DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ye et al. (CN 114855195).
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Ye discloses an electrolysis system [n0003] (= an electrolysis cell system) comprising:
A hydrogen electrode with a high temperature hydrogen discharge pipeline (21) from fuel cell stack (12) [n0027], [0032] (= a cathode portion configured to output a cathode exhaust stream);
An air electrode with high temperature wet tail gas pipeline (31) [n0026] [0032] (= an anode portion configured to output an anode exhaust stream);
An oxygen concentration sensor and a moisture content sensor (16 = water concentration sensor) for analyzing gas composition [n0012] (= a sensor configured to detect a concentration in an exhaust stream and to output sensor data, wherein the sensor is either a hydrogen concentration sensor configured to detect a hydrogen concentration in the cathode exhaust stream or a water concentration sensor configured to detect a water concentration of the anode exhaust stream);
A control module (17) that controls the power of the wet exhaust gas circulation pump (7) based on the detection value of the moisture content sensor, and the wet exhaust gas circulation pump is controlled to return a portion of the wet exhaust gas to the air heat exchanger…based on the detection value…the power of the blower is controlled [n0012], [n0056] and additionally, the control module calculates the gas composition in the wet exhaust gas using the moisture sensor and then accurately calculates the amount of deionized water and water vapor required for the mixed gas supplied to the fuel cell stack …thereby controlling the water pump, the water vapor flow controller and the wet exhaust gas circulation pump [n0055]
(= a controller configured to:
Receive the sensor data from the sensor; and
Based on the sensor data, control at least one of (a) an air pressure adjustment device to adjust a pressure of air entering the anode portion or (b) a steam pressure adjustment device to adjust a pressure of steam entering the cathode portion). It is further noted that the claimed “configured to” claim language found throughout claim 1 is directed towards functional claim language and not further structurally limiting to the claimed system. The manner of operating the device does not differentiate apparatus claims from the prior art (MPEP 2114 II). The control module of Ye for example can perform the claimed function with no additional modification.
Regarding claim 17, the instant claim is directed towards functional claim language and does not further structurally limit the claimed device. Moreover, Ye discloses a control module that compares data from a moisture content sensor to calculate the amount of water and water vapor required for the fuel cell stack [n0055]. Ye discloses the control module calculating based on a required (= predetermined threshold) moisture content [n0056].
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.
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 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114855195) in view of Hamada et al. (US 2011/0294026).
Regarding claims 2 and 19, Ye does not disclose first and second pressure transducers as claimed.
In the same or similar field of controlling the operation of fuel cells, Hamada discloses monitoring pressure using multiple pressure transducers (172, 184) which are connected to the system controller (110) and measure the pressure of the reactant gas stream before it enters the electrode plate [0015]-[0017]. Hamada discloses that reactant gas stream pressures input from the pressure transducers may cause the controller to regulate the regulator and/or the compressor when necessary to achieve a target reactant gas stream pressure [0016].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce the system of Ye with multiple pressure transducers to control and regulate the amount of reactant gas or materials that enter the stack.
Regarding claim 3, the instant claim is directed towards functional claim language directed towards the claimed controller. The phrase does not appear to further structurally limit the claimed apparatus. Moreover, Ye discloses calculating and comparing sensor data and controlling the pressure. Hamada discloses adjusting the pressure based on the pressure input received from the pressure transducers with a regulator or compressor.
Claim(s) 4 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114855195) in view of Yoshida (US 2008/0220303).
Regarding claims 4 and 20, Ye does not disclose back-pressure regulators as claimed.
In the same or similar field of electrochemical reaction systems (abstract), Yoshida discloses the device comprising back pressure regulating valves to control the pressure downstream of the valve to a predetermined pressure by controlling the degree of opening of the valve [0099]. Yoshida discloses that by controlling the back pressure valve a more constant pressure can be maintained [0100].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce a device comprising back pressure regulators because Yoshida discloses that a downstream pressure can be controlled in a constant manner when utilizing pressure regulators.
Claim(s) 5, 7-8 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114855195) in view of Mohri (US 2022/0311029).
Regarding claims 5 and 7, Ye does not disclose the sensor as a hydrogen concentration sensor.
In the same or similar field of electrolysis (title), Mohri discloses a hydrogen sensor (91) utilized to detect a concentration of hydrogen gas within a gas component which is installed in the exhaust gas flow path (90) [0047]. Mohri discloses that the concentration of the hydrogen gas discharged from electrolysis can be controlled to be less than or equal to a predetermined value [0143]. Mohri additionally discloses that the operation of the system can be stopped in the case where the concentration of hydrogen gas is greater than or equal to an upper limit value [0129].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce a device comprising a hydrogen concentration sensor because Mohri discloses utilizing a hydrogen concentration sensor in an exhaust gas flow path to maintain the concentration below a desired threshold. Additionally, it is noted that the claimed “controller is configured to” claim language is directed towards functional claim language which does not further structurally limit the claimed device. Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the hydrogen sensor to the device of Ye to produce the same or similar result of controlling the concentration and/or pressure in the electrolysis device.
Regarding claim 8, the instant claim is directed towards the functional claim language of the claimed controller and does not further structurally limit the claimed device. The hydrogen sensor is described by Mohri above. Further, Ye discloses adjusting, based on sensor calculations, the pressure flowed to the stack.
Regarding claims 11-12, Ye and Mohri disclose the claimed concentration sensors as described above. The remainder of the claim language is directed towards the functional language of the controller which does not further structurally limit the claimed device. Further, Ye discloses adjusting, based on sensor calculations, the pressure flowed to the stack. Moreover, it would have been obvious in view of Ye and Mohri to control the system including pressure adjustments based on concentration data since both Ye and Mohri disclose controlling the electrolysis process based on concentration data. Claim 12 does not appear to include any additional structure to the claimed controller.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114855195).
Regarding claim 6, the instant claim is directed towards the functional claim language of the claimed controller and does not further structurally limit the claimed device. The moisture sensor is described by Ye above. Further, Ye discloses adjusting, based on sensor calculations, the pressure flowed to the stack. Although Ye does not explicitly state “configured to at least one of (a) or (b) as claimed (e.g. decrease the pressure or increase the pressure), the control module of Ye is capable of performing the claimed functional language without further modification since the pressure is controlled based on the sensor input data.
Claim(s) 9 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114855195), in view of Mohri (US 2022/0311029) and in further view of Paganelli (US 2012/0237843).
Regarding claim 9, Ye in view of Mohri do not disclose a second hydrogen sensor as claimed.
Paganelli discloses an electrochemical reactor comprising a hydrogen sensor positioned at the entrance of the reactor and a hydrogen sensor positioned at the outlet of the reactor. Paganelli discloses the advantage lies in the possibility of measuring the quality of gases produced directly in the electrolyzer without having to take off gas samples intermittently or continuously [0075]. Paganelli discloses the hydrogen concentration sensor is used to check the hazardous condition in which the percentage of hydrogen content increases above a safety threshold [0077].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce a device comprising a second hydrogen concentration sensor because Paganelli discloses multiple hydrogen concentration sensors to monitor the content of hydrogen into and out of the electrolyzer stack. It would have been obvious to provide a second hydrogen concentration sensor at an entrance of the stack to check the hazardous condition in which the percentage of hydrogen content increases above a safety threshold [0077]. Regarding the claimed the controller is further configured to receive data…compare and control, the claim language is directed towards the functional language of the claimed controller and not further structurally limiting. The control module of Ye is capable of performing the claimed functional language without further modification.
Regarding claims 13-14, Paganelli discloses determining the water vapor content by another specific sensor (e.g. capacitive sensor). Paganelli discloses wherein the control unit adjust the speed of the recirculating pump so as to maintain the moisture content within a predetermined range favorable to correct operation of the membrane while still maintaining the hydrogen content of the gas entering the manifold at a suitable level [0069]. Moreover, the mere duplication of a sensor to detect a concentration of hydrogen and/or water would have been an obvious engineering design choice in order to monitor the concentration prior to entrance into the cell stack and after electrolysis within the stack.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114855195), in view of Mohri (US 2022/0311029) and in further view of Hamada et al. (US 2011/0294026).
Regarding claim 10, Ye in view of Mohri does not disclose first and second pressure transducers as claimed.
In the same or similar field of controlling the operation of fuel cells, Hamada discloses monitoring pressure using multiple pressure transducers (172, 184) which are connected to the system controller (110) and measure the pressure of the reactant gas stream before it enters the electrode plate [0015]-[0017]. Hamada discloses that reactant gas stream pressures input from the pressure transducers may cause the controller to regulate the regulator and/or the compressor when necessary to achieve a target reactant gas stream pressure [0016].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce the system of Ye in view of Mohri with multiple pressure transducers to control and regulate the amount of reactant gas or materials that enter the stack.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114855195), in view of Mohri (US 2022/0311029) and in further view of Yoshida (US 2008/0220303).
Regarding claim 15, Ye in view of Mohri does not disclose back-pressure regulators as claimed.
In the same or similar field of electrochemical reaction systems (abstract), Yoshida discloses the device comprising back pressure regulating valves to control the pressure downstream of the valve to a predetermined pressure by controlling the degree of opening of the valve [0099]. Yoshida discloses that by controlling the back pressure valve a more constant pressure can be maintained [0100].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce a device comprising back pressure regulators because Yoshida discloses that a downstream pressure can be controlled in a constant manner utilizing pressure regulators.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114855195) in view of Imamura et al. (US 2004/0038098).
Regarding claim 18, Ye fails to disclose a second water concentration sensor.
In the same or similar field of fuel cells, Imamura discloses a system comprising water state diagnosing means including water quantity measuring means (51, 52) provided at least one of an oxidizer gas outlet/inlet portion of the fuel cell stack (10) and a fuel gas outlet/inlet portion thereof for measuring a water quantity of the gas [0020]. Imamura discloses a first water quantity sensor (51) is placed in the air passage (20) on the downstream side of the stack to measure water quantity of air passing through the stack and a second water quantity sensor (52) placed in the fuel passage on the downstream side of the stack to measure water quantity of hydrogen passing through the stack. Imamura discloses that measurement signals from the sensos are inputted to the control unit and the control unit diagnoses a water state of the stack, a water residence state or a dry state of the electrolyte membrane. Additionally, Imamura discloses the control unit carries out the control of the pressure difference between the outlet and the inlet portion and the control of the humidification quantity according to the diagnosis result [0111]-[0112].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to produce a system comprising a second water concentration sensor because Imamura discloses providing multiple water content sensors at the input and output of a stack for diagnosing the state of the stack and thereby making adjustments to the pressure difference. Moreover, the mere duplication of a water concentration sensor would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in order to monitor the water concentration prior to entry and after electrolysis takes place in the stack.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2023/0104149 – pressure differential
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE S WITTENBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-7594. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 am -4:00 pm 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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/Stefanie S Wittenberg/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights