be an iron plate, which can be considered the claimed shielding plate provided between the fuel gas leakage risk portion and the fuel cell module).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACKARY R COCHENOUR whose telephone number is (703)756-1480. The examiner can normally be reached 1-9:00PM 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, Nicholas Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/ZACKARY RICHARD COCHENOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 4 August 2026
Prosecution Insights