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 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.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (JP 2016-042413 A) in view of Abouatallah et al. (US 2006/0210850 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yoshida et al. discloses a leak inspection apparatus (200; fig. 1) configured to inspect a leakage state of a product (100) including a first flow path (13h; fig. 10) and a second flow path (13j), the first flow path (13h) and the second flow path (13h) being separated from an external space through a first intermediate member (anode gas flow path 13h and cooling fluid flow path 13j are separated from an external space by welding at outer periphery 13m; fig. 11 and ¶ [0025]) respectively and being separated from each other through a second intermediate member (anode gas flow path 13h and cooling fluid flow path 13j are separated from each other by sealing material applied to portions 13p; ¶ [0025]), the leak inspection apparatus (200) comprising: a gas supply unit (251, 261; fig. 2A) configured to supply inspection gas to the first flow path (13h) at a first pressure and supply the inspection gas to the second flow path (13j) at a second pressure lower than the first pressure (test medium supply unit 251 and test medium supply unit 261 supply test gas to the flow paths at different pressures; ¶¶ [0051, 0056]); detectors (256, 266) to detect inspection gas flowing out from each of the first flow path and the second flow path (detector 256 detects helium test gas and detector 266 detects hydrogen test gas through flow paths 13h and 13j; ¶¶ [0054, 0056]); and a processing device performs a first determination to determine whether there is leakage of the inspection gas from each of the first flow path (13h) and the second flow path (13j) to the external space based on inspection gas detected by the detectors (256) in a first period (T1; fig. 15C) after supply of the inspection gas (some processing device determines a through leak from flow paths 13h and 13j to an external space based on detection by detector 256; ¶¶ [0051-0052]); and performs a second determination to determine whether there is leakage of the inspection gas from the first flow path (13h) to the second flow path (13j) based on inspection gas detected by the detectors (256) in a second period (T3; fig. 15C) after the first period (some processing device determines an internal leak between flow paths 13h and 13j based on test gas detected by detector 266; ¶¶ [0040), wherein in the first determination, the processing device determines that there is a defect in the first intermediate member (welding) when it is determined that there is leakage of the inspection gas to the external space in the first period (T1), while determines that there is no defect in the first intermediate member (welding) when it is determined that there is no leakage of the inspection gas to the external space in the first period (detection of a leak of test gas to an external space is determination of a defect in the welding at outer periphery 13m and no detection of a leak is determination of no defect in the welding), wherein in the second determination, the processing device determines that there is a defect in the second intermediate member (sealing material at portions 13p) when it is determined that there is leakage of the inspection gas from the first flow path (13h) to the second flow path (13j) in the second period (T3), while determines that there is no defect in the second intermediate member (sealing material) when it is determined that there is no leakage of the inspection gas from the first flow path (13h) to the second flow path (13j) in the second period (detection of an internal leak of test gas between flow paths 13h and 13j is determination of a defect in the sealing material at portions 13p and no detection of a leak is determination of no defect in the sealing material).
Regarding claim 2, Yoshida et al. discloses wherein a permeability coefficient of the first intermediate member (welding) is different from a permeability coefficient of the second intermediate member (as separator 13 is made of metal containing a conductive material and sealing material is made of thermosetting resin, they have different permeability coefficients; ¶¶ [0019, 0030]).
Regarding claim 3, Yoshida et al. discloses wherein the product (100) is one of a fuel cell stack (fuel cell 100 is made of stack 10 of fuel cell units 10a; fig. 8 and ¶ [0017]) and a power generation cell, wherein each of the first flow path and the second flow path is one of an anode flow path through which fuel gas flows (anode gas flow path 13h; ¶ [0020]), a cathode flow path through which oxidant gas flows (cathode gas flow path 14h; ¶ [0023]), and cooling flow path through which cooling medium flows (cooling fluid flow path 13j; ¶ [0020]), wherein the second intermediate member is one of: a gas permeable member separating the anode flow path from the cathode flow path; and a gas-impermeable member (sealing material applied to portion 13p) separating the anode flow path (13h) and the cathode flow path (14h) from the cooling flow path (13j, 14j; ¶ [0025]).
Regarding claim 6, Yoshida et al. discloses wherein the processing device performs the second determination when it is determined in the first determination that there is no defect in the first intermediate member (first and second inspection units 250 and 260 may be operated simultaneously or not, and inspection unit 260 would also be operated when no defect has been detected by inspection unit 250; ¶ [0064]).
Regarding claim 7, Yoshida et al. discloses wherein the second pressure is set higher than a pressure of the external space (first and second pressures are at higher pressures than an external pressure to shorten the leak detection time; ¶ [0069]).
Although Yoshida et al. discloses some processing device to process the sensor information, Yoshida et al. is silent on using a computer.
However, computers are a well-known tool to process sensor data. Abouatallah et al. teaches a computer (120; fig. 3) including a processor (320) and a memory (340) coupled to the processor to perform leakage determination (¶ [0079]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yoshida et al. with the computer of Abouatallah et al. to provide an efficient means of storing and processing sensor data.
Although Yoshida et al. discloses test gas detectors (256, 266) to detect a flow of test gas, Yoshida et al. is silent on using flowmeters to measure flow rates of the test gas.
However, flowmeters are well-known in the art of leak detection. Abouatallah et al. teaches testing a fuel cell stack (170; fig. 2A) by measuring flow rates of gas with flowmeters (flow rates are measured with flow meters 254 and 280 to determine a leak rate of fuel cell stack 170; ¶ [0073).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yoshida et al. with the flowmeters of Abouatallah et al. to allow for more accurate leakage determination by determining not merely the presence of a leakage but a leakage rate (Abouatallah et al., ¶¶ [0073-0074]).
Regarding claim 4, Yoshida et al. discloses the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 1.
Yoshida et al. is silent on using flow is silent on using flowmeters and valves to measure flow rates of the test gas.
Abouatallah et al. teaches a valve (260, 268, 270; fig. 2A) configured to seal each of a first flow path and a second flow path (valves 260, 268, and 270 seal an anode flow path, a cathode flow path, and a coolant flow path of fuel cell stack 170; fig. 2A), wherein the flowmeters (254, 280, 281) measure the flow rates of the inspection gas flowing out from each of the first flow path and the second flow path by measuring the flow rates of the inspection gas supplied from a gas supply unit (210) to each of the first flow path and the second flow path (flow meters 254, 280, and 281 measure gas flowing out from at least an anode flow path and a cathode flow path by measuring flow rates of gas supplied from gas supply 210; ¶¶ [0057-0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yoshida et al. with the flowmeters of Abouatallah et al. to provide various types of leaks including between anode, cathode, and coolant paths, as well as external leaks (Abouatallah et al., ¶ [0068]).
Regarding claim 5, Yoshida et al. discloses the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 1.
Yoshida et al. is silent on using flow is silent on using flowmeters to measure flow rates of the test gas.
Abouatallah et al. teaches determining a leakage rate by measuring flow rates of gas with flowmeters (flow rates are measured with flow meters 254 and 280 to determine a leak rate of fuel cell stack 170; ¶ [0073).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yoshida et al. with the flowmeters of Abouatallah et al. to allow for more accurate leakage determination by determining not merely the presence of a leakage but a leakage rate (Abouatallah et al., ¶¶ [0073-0074]).
In modifying the apparatus of Yoshida et al. with that of Abouatallah et al., one of ordinary skill would have known that a measured flow rate would be zero when there is no leak or defect (Abouatallah et al., ¶ [0075]).
Regarding claim 8, Yoshida et al. discloses a leak inspection method (using apparatus 200; fig. 1) to inspect a leakage state of a product (100) including a first flow path (13h; fig. 10) and a second flow path (13j), the first flow path (13h) and the second flow path (13h) being separated from an external space through a first intermediate member (anode gas flow path 13h and cooling fluid flow path 13j are separated from an external space by welding at outer periphery 13m; fig. 11 and ¶ [0025]) respectively and being separated from each other through a second intermediate member (anode gas flow path 13h and cooling fluid flow path 13j are separated from each other by sealing material applied to portions 13p; ¶ [0025]), the leak inspection method comprising the steps of: supplying inspection gas to the first flow path (13h) at a first pressure and supply the inspection gas to the second flow path (13j) at a second pressure lower than the first pressure (test medium supply unit 251 and test medium supply unit 261 supply test gas to the flow paths at different pressures; ¶¶ [0051, 0056]); measuring inspection gas flowing out from each of the first flow path and the second flow path (detector 256 detects helium test gas and detector 266 detects hydrogen test gas through flow paths 13h and 13j; ¶¶ [0054, 0056]); performing a first determination to determine whether there is leakage of the inspection gas from each of the first flow path (13h) and the second flow path (13j) to the external space based on inspection gas detected by the detectors (256) in a first period (T1; fig. 15C) after supply of the inspection gas (some processing device determines a through leak from flow paths 13h and 13j to an external space based on detection by detector 256; ¶¶ [0051-0052]); and performing a second determination to determine whether there is leakage of the inspection gas from the first flow path (13h) to the second flow path (13j) based on inspection gas detected by the detectors (256) in a second period (T3; fig. 15C) after the first period (some processing device determines an internal leak between flow paths 13h and 13j based on test gas detected by detector 266; ¶¶ [0040), wherein in the first determination, the processing device determines that there is a defect in the first intermediate member (welding) when it is determined that there is leakage of the inspection gas to the external space in the first period (T1), while determines that there is no defect in the first intermediate member (welding) when it is determined that there is no leakage of the inspection gas to the external space in the first period (detection of a leak of test gas to an external space is determination of a defect in the welding at outer periphery 13m and no detection of a leak is determination of no defect in the welding), wherein in the second determination, the processing device determines that there is a defect in the second intermediate member (sealing material at portions 13p) when it is determined that there is leakage of the inspection gas from the first flow path (13h) to the second flow path (13j) in the second period (T3), while determines that there is no defect in the second intermediate member (sealing material) when it is determined that there is no leakage of the inspection gas from the first flow path (13h) to the second flow path (13j) in the second period (detection of an internal leak of test gas between flow paths 13h and 13j is determination of a defect in the sealing material at portions 13p and no detection of a leak is determination of no defect in the sealing material).
Although Yoshida et al. discloses test gas detectors (256, 266) to detect a flow of test gas, Yoshida et al. is silent on using flowmeters to measure flow rates of the test gas.
However, flowmeters are well-known in the art of leak detection. Abouatallah et al. teaches testing a fuel cell stack (170; fig. 2A) by measuring flow rates of gas with flowmeters (flow rates are measured with flow meters 254 and 280 to determine a leak rate of fuel cell stack 170; ¶ [0073).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yoshida et al. with the flowmeters of Abouatallah et al. to allow for more accurate leakage determination by determining not merely the presence of a leakage but a leakage rate (Abouatallah et al., ¶¶ [0073-0074]).
Regarding claim 9, Yoshida et al. discloses further comprising the steps of: sealing each of the first flow path (13h) and the second flow path (anode gas flow path 13h and cooling fluid flow path 13j are separated from each other by sealing material applied to portions 13p; ¶ [0025]), wherein the measuring includes measuring the inspection gas flowing out from each of the first flow path (13h) and the second flow path (13j).
Yoshida et al. is further silent on where the flowmeters are disposed.
Abouatallah et al. teaches measuring a flow rate, wherein the measuring includes measuring the inspection gas flowing out from a flow path by measuring the flow rat of the inspection gas supplied to the flow path (flow meter 254 measures gas supplied from gas supply 214 to fuel cell stack 170; fig. 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yoshida et al. with the flowmeter of Abouatallah et al. to allow for more accurate leakage determination by determining not merely the presence of a leakage but a leakage rate (Abouatallah et al., ¶¶ [0073-0074]).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erika J. Villaluna whose telephone number is (571)272-8348. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at (571) 272-3555. 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.
/ERIKA J. VILLALUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852