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 § 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 1-4 are 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.
The term “gradually” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The
term “gradually” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for
ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably
apprised of the scope of the invention. The claim is unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art
because there is no standard for determining which rates of increase were “gradual” and which
rates were not “gradual”.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki e(JP 2006-199995 A) in view of Harada (US 2003/0141200 A1).
Sasaki teaches (see fig. 1, paragraphs [0012]-[0017]) a water electrolysis system comprising a water electrolysis cell (2) and a reaction water supply device (pure water tank (3)). The system of Sasaki included valves ((14),(15)) that set the pressure/amount of reaction water being provided to the oxygen electrode (anode-side). During startup from a state lower than atmospheric pressure or steady pressure, the pressure of the water supplied from the water supply device (3) was adjusted, via valves ((14),(15)), to be no more than the pressure value on the hydrogen electrode (cathode) side of the cell. This adjustment starts small and incrementally increases (i.e. “gradually” as claimed) the oxygen pressure in response to the rising hydrogen pressure.
Note that the electrolysis cell of Sasaki was positioned inside a pressure vessel, wherein one product of the electrolysis was released to the interior of the pressure vessel and the other product was piped out of the pressure vessel.
Sasaki fails to explicitly teach that the water electrolysis cell was formed as a cell stack, instead referring to the cell merely in the singular.
Harada teaches (see abstract, fig. 17) a similar water electrolysis system, wherein a cell stack (503) is positioned within a pressure vessel and one product of the electrolysis is released into the interior of the pressure vessel and the other product is piped out of the pressure vessel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the system of Sasaki according to the suggestion of Harada by using a cell stack instead of a singular cell within the pressure vessel for the reason of increasing production capacity without having to add additional pressure vessels.
Regarding claim 2, the system of Sasaki included an oxygen electrode side bypass flow path (13) wherein the bypass flow path connected an oxygen electrode side inlet flow path (5) and an oxygen electrode side outlet flow path (12) such that reaction water makes a detour from the water electrolysis cell stack. A flow rate control valve (15) was positioned within the bypass flow path, wherein the valve (15) controlled the pressure value on the oxygen electrode side. The control system of Sasaki controlled the oxygen electrode side pressure to be not greater than that hydrogen electrode side pressure.
Regarding claim 3, Sasaki teaches an oxygen electrode side pressure sensor (16) that measured the pressure value on the oxygen electrode side and a hydrogen electrode side pressure sensor (21) that measured the pressure value on the hydrogen electrode side. Sasaki teaches that control signals are sent to the control vale (15) to control the oxygen pressure to be not higher than the hydrogen pressure.
Regarding claim 4, see above regarding the features of claims 2 and 3 with respect to the teachings of Sasaki.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARRY D WILKINS III whose telephone number is (571)272-1251. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30am -6:00pm.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/HARRY D WILKINS III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights