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 .
Election/Restrictions
Upon further consideration the restriction dated 4/28/2026 is withdrawn. All claims pending in the application have been rejoined and examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/13/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner except where lined-through. Foreign document 2 (KR 101592667) was not submitted so was not considered. It should also be noted that a foreign document KR 20150090390 was included in the file but does not appear on the IDS. This document was also not considered.
Drawings
The drawings submitted on 9/13/2023 are acceptable.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph 0026 indicates that a part of the drawing is in "phantom"
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 8, 10-11, and 13-19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 5, and 7-15 of copending Application No. 18466346 (BARTLETT et al.) in view of US 20030031902 A1, BALASUBRAMANIAN et al.
Regarding claim 1. Reference claim 1 reads, A thermal management system for a vehicle having a fuel cell stack, the thermal management system comprising:
a condenser fluidly coupled to the fuel cell stack to receive a flow of water/air exhaust therefrom;
a liquid-gas separator fluidly coupled to the condenser to receive the flow of water/air exhaust therefrom,
the liquid-gas separator including
a first outlet to direct separated gas to an exhaust line, and a second outlet for separated liquid water; and
a coolant circuit configured to circulate a coolant to the fuel cell stack for cooling thereof,
the coolant circuit including a radiator configured to cool the coolant, wherein the one or more spray nozzles are configured to selectively spray the liquid water onto the radiator to increase cooling of the coolant and improve performance of the fuel cell stack.
BARTLETT does not claim:
a storage reservoir having
an inlet to receive the separated liquid water from the second outlet of the liquid-gas separator, and
a supply outlet for the liquid water;
BALASUBRAMANIAN [title] discloses A Method and Apparatus For Maintaining Neutral Water Balance In A Fuel Cell System, where
BALASUBRAMANIAN [0011, 0019-0020] discloses a storage reservoir having an inlet to receive the separated liquid water from the second outlet of the liquid-gas separator, and a supply outlet for the liquid water
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have used the reservoir disclosed by BALASUBRAMANIAN in the invention claimed by BARTLETT in order to arrive at the instantly claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2. Reference claim 2 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1, further comprising a membrane humidifier configured to receive the flow of water/air exhaust from the fuel cell stack and humidify a flow of air into the fuel cell stack before supplying the water/air exhaust flow to the condenser.
Regarding claim 3. Reference claim 3 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1, further comprising a three-way valve disposed upstream of the condenser and configured to selectively direct the flow of water/air exhaust to the condenser or the exhaust line.
Regarding claim 8. Reference claim 5 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1, wherein the liquid-gas separator is a pressurized accumulator vessel.
Regarding claim 10. Reference claim 7 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 6, further comprising: a pump disposed between the second storage reservoir supply outlet and the one or more spray nozzles; and a controller in signal communication with the second sensor and the pump, the controller configured to control the flow of liquid water to the one or more spray nozzles based on the measured liquid level in the liquid-gas separator.
Regarding claim 11. Reference claim 8 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 7, wherein when the measured liquid level meets or exceeds a predetermined full threshold, the controller commands the pump to provide a maximum flow rate to the one or more spray nozzles.
Regarding claim 13. Reference claim 9 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 10, wherein the controller is configured to operate the thermal management system in a Performance Mode where, based on GPS map-based route planning data and ambient temperature, the controller sets an RPM of the pump to ensure liquid water is available to the one or more spray nozzles during a predicted high load fuel cell operating event.
Regarding claim 14. Reference claim 10 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 7, wherein the controller is configured to operate the thermal management system in a Shut-Down Mode where the controller is configured to drain the liquid-gas separator and/or the storage reservoir if the ambient temperature is less than a predetermined threshold to thereby prevent freezing of the liquid water in the thermal management system.
Regarding claim 15. Reference claim 11 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 7, wherein the controller is configured to operate the thermal management system in an Eco-Mode where, when the sensor indicates the storage reservoir is partially full, the controller is configured to supply liquid water to the one or more spray nozzles while reserving a portion of the liquid water to increase the water level in the storage reservoir for a predicted high-demand portion of a drive cycle.
Regarding claim 16. Reference claim 12 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1, wherein the condenser is a tube and fin heat exchanger with an electric fan configured to cool the water/air exhaust via heat exchange with ram air flow and/or airflow generated by the electric fan.
Regarding claim 17. Reference claim 13 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1, wherein the condenser is a tube heat exchanger configured to cool the water/air exhaust via heat exchange with ram air flow.
Regarding claim 18. Reference claim 14 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1, wherein the condenser is a liquid cooled heat exchanger thermally coupled to a second coolant circuit of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 19. Reference claim 15 reads, BARTLETT in view of BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1, further comprising a drain valve disposed between the storage reservoir supply outlet and the one or more spray nozzles, the drain valve configured to drain liquid water from the thermal management system to prevent damage thereof.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 8-15, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20030148155 A1, MATTHEWS et al. provided in the IDS dated 9/13/2023 in view of US 20030031902 A1, BALASUBRAMANIAN et al.
Regarding claim 1. MATTHEWS [abstract] discloses a thermal management system called a cooling circuit for a vehicle having a fuel cell stack, the thermal management system comprising:
[0017] a condenser fluidly coupled to the fuel cell stack to receive a flow of water/air exhaust therefrom;
[0017] a liquid-gas separator fluidly coupled to the condenser to receive the flow of water/air exhaust therefrom,
The annotated figure depicted below discloses the liquid-gas separator including
a first outlet to direct separated gas to an exhaust line, and
a second outlet for separated liquid water; and
a coolant circuit configured to circulate a coolant to the fuel cell stack for cooling thereof,
the coolant circuit including a radiator (13) configured to cool the coolant, wherein the one or more spray nozzles (12) are configured to selectively spray the liquid water onto the radiator to increase cooling of the coolant and improve performance of the fuel cell stack.
PNG
media_image1.png
634
933
media_image1.png
Greyscale
MATTHEWS does not disclose a storage reservoir having
an inlet to receive the separated liquid water from the second outlet of the liquid-gas separator, and
a supply outlet for the liquid water;
one or more spray nozzles fluidly coupled to the storage reservoir supply outlet to receive a flow of liquid water therefrom
BALASUBRAMANIAN [title] discloses A Method and Apparatus For Maintaining Neutral Water Balance In A Fuel Cell System, where
BALASUBRAMANIAN [0011, 0019-0020] discloses a storage reservoir having an inlet to receive the separated liquid water from the second outlet of the liquid-gas separator, and a supply outlet for the liquid water
BALASUBRAMANIAN [0019] further discloses “the invention, acts to maintain a neutral water balance in a water loop that includes a humidifier, fuel cell stack, separators, water reservoir or tank, and water pump. As used throughout this application, neutral water balance refers to the ability of the fuel cell system to produce in the oxidant and fuel exhaust of the fuel cell stack sufficient liquid water to satisfy the water consumption needs of the system, particularly the water consumption by the intake air humidifier and the fuel processor.” In other words allows the water to be used on demand.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have used the reservoir disclosed by BALASUBRAMANIAN in the cooling system disclosed by BARTLETT in order use the water when needed.
Regarding claim 2. MATTHEWS [0013] modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1, further comprising a membrane humidifier configured to receive the flow of water/air exhaust from the fuel cell stack and humidify a flow of air into the fuel cell stack before supplying the water/air exhaust flow to the condenser.
Regarding claim 8. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1.
BALASUBRAMANIAN [0027] FIG 2 discloses that the liquid-gas separator is a pressurized system between 10-30 psig.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used a pressurized vessel in a pressurized system that utilizes a compressor that controls the pressure of said system.
Regarding claim 9. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 8.
MATTHEWS [0021] discloses the liquid-gas separator (9) includes a first sensor configured to measure a liquid level in the liquid-gas separator.
MATTHEWS does not disclose the storage reservoir includes a second sensor configured to measure a liquid level in the storage reservoir.
BALASUBRAMANIAN [0032] discloses the storage reservoir includes a second sensor configured to measure a liquid level in the storage reservoir.
Level sensors in compressor systems that separate liquid with gas are well known in the art. Liquids are non-compressible materials and are mechanically catastrophic when introduced to a compressor.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used level sensors in both the separator and the reservoir in order to protect the integrity of the compressor.
Regarding claim 10. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 9.
BALASUBRAMANIAN [0021] discloses a pump disposed between the storage reservoir supply outlet and the one or more spray nozzles; and
BALASUBRAMANIAN [0032] discloses a controller “such as a digital computer” in signal communication with the second sensor and the pump, the controller configured to control the flow of liquid water to the one or more spray nozzles based on the measured liquid level in the liquid-gas separator.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used a controller that receives signals from a sensor in order to control liquid levels in the claimed compressor system.
Regarding claims 11-15. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claims 9 and 10.
MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN [0032] discloses a level sensor and [0021] a pump and a [0032] controller “such as a digital computer” that commands the pump to provide a maximum flow rate to the one or more spray nozzles.
This pump, separator, sensor, reservoir and controller scheme are the structural limitations for claims 9-15
This controller can be programed to control the flow of liquid water to the storage reservoir based on the measure liquid level in the liquid-gas separator as reads on the limitation according to instant claim 12 and/or,
be configured to operate the thermal management system in a Performance Mode where, based on GPS map-based route planning data and ambient temperature, the controller sets an RPM of the pump to ensure liquid water is available to the one or more spray nozzles during a predicted high load fuel cell operating event as reads on the limitation according to instant claim 13 and/or,
be configured to operate the thermal management system in a Shut-Down Mode where the controller is configured to drain the liquid-gas separator and/or the storage reservoir if the ambient temperature is less than a predetermined threshold to thereby prevent freezing of the liquid water in the thermal management system as reads on the limitation according to instant claim 14 and/or,
be configured to operate the thermal management system in an Eco-Mode where, when the sensor indicates the storage reservoir is partially full, the controller is configured to supply liquid water to the one or more spray nozzles while reserving a portion of the liquid water to increase the water level in the storage reservoir for a predicted high-demand portion of a drive cycle as reads on the limitation according to instant claim 15.
The courts have determined that automating a manual activity is a routine expedient in some circumstances. This legal precedent may be applied to support a conclusion that the claimed programming of a controller would have been obvious, depending on the facts of the case. MPEP 2114(IV) and 2144.04(III)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have programmed a controller with the claimed functional language in order to control the liquid levels in the instantly claimed thermal management system.
Regarding claim 18. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1,
MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN does not explicitly disclose the condenser is a liquid cooled heat exchanger thermally coupled to a second coolant circuit of the vehicle.
MATTHEWS [0023] discloses that his system is used in a moving vehicle. It would be obvious to use this vehicle in all weather conditions, it would also be obvious that when the vehicle is used in the rain or other wet conditions that the heat exchanger would become a liquid cooled heat exchanger thereby reading on the instantly claimed limitation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used a liquid cooled heat exchanger disclosed by MATTHEWS in the instantly claimed thermal management system.
Regarding claim 19. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1,
MATTHEWS [0021] discloses a drain valve (16) disposed between the storage reservoir supply outlet and the one or more spray nozzles, the drain valve configured to drain liquid water from the thermal management system.
Claims 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20030148155 A1, MATTHEWS et al. provided in the IDS dated 9/13/2023 in view of US 20030031902 A1, BALASUBRAMANIAN et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20160315340 A1, MISHIMA.
Regarding claims 3-6. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1.
MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN does not disclose a three-way valve disposed upstream of the condenser and configured to selectively direct the flow of water/air exhaust to the condenser or the exhaust line.
MISHIMA [title] discloses An Exhaust Drain Valve For Fuel Cell, where
MISHIMA [0018] also discloses a back pressure control valve disposed in the exhaust line downstream of the three-way valve which also reads on instant claims 5 and 6
MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN in further view of MISHIMA does not explicitly disclose a back pressure control valve disposed upstream of the three-way valve with respect to claim 4
However, applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.).
The use of three-way valves in conjunction with backpressure controllers are well known in the art in order to economize the flow of a process stream.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have performed minimal experimentation to economize the process using a three way valve with back pressure controllers in order to economize the configuration of the piping scheme.
Regarding claim 7. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN and further in view of MISHIMA discloses the thermal management system of claim 6,
BALASUBRAMANIAN [0025] discloses an expander operably coupled to a compressor and an electric motor, wherein the expander is configured to expand a gaseous portion of the water/air exhaust from the fuel cell stack upstream of the three-way valve, wherein the compressor is configured to compress ambient air before supplying the compressed air to the fuel cell stack, and wherein the electric motor is configured to generate electricity due to rotation of the expander.
Furthermore, expanders are well known in the art as an assist to the electric motor in order to economize a system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used an expander attached to the electric motor and compressor in order to share the work load with the electric motor on the compressor thereby recapturing usable energy in the system making it more economical. This person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated by economy and would have been no more than routine experimentation in order to come to this conclusion.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20030148155 A1, MATTHEWS et al. provided in the IDS dated 9/13/2023 in view of US 20030031902 A1, BALASUBRAMANIAN et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20150037695 A1, WARD et al.
Regarding claims 16 and 17. MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN discloses the thermal management system of claim 1.
MATTHEWS modified by BALASUBRAMANIAN does not explicitly disclose the condenser is a tube and fin heat exchanger with an electric fan configured to cool the water/air exhaust via heat exchange with ram air flow and/or airflow generated by the electric fan.
WARD [title] discloses Fuel Cell Electrolyte Regenerator And Separator where
WARD [0116] discloses the use of a condenser that uses a tube fin heat exchanger reading on the limitation of claim 16. This exchanger being used in a moving vehicle would by its nature use the air that is forced through it when the vehicle is in motion, this ram air flow reads on claim 17.
WARD [0116] also discloses a cooling fan (614) used in conjunction with the condenser reading on the limitation of instant claim 16.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20030148157 A1, GRASSO et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAWRENCE LA RAIA III whose telephone number is (703)756-5441. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 6:00am-4:00pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571) 272-1330. 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.
LAWRENCE LA RAIA III
Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights