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 .
Summary
This is the response to the Response to Election/Restriction filed on 03/24/2026.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application.
Election/Restrictions
The Applicants’ arguments regarding the restriction are persuasive. The restriction has been withdrawn.
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 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Teene et al. (US 2023/0170502).
Addressing claims 1 and 12, Teene discloses a fuel cell system and a method for draining condensate water of a fuel cell system, the method comprising:
a drain valve (212, figs. 4A-4C, or 222 in figs. 5A-5C) configured to adjust an amount of condensate water being drained (the valve is for draining condensate water), at an outlet of a water trap (water collection device 226, [0056]) having the condensate water drained from an anode of a fuel cell stack [0060]; and
a controller 198 [0050] configured to:
control the drain valve to be open or closed, based on a water level of the condensate water stored in the water trap [0082]; and
control the drain valve to be open or closed at a specific period, when a body of the fuel cell system is tilted (paragraph [0094] discloses the controller 198 controls the exhaust valve, which includes opening and closing the exhaust valve, when the fuel cell stack 12 is tilted, which corresponds to a specific period when the body of the fuel cell system is tilted as claimed).
Claim(s) 1 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Malhi et al. (US 2023/0411654).
Addressing claims 1 and 12, Malhi discloses a fuel cell system and a method for draining condensate water of a fuel cell system, comprising:
a drain valve (purge valve systems 220 and 230) configured to adjust an amount of condensate water being drained (the valve systems are for draining condensate water, which is configured to perform the claimed function) at an outlet of a water trap 13 (fig. 2) having the condensate water drained from an anode of a fuel cell stack [0066]; and
a controller 198 configured to:
control the drain valve to be open or closed, based on a water level of the condensate water stored in the water trap (paragraph [0063] discloses the controller 198 controls the valves, which involves opening and closing the valves, based on water accumulation rate, which corresponds to the claimed water level of the condensate water stored in the water trap; moreover, paragraph [0068] discloses the controller 198 employs purge operation based on the amount of water collected, which corresponds to the claimed water level of condensate water stored in the water trap); and
control the drain valve to be open or closed at a specific period when a body of the fuel cell system is tilted [0084-0099].
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 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) 2-3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malhi et al. (US 2023/0411654) in view of Kaneko et al. (US 2016/0380287).
Addressing claims 2-3 and 13, Malhi discloses a plurality of tilt sensors 250 mounted on the fuel cell stack [0059] and the tilt angle at each corner is detected [0056, 0085], which implies that the tilt sensors 250 are mounted at different corners or different positions of the body of the fuel cell system. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to mount the tilt sensors at the four corners of the body of Malhi’s fuel cell system in order to detect the tilt angle at each corner.
Kaneko discloses inclination detector 15 mounted to the fuel cell 10; wherein, the inclination detector is an acceleration sensor to detect an inclination of the fuel cell [0020].
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the fuel cell system and method of Malhi with the known acceleration sensor of Kaneko as the tilt sensors in order to obtain the predictable result of measuring the inclination of the fuel cell at each corner (Rationale B, KSR decision, MPEP 2143).
Addressing claim 4, in the modified fuel cell system of Malhi in view of Kaneko, the acceleration sensors are mounted at each corner of the four corners of the body of Malhi’s fuel cell system, which results in the acceleration sensors being mounted in the claimed front surface, right surface, rear surface and left surface.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-11 and 14-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 EST.
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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571)-272-1307. 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.
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 07/16/2026
Prosecution Insights