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 § 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner et al. (US 20230361321), hereinafter Weingaertner, in view of Craft, Jr. et al. (US 8211580), hereinafter Craft, in further view of Oguro (US 20200395623), hereinafter Oguro.
Regarding claim 1, Weingaertner teaches:
A fuel cell power system comprising ([0001]):
a container having a single compartment ([0015], hot box 100);
a fuel cell stack ([0025], fuel cell stack 102);
a set of power electronics electrically connected to the fuel cell stack ([0024-0030], power modules 10, power-conditioning modules 12);
a plurality of fan assemblies ([0031-0038], [0044]);
the plurality of fan assemblies are configured to draw the outside air through the plurality of heat exchangers and expel exhaust air out of the container ([0031-0038], [0044]).
Weingaertner fails to teach:
a plurality of fan assemblies mounted on top of the container,
a plurality of heat exchangers mounted on a plurality of walls on the container configured for drawing outside air into the container;
a common manifold connecting a plurality of coolant lines to the plurality of heat exchangers, at least one of the plurality of coolant lines circulating hot coolant from the fuel cell power system to the plurality of heat exchangers,
at least one of the plurality of coolant lines circulating cold coolant to the fuel cell stack;
a pump for transferring coolant throughout the plurality of coolant lines;
Craft teaches:
a plurality of heat exchangers mounted on a plurality of walls on the container configured for drawing outside air into the container ([0031-0038], heat exchangers 420);
a common manifold connecting a plurality of coolant lines to the plurality of heat exchangers, at least one of the plurality of coolant lines circulating hot coolant from the fuel cell power system to the plurality of heat exchangers (Abstract, Fig. 1-3);
at least one of the plurality of coolant lines circulating cold coolant to the fuel cell stack (Abstract, Fig. 1-3);
a pump for transferring coolant throughout the plurality of coolant lines (Summary of the Invention [0009]).
Oguro teaches:
a plurality of fan assemblies mounted on top of the container ([0011]).
Weingaertner, Craft, and Oguro are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fuel cell power systems and thermal management. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the fuel cell power system of Weingaertner to include the plurality of heat exchangers, coolant lines, and pump of Craft, and the top-mounted fan assemblies of Oguro. The motivation to combine would have been to provide an effective thermal-management system for the fuel cell power system of Weingaertner. Craft’s system provides a known liquid-cooling arrangement for removing heat from the fuel cell system, while Oguro’s top-mounted fan assemblies provide a known arrangement for drawing ambient air through heat exchangers and exhausting heated air from a container. The combination would therefore have predictably provided improved heat removal from the enclosed fuel cell power system while maintaining the fuel cell stack and power electronics.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner, in view of Craft, in further view of Arisawa et al. (WO 2011033362), hereinafter Arisawa, in further view of Xiao et al. (US 8379417), hereinafter Xiao.
Regarding claim 2, Weingaertner, Craft, and Oguro teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Weingaertner further teaches:
A duct assembly for each of the plurality of fan assemblies ([0003], [0031-0038]);
the duct assembly having an opening for expelling the exhaust air ([0003], [0031-0038]);
a power distribution unit ([0024-0030]);
Weingaertner fails to teach:
a battery;
a DC choke set;
the DC choke set being positioned proximate the top of the container and proximate to one of the plurality of fan assemblies;
fuel cell air filters for cleaning intake air for the fuel cell stack.
Craft teaches:
a battery compartment;
fuel cell air filters for cleaning intake air for the fuel cell stack.
Arisawa and Xiao teach a DC choke set.
Weingaertner, Craft, Arisawa, and Xiao are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fuel cell power systems and thermal management. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the fuel cell power system of Weingaertner to include the battery compartment and fuel cell air filters of Craft, and the DC choke set taught by Arisawa and Xiao.
With respect to the claimed battery, Craft provides a battery compartment associate with the fuel cell power system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a battery within the battery compartment, as the purpose of a battery compartment is to accommodate and protect a battery. Providing a battery within the battery compartment would have been a predictable use of the compartment for its intended purpose and would allow the fuel cell power system to store electrical energy for use during startup, transient power demands, or other operating conditions.
It would further have been obvious to incorporate the fuel-cell air filters of Craft into Weingaertner’s system to remove contaminants, dust, moisture, and other particulate matter from intake air before the air reaches the fuel cell stack. Such filtering would protect the fuel cell components and improve reliable operation of the fuel cell system.
Further, it would have been obvious to incorporate the DC choke set taught by Arisawa and Xiao into the power-distribution and power-electronics circuitry of Weingaertner. A Dc choke set is a known component for suppressing electrical ripple and unwanted current fluctuations in a DC power circuit. Incorporating the known DC choke into the existing power electronics would therefore have provided the predictable benefit of improving the quality and stability of the electrical power supplied to the fuel cell power system without changing the underlying operation of Weingaertner’s system.
Positioning the DC choke set would have been a matter of design choice because the DC choke generates heat during operation, and locating the choke near an existing fan provides a convenient and predictable arrangement for dissipating the generated heat. Such placement merely involves selecting a known location for a known component based on considerations of thermal management, available space, and efficient airflow. Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in positioning the DC choke near the fan because the fan already provides airflow for removing heat from components within the container. Placing the heat-generating DC choke proximate to the fan would therefore have predictably facilitated heat removal without changing the respective functions of either the DC choke or fan assembly.
The combination would have involved the use of known components, namely, a battery, fuel-cell air filters, and a DC choke, in their known expected manners within the fuel cell power system. The skilled artisan would have had a reasonable expectation of success because each component preforms its established function when incorporated into the corresponding portion of the system.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner, in view of Vanderwees et al. (US 7191858), hereinafter Vanderwees, in further view of Jeong et al. (US 20140178784), hereinafter Jeong .
Regarding claim 3, Weingaertner, Craft, and Oguro teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Weingaertner further teaches a control unit ([0003], [0024]).
Weingaertner teaches a fuel cell power system having a control system associated with the fuel cell power system and power-conditioning equipment. Weingaertner’s control system is configured to monitor and control operation of components of the fuel cell power system, including components associated with power conditioning and system operation.
Weingaertner fails to teach:
A thermostat;
a plurality of thermocouples provided throughout the container and in communication with the thermostat;
a control unit in communication with the thermostat, the fuel cell stack, the battery, the plurality of heat exchangers, the pump, the plurality of fan assemblies, and the set of power electronics,
the control unit being configured to activate the pump, the plurality of heat exchangers, and the plurality of fan assemblies.
Vanderwees teaches:
A thermostat (Claim 11);
a control unit in communication with the thermostat, the fuel cell stack, the battery, the plurality of heat exchangers, the pump, the plurality of fan assemblies, and the set of power electronics ([0012-0019]);
the control unit being configured to activate the pump, the plurality of heat exchangers, and the plurality of fan assemblies ([0012-0019]).
Vanderwees teaches a thermal management system in which thermal conditions of a fuel cell system are monitored and a cooling system is controlled in response to the monitored thermal conditions. Vanderwees further teaches controlling thermal-management components, including a pump, heat exchanger, and fan, to regulate the temperature of the fuel cell system.
Jeong teaches a plurality of thermocouples provided throughout the container ([0015], [0020]).
Weingaertner, Vanderwees, and Jeong are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fuel cell power systems and thermal management and control of fuel cell power systems.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the control system of Weingaertner to incorporate the thermal-management control system of Vanderwees and the plurality of thermocouples and distributed temperature measurements of Jeong.
In particular, Weingaertner provides a suitable control-system architecture for controlling the fuel cell power system and its power-conditioning equipment. Vanderwees provides a known thermal-management control scheme that uses monitored thermal conditions to control operation of the cooling system. It would therefore have been obvious to apply Vanderwees’s thermal-management control scheme to the control system of Weingaertner so that the existing control system would additionally monitor thermal conditions and control the cooling equipment in response to those conditions.
Such a modification would have provided the predictable benefit of allowing the control system of Weingaertner to automatically respond to changes in the thermal condition of the fuel cell power system rather than relying upon fixed or manually selected cooling conditions. For example, when the fuel cell stack or other power-conditioning components generate increased heat, the control system could increase operation of the cooling equipment, whereas when the thermal load decreases, the cooling equipment could be reduced accordingly. This would improve thermal regulation, protect the fuel cell components from excessive temperatures, and promote efficient operation of the system.
Jeong provides a known manner of obtaining the thermal information used by such a thermal-management controller. Specifically, Jeong teaches multiple thermocouples positioned at different locations throughout the container, thereby allowing temperatures at different portions of the enclosed system to be measured. It would have been obvious to incorporate Jeong’s distributed thermocouples into the Weingaertner/Vanderwees system so that the thermal-management control system would receive temperature information from multiple locations rather than relying upon a single temperature measurement.
The combination would have been particularly advantageous in a fuel cell power system because different components within the container can experience different thermal loads. For example, the fuel cell stack, power-conditioning equipment, heat exchangers, pump, and other components may generate or experience different amounts of heat. Providing thermocouples at multiple locations would allow the controller to identify localized increases in temperature and operate the cooling system in response to the actual thermal conditions throughout the container. Thus, Jeong’s distributed temperature measurements would complement Vanderwees’s thermal-management control and provide the information necessary for Weingaertner’s control system to make appropriate cooling adjustments.
With respect to the limitation that “the control unit is in communication with the thermostat, the fuel cell stack, the battery, the plurality of heat exchangers, the pump, the plurality of fan assemblies, and the set of power electronics,” the combination would have naturally placed these components under the control of the existing system controller. Weingaertner already provides the control architecture for the fuel cell power system and power-conditioning equipment, while Vanderwees teaches coordinating the thermal-management components based on monitored thermal conditions. Connecting the controller to the fuel cell stack and power electronics would allow the controller to account for the operating state and power demand of the system, while connecting the controller to the pump, heat exchangers, and fans would allow the controller to regulate the corresponding cooling functions.
Further, incorporating a battery into the controlled system would allow the controller to monitor and coordinate operation of the battery with the fuel cell power system and power-conditioning equipment. Such communication would permit the controller to account for electrical load and power-generation conditions when determining the appropriate thermal-management response.
With respect to the limitation that “the control unit is configured to activate the pump, the plurality of heat exchangers, and the plurality of fan assemblies,” Vanderwees provides the motivation and teaching for such control. Vanderwees teaches monitoring thermal conditions and controlling the cooling system in response thereto. Thus, it would have been obvious to configure Weingaertner’s existing control unit to activate the pump and fan assemblies and operate the heat exchangers when the monitored temperature indicates that cooling is required.
For example, upon detecting an increase in temperature through the thermocouples of Jeong, the modified Weingaertner control unit would activate or increase operation of the pump to circulate coolant through the heat exchangers and activate the fan assemblies to move air through the heat exchangers and remove heat from the container. This is the predictable application of Vanderwees’s thermal-management control to the components already present in the fuel-cell system of Weingaertner.
The combination does not require a change in the principle of operation of any of the references. Weingaertner’s control system continues to control the fuel cell power system; Vanderwees’s thermal-management system continues to monitor and regulate temperature; and Jeong’s thermocouples continue to measure temperature at their respective locations. The combination merely uses the known temperature-monitoring information of Jeong as an input to the known thermal-management control of Vanderwees and incorporates that control functionality into Weingaertner’s existing fuel-cell power-system controller.
Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success because temperature sensors, thermostats, controllers, pumps, heat exchangers, and fans are conventional and well-established components of fuel-cell thermal-management systems. The references themselves demonstrate that these components were routinely used together to monitor and control fuel-cell temperature. Combining the teachings would therefore amount to the predictable use of known components according to their established functions.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner, in view of Craft.
Regarding claim 4, Weingaertner, Craft, and Oguro teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Weingaertner, Craft, and Oguro teach the fuel cell power system of claim 1, including the plurality of coolant lines associated with the thermal-management system. In particular, the coolant lines circulate coolant between the fuel cell system and the heat-exchange equipment.
Weingaertner fails to teach a coolant reservoir in fluid communication with the plurality of coolant lines, storing a reserve of the coolant for circulation.
Craft teaches a coolant reservoir in fluid communication with the plurality of coolant lines, storing a reserve of the coolant for circulation ([0087]).
Weingaertner and Craft are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fuel cell power systems and thermal management of fuel cell power systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the fuel cell power system of Weingaertner having the plurality of coolant lines to further include the coolant reservoir of Craft in fluid communication with the coolant lines.
The motivation to make the combination would have been to provide Weingaertner’s coolant circuit with a reserve supply of coolant to compensate for coolant losses, thermal expansion and contraction, and variations in the amount of coolant circulating through the cooling circuit. Providing a reservoir in communication with an existing coolant loop was a conventional arrangement in fuel-cell cooling systems. Incorporating Craft’s reservoir into the coolant circuit of Weingaertner would therefore have been a predictable modification because the reservoir would preform its known function of storing coolant and supplying the coolant to the circulating coolant circuit when needed. The existing coolant lines of Weingaertner and Craft from claim 1, provide the fluid pathway through which the coolant is circulated, while the reservoir of Craft would simply be connected to those lines to provide a reserve quantity of coolant.
Moreover, the combination would have provided the predictable benefit of maintaining an adequate coolant volume within the cooling system. As the coolant undergoes temperature changes during operation of the fuel cell power system, the coolant can expand and contract, and some coolant can be lost through servicing, leakage, or other ordinary operating conditions. A reservoir provides additional coolant volume to accommodate such changes and maintain circulation through the coolant lines.
There would also have been a reasonable expectation of success because coolant reservoir, pumps, heat exchangers, and coolant lines are conventional components of fuel-cell cooling loops and are routinely connected together to form a circulating coolant circuit. The modification would not require a change in the principle of operation of Weingaertner’s cooling system; rather, it would merely add a known reservoir to the existing coolant circuit. The modification would not require a change in the principle of operation of Weingaertner’s cooling system, rather it would merely add a known reservoir to the existing coolant circuit.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner, in view of Grot et al. (DE 10065460), hereinafter Grot.
Regarding claim 5, Weingaertner, Craft, and Oguro teach the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Weingaertner fails to teach a humidity control system in the container to maintain optimal humidity levels container.
Grot teaches a humidity control system in the container to maintain optimal humidity levels container (Novelty). Grot teaches a controller that determines the humidity level of the fuel cell and controls the humidity in response to the determined humidity level. Grot further teaches maintaining the humidity level at a predetermined level or within a predetermined range to provide proper humidification and efficient fuel-cell operation.
Weingaertner and Grot are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fuel cell power systems and thermal management of fuel cell power systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the fuel cell power system of Weingaertner to include the humidity control system of Grot within the container.
The motivation to make the combination would have been to maintain the fuel cell at an appropriate humidity level and thereby improve fuel-cell performance, efficiency, and reliability. Grot expressly recognizes that proper humidification is important to fuel-cell operation and that excessive humidity can impede access of reactant gases to the catalyst, while insufficient humidity can restrict proton transport through the membrane. Grot therefore provides a specific motivation to monitor and control humidity rather than allowing humidity to vary without regulation.
Applying Grot’s humidity-control system to Weingaertner would have provided the predictable benefit of maintaining the fuel cell within an appropriate humidity range during operation. Because Weingaertner already provides a container enclosing the fuel-cell-power-system components, it would have been a straightforward implementation to place Grot’s humidifier and associated humidity-control equipment within the container so that the humidity of the fuel-cell system could be regulated in the same enclosed environment.
There would have been a reasonable expectation of success because Grot’s humidity-control system uses conventional fuel-cell components, including a humidifier and controller, and is expressly designed to operated with a fuel cell. The modification therefore merely applies Grot’s known humidity-control technique to the fuel-cell power system of Weingaertner for its intended purpose.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner, in view of Owusu et al. (US 20140186197), hereinafter Owusu.
Regarding claim 6, Weingaertner, Craft, and Oguro, Arisawa, and Xiao teach the limitations of claim 2, as stated above. Weingaertner teaches a fan assembly/exhaust fans ([0031-0038], [0044]).
Owuso teaches a plurality of fan assemblies include at least two centrifugal fans each having the duct assembly oriented to channel the exhaust air out of the container (Abstract).
Weingaertner and Owuso are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fuel cell power systems, ventilation, and thermal management of fuel cell power systems.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the exhaust-fan arrangement of Weingaertner to include the at least two centrifugal fans and associated duct assemblies taught by Owuso.
The motivation to make the combination would have been to provide increased and more efficiently controlled airflow through the fuel cell power system and thereby improve removal of heat generated during operation. Centrifugal fans are well-known for producing a relatively high-pressure differential and are therefore suitable for moving air through heat exchangers, ducts, filters, and other components that impose flow resistance. Incorporating the centrifugal fans of Owuso into Weingaertner’s exhaust-ventilation system would therefore have provided a predictable means for moving heated air out of the container.
It would further have been obvious to provide a duct assembly associated with each centrifugal fan. Owuso teaches ducts associated with centrifugal blower units for directing the discharged airflow. Thus, the use of ducts would permit the airflow generated by each fan to be directed toward a desired exhaust location rather than allowing the exhaust air to discharge indiscriminately into the surrounding area.
It would also have been obvious to configure the respective duct assemblies to direct the exhaust air in opposing directions. Directing the exhaust streams in different, and particularly opposing, directions would reduce the likelihood that the exhaust discharged from one fan would interfere with or recirculate into the intake airflow of another fan. Such an arrangement would thereby promote more effective removal of heated air from the container and improve the overall ventilation efficiency of the fuel cell power system.
The use of opposing exhaust directions would additionally provide a predictable way of distributing the exhaust airflow around the container, rather than concentrating both exhaust streams at the same location. This would reduce localized accumulation of heated exhaust air and facilitate the replacement of heated container air with cooler outside air through the heat exchangers.
The modification would not require a change in the principle of operation of Weingaertner. Weingaertner would continue to use fans to exhaust air from the fuel cell power system, while Owuso’s teachings would merely provide a known type of fan—a centrifugal fan—and known duct arrangements for directing the resulting airflow. Configuring the ducts to discharge in opposing directions would merely be an arrangement of the exhaust outlets according to the desired airflow path and available space around the container.
Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success because centrifugal fans, ducts, and directional exhaust arrangements were known ventilation components, and their respective functions would remain unchanged when incorporated into Weingaertner’s system. Indeed, prior fuel-cell blower systems expressly demonstrate the use of multiple centrifugal blower units connected by ducts for directing gas flow.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner, in view of Vanderwees, in further view of Hrovat et al. (US 6651761), hereinafter Hrovat, and in further view of Holmefjord (NO 20220590), and in further view of Hiechan et al. (Hiechan et al. (2012)), hereinafter Hiechan, and in further view of Sano et al. (JP 2012043666), hereinafter Sano.
Regarding claim 7, Weingaertner, Craft, and Oguro, Arisawa, and Xiao teach the limitations of claim 2, as stated above. Weingaertner teaches the fuel cell power system of claim 1, including the container having a plurality of walls. Weingaertner further teaches insulation layers provided on the interior of the walls of the container ([0039]).
Vanderwees teaches a pump associated with the thermal-management system of a fuel cell power system for circulating coolant through the cooling system ([0010]).
Hrovat teaches a variable-speed pump for circulating coolant in a fuel-cell cooling circuit and controlling coolant flow to maintain desired fuel-cell operating temperatures ([0005]). Hrovat further teaches a fan having variable speed, wherein fan speed is adjusted as part of the fuel-cell thermal-control strategy in response to thermal conditions (Fig. 1, description of fig. 1, claims 1-3). In particular, Hrovat describes controlling coolant temperature by adjusting fan speed and controlling coolant flow by adjusting the speed of a variable-speed pump. Hrovat’s control strategy uses fuel-cell power, ambient temperature, and other thermal conditions as inputs to adjust fan and pump operation.
Holmefjord teaches a plurality of heat exchangers having anti-corrosive materials/coatings for protecting the heat exchangers from corrosion and extending their useful life in operating environments (pg. 8, ln. 1-15).
Sano teaches a fuel-cell system having airflow openings provided with louver portions, including intake and exhaust airflow arrangements (Fig. 1-3, intake louver portion 14, intake opening 18, fan 12, used to prevent rainwater from entering the fuel-cell body, exhaust louver portion 17, exhaust opening 16). Sano’s fuel-cell package includes a fan and openings having louver portions configured to guide intake or exhaust airflow.
Weingaertner, Vanderwees, Hrovat, Holmefjord, and Sano are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fuel cell power systems and thermal management, cooling, and environmental protection of fuel cell power systems.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the fuel cell power system of Weingaertner to include the pump of Vanderwees, the variable-speed pump and dynamically controlled fan assemblies of Hrovat, the anti-corrosive heat-exchanger materials of Holmefjord, and the louver arrangements of Sano.
With respect to the variable-speed pump, Vanderwees provides a pump for circulating coolant through the fuel-cell thermal-management system, while Hrovat specifically teaches using a variable-speed coolant pump to control coolant flow. Hrovat explains that coolant temperature rise across the fuel-cell system is controlled by adjusting coolant mass flow through adjustment of the high-temperature cooling-loop pump speed. Hrovat further explains that the system uses variable fan speed to control cooling airflow.
It would therefore have been obvious to modify the coolant system of Weingaertner to employ Hrovat’s variable-speed pump. The motivation would have been to more precisely regulate coolant flow according to the thermal load of the fuel-cell system, thereby maintaining the fuel cell at a desired operating temperature while avoiding unnecessary pumping and cooling energy consumption. Hrovat expressly recognizes the need for precise temperature control to maintain fuel-cell efficiency, humidification, performance, and durability.
Further, it would have been obvious to configure Weingaertner’s fan assemblies to dynamically adjust airflow based on the thermal needs of the fuel-cell power system. Hrovat teaches that fan speed is a controllable variable and that the fan speed is adjusted based on fuel-cell thermal conditions, including coolant temperature and heat generated by the fuel-cell system. Hrovat also teaches that fan speed can be increased when greater cooling airflow is required.
The motivation for this modification would have been to provide cooling airflow commensurate with the actual thermal load of the fuel-cell system. When the fuel-cell system produces greater waste heat, increasing fan speed increases cooling airflow and heat removal; when the thermal load is reduced, fan speed can be reduced to avoid unnecessary energy consumption. This would improve thermal control while reducing parasitic energy consumption associated with operating the fans at unnecessarily high speeds.
With respect to the anti-corrosive materials on the heat exchangers, Holmefjord teaches protecting heat-exchanger surfaces against corrosion. It would have been obvious to apply such anti-corrosive material to the heat exchangers of Weingaertner because the heat exchangers are exposed to coolant, ambient air, moisture, and potentially corrosive environmental conditions. The motivation would have been to increase durability and service life and reduce degradation of the heat exchangers. Such a modification would merely apply a known corrosion-protection technique to the heat exchangers of Weingaertner for its known purpose.
With respect to the claimed inlet louvers, Sano teaches louvered airflow openings associated with a fuel-cell system. Sano’s fuel-cell package includes a fan, an opening, and a louver portion arranged to guide intake or exhaust airflow. The louver is configured to control the direction of airflow through the opening.
It would have been obvious to incorporate Sano’s louver arrangement into the air inlet of the heat exchangers of Weingaertner. The motivation would have been to control the direction of incoming air while reducing the likelihood of environmental contaminants and precipitation entering the heat-exchanger and fuel-cell enclosure. Because Weingaertner already relies upon outside air for cooling, providing a louver at the inlet would provide a predictable means of regulating that incoming airflow and protecting the enclosed components from environmental exposure.
Similarly, Sano teaches an exhaust louver associated with an exhaust opening. It would have been obvious to provide the exhaust opening of Weingaertner’s duct assembly with Sano’s louver structure to direct the exhaust airflow while inhibiting the ingress of water and debris when the system is exposed to the outside environment. Sano’s louver structure is specifically used with a fuel-cell package and is arranged in relation to the package’s airflow openings.
The combination would have involved known components performing their known functions: Weingaertner’s insulated container provides the enclosure; Vanderwees’s pump circulates coolant; Hrovat’s variable-speed pump and fan control regulate coolant flow and cooling airflow according to thermal conditions; Holmefjord’s anti-corrosive material protects the heat exchangers; and Sano’s louvers regulate and protect the intake and exhaust airflow paths.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success because these modifications are directed to the same overall objective of maintaining the fuel-cell system within desired operating conditions while protecting the thermal-management equipment from environmental conditions. The modifications would not change the fundamental operation of Weingaertner’s fuel-cell power system. Rather, they would predictably improve the system’s thermal regulation, energy efficiency, durability, and environmental protection.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner.
Regarding claim 8, Weingaertner, Vanderwees, Hrovat, Holmefjord, Hiechan, and Sano teach the limitations of claim 7, as stated above.
Weingaertner teaches an interface configured to connect to external devices and to supply power from fuel cell power system ([0036]). In particular, Weingaertner teaches that external equipment may be powered by powered generated by power modules 10 and/or by other external power.
Weingaertner is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of fuel cell power systems. The motivation to provide such an interface would have been to permit the electrical power generated by the fuel cell power system to be delivered to external electrical loads or devices. Weingaertner expressly recognizes that power generated by the power modules may be used to power external equipment. Providing an interface through which the external equipment can receive the generated power would therefore have been an expected and straightforward implementation. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success because electrical interfaces for connecting power-generating systems to external loads were well-known and would merely provide an electrical connection between the system and the external device. The modification would therefore constitute the predictable use of a known interface for its intended purpose.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tamara Orduna whose telephone number is (571)431-1457. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/TAMARA ORDUNA/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights