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 Interpretation
The use of the phrasing in the limitation ‘wherein the magnet is arranged between two of the plurality of openings and is oriented so that a direction between a north pole and a south pole corresponds to the main direction’ has been interpreted that the magnet being described in the limitation is referring to a magnet that is somehow incorporated into the design of the fuel cell stack, as the use of the term “corresponds” does not actively describe any true orientation of the magnet to the stack array. As long as the prior art teaches a magnet arranges between a plurality of openings for leading reactants, it is considered that a direction between a north pole and a south pole of the magnet corresponds to the main direction, which is the stacking direction of the electrodes forming the fuel cell.
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.
Claims 1-6, and 9 are rejected on the grounds of 35 USC 112(b) on the grounds of having an indefinite use of language that creates an undefined element in the claim. In claim 1, the manifold plate is defined with the following element:
“The manifold plate further comprising a magnet, wherein the magnet is arranged between two of the plurality of openings and is oriented so that a direction between a north and south pole of the magnet corresponds to the main direction.”
It is found that the use of the word ‘corresponds’ in this claim does not define the orientation of the magnet relative to the other elements in the claim, and as this element reads on the claim must be rejected.
Claims 2-6, and 9 are dependent on claim 1 and are therefore rejected in view of claim 1’s rejection.
Claim 3 specifically repeats the wording of claim 1 and is rejected on the same basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being taught by Minoru et al. in JP2011187432-AI (English Translation attached).
Regarding claim 1; Minoru et al. teaches of a fuel cell (diagram item 20/21, Figure(s) 1-4) consisting of a manifold plate (a fuel cell, such that the openings along the structure create ports for the movement of reagent gas through the structure acting as a manifold consisting of a plated structure for the fuel cell, paragraphs 2-4 of page 4). These fuel cells contain electrodes (page 3 paragraphs 3-10), openings for the reactants to move through the manifold system (figure elements 211, 212, 231, 232) that are arranged along the main direction of the manifold plate. The manifold that shapes the fuel cells include magnets within them (figure elements 51 and 52) which have north and south poles inherently. The magnets (51 and 52) are arranged between the plurality of openings (211, 212, 231, 232), therefore it is considered that a direction between a north and south pole of the magnets corresponds to the stacking direction of electrodes 21 forming the fuel cell (see the claim interpretation section above).
Regarding claim 2; Minoru et al. teaches of a fuel cell (diagram item 20/21) that has a magnetic material (diagram items 51/52) which outputs a magnetic field that reaches through the fuel cell (page 7 paragraph 1), which would include the cathode, after the fuel cells are assembled to the apparatus.
Regarding claim 3; Minoru et al. teaches of a design of a fuel cell stack (figure element 20/21) that when assembled forms a manifold for the fuel cell stack (page 4 paragraphs 2-4) that incorporates magnets into the design of the stacking of the fuel cells (figures 1 &3, where the ‘magnetic material’ can be seen as relying on the stacking of the fuel cells).
Regarding claim 4; Minoru et al. teaches of magnets material being arranged within the manifold forming fuel cells (figures 1 & 3, elements 20/21 for the fuel cells, elements 51/52 for the magnetic materials).
Regarding claim 5; Minoru et al. teaches of a construction of a fuel cell stack that serves as a manifold where the fuel cell is made up of multiple layers, or plies, where the magnetic material is located within the layers of the fuel cell, layers that include the outer layer of the fuel cell (this can be seen in figure 3, where items 51/52 are located in the outermost component wall of the fuel cell, separator parts 23(a) & 23(b)).
Regarding claim 7; Minoru et al. teaches of a fuel cell stack that includes electrodes (page 3 paragraphs 3-10) and a fuel cell assembly that forms a manifold when the stack is assembled consisting of plates that form the fuel cell (see figures 1 & 3).
Regarding claim 8; Minoru et al. teaches of a fuel cell stack that includes electrodes (page 3 paragraphs 3-10) and a fuel cell assembly that forms a manifold when the stack is assembled consisting of plates that form the fuel cell (see figures 1 & 3). In figure 3 the magnets (figure items 51/52) can be seen as surrounding the internal components of the fuel cell 21 including the electrodes (22).
Regarding claim 9; Minoru et al. teaches of a fuel cell (figure item 20/21) being used in an aircraft (page 18 paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 10; Minoru et al. teaches of a fuel cell (figure item 20/21) being used in an aircraft (page 18 paragraph 5) as a part of being mounted to a vehicle, such as an electric vehicle, or otherwise connected to an electrical consumer such as an electric motor (page 2 paragraph 5).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), 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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over obviousness in the scope of prior art as taught by Minoru et al. in further view of Hibino JP 2001155746 A.
Minoru et al. teaches of a fuel cell (diagram item 20/21) consisting of a manifold plate (a fuel cell, such that the openings along the structure create ports for the movement of reagent gas through the structure acting as a manifold consisting of a plated structure for the fuel cell, paragraphs 2-4 of page 4). These fuel cells contain electrodes (page 3 paragraphs 3-10), openings for the reactants to move through the manifold system (figure elements 211, 212, 231, 232) that are arranged along the main direction of the manifold plate. The manifold that shapes the fuel cells include magnets within them (figure elements 51 and 52) which have north and south poles inherently.
Minoru does not teach of the kinds of magnets being used in the fuel cell stack
Hibino teaches of fuel cell, incorporating magnets and electrodes and a manifold system to guide reagent and waste gas through the system (paragraph 1 and 2). Hibino also teaches that the magnets used in the fuel cell can be of the class of permanent or electromagnets (paragraph 31). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the permanent or the electromagnets of Hibino for the magnets of Minoru, because selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use, in the instant case a magnet to be used in a fuel cell manifold, supports prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKIL JALIL MONDIE whose telephone number is (571)270-7804. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM - 5:00PM.
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.
/A.J.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights