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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II to claims 2-4 in the reply filed on 8/13/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 1 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 8/13/2026.
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)(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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2023/0235469 of Holler.
As to claim 2, Holler teaches of a system, the system comprising:
a water electrolysis stack in which water electrolysis cells are stacked (Holler, [0030] and Fig. 1) ;
a water supply side path for supplying water to the water electrolysis stack (Holler, [0030] – [0032] and Fig. 1); and
a hydrogen side path for recovering hydrogen generated from the water electrolysis stack (Holler, [0030] and Fig. 1), wherein:
the water supply side path includes
a pump that is a power source for supplying water to the water electrolysis stack (Holler, [0031] and Fig. 1),
an ion exchanger disposed between the pump and the water electrolysis stack (Holler, [0031] and Fig. 1),
a bypass that is a path that allows water from the pump to flow to the water electrolysis stack without passing through the ion exchanger (Holler, [0031] and Fig. 1),
a valve for adjusting an amount of water that flows through the bypass (Holler, [0033] and Fig. 1), and
a control system for adjusting the valve, wherein the control system performs control so as to adjust an opening degree of the valve based on an amount of ions contained in the water supplied to the water electrolysis stack (Holler, [0035], [0041] and Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
614
828
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As seen in Holler, there is an electrolysis stack (1) that is supplied with water through line (2). Hydrogen gas is recovered through outlet (3). The water is supplied from container (6) by pump (11) through ion exchangers (15/16) and through a bypass line (13) such that a valve (20) adjusts an amount of water through the bypass line.
There is a control system that controls the amount of water through the valve as a function of the metal ion concentration, thus performing the adjusting operation as claimed.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holler as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of JP 2015048506 of Kurashina et al (translation provided by Applicant on 11/16/2023 within file wrapper of application).
As to claim 3, Holler teaches of a system of claim 2.
Holler does not specifically teach the controller acquires a conductivity of the water supplied to the water electrolysis stack, and adjusting the opening degree of the valve based on a threshold value of the conductivity.
Kurashina teaches of water electrolysis systems that utilize ion exchangers within the water supply line (Kurashina, [0008] – [0015]).
Kurashina teaches that the system utilizes a controller that acquires the conductivity of the water supplied (i.e. metal ions in the water) by using a conductivity sensor such that the conductivity sensed, valves are controlled to supply water to the stack or through a bypass line to ensure proper conductivity of the water to the stack (Kurashina, [0049] – [0058] and Fig. 6).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Holler as per Kurashina so as to utilize a conductivity sensor to acquire the ion concentration within the supplied water in order to control the amount of water through the ion exchanger and bypass line in order to ensure proper conductivity of water is reaching the electrolyzer stack for proper operation.
PNG
media_image2.png
446
680
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
Claim 4 requires that within this type of system a difference in the conductivity is acquired up and downstream of the ion exchanger to control the operation of the valve adjustment. This operation is not obvious or anticipated in view of the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN W COHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7961. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 am to 5 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
BRIAN W. COHEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1759
/BRIAN W COHEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights