CTNF 18/537,979 CTNF 96363 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi (US 2012/0028135 A1) further in view of Sawai (US 2019/0047404 A1) and de Miguel et al. (Int. J. Hydrog. Energy, Volume 41, Issue 20, 2016) . In Regards to Claim 1: Ohashi discloses a vehicle (100) comprising: a fuel cell stack, a radiator (33) configured to cool a coolant circulating in the fuel cell stack, and a plurality of gas tanks (first fuel gas tank, 42a, and second fuel gas tank, 42b) filled with hydrogen to be supplied to the fuel cell stack (Figures 1 and 2, [0055-0056, 0058-0061, 0090]). Ohashi is deficient in disclosing 1) a manifold connecting openings of the gas tanks; and 2) a cooling channel that is provided in the manifold and through which the coolant circulates. Regarding 1), Sawai discloses a vehicle comprising: a fuel cell stack (18) and a plurality of gas tanks (tank bodies, 22) filled with hydrogen to be supplied to the fuel cell stack (18) (Figures 1 and 2, [0046-0047]). Sawai further discloses a manifold (second manifold, 38) which serves to connect openings of the gas tanks (tank bodies, 22) and to act as a heat transmitting section (Figure 2, [0054, 0056]). Sawai further discloses that the manifold (second manifold, 38) includes a channel (third tube, 44) serving as a heat transmitting section which controls a temperature of the gas tanks (tank bodies, 22) such that they remain at a desired temperature (Figure 2, [0006-0007, 0076-0077]). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the vehicle of Ohashi to include a manifold which connects openings of the plurality of gas tanks and which comprises a channel to control the temperature of the gas tanks, as it is known in the art that a plurality of gas tanks in a vehicle may be connected to one another via a manifold and that the manifold may comprise a channel through which a temperature of the gas tanks is controlled, as taught by Sawai. Furthermore, the selection of a known apparatus based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, the limitation of Claim 1 requiring a manifold connecting openings of the gas tanks, is met. Regarding 2), de Miguel reports on the impact of the initial temperature of gas tanks during refueling (p. 8606, Abstract). De Miguel teaches that upon filling a hydrogen tank, the final temperature has direct impact on the safety of the tank given the relationship between temperature and pressure in a gas (p. 8606-8607, Introduction). De Miguel further teaches that performing cooling on the gas tank may prevent some safety hazards associated with refilling hydrogen gas tanks (p.8614-8615, Conclusions). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to further modify the vehicle of Ohashi to make the channel in the manifold of modified Ohashi be a cooling channel wherein the coolant circulates therethrough, as it is known in the art that a channel in a manifold may be used to control the temperature of gas tanks, as taught by Sawai, and further as it is known in the art that cooling a hydrogen gas tank can be useful to prevent safety hazards associated with elevated temperatures during refueling, as taught by de Miguel. By doing so, the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation of success in limiting the safety hazards associated with temperature changes within the gas tanks, as taught by de Miguel. Upon the above modifications, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met. In Regards to Claim 2 (Dependent Upon Claim 1): Ohashi as modified by Sawai and de Miguel disclose the vehicle of Claim 1 as set forth above. Ohashi further discloses a control valve (34) that is provided in a circulation channel for circulation of the coolant through the fuel cell stack and the radiator (33), and that is configured to adjust a flow rate of the coolant flowing through the fuel cell stack via regulating the amount of coolant flow into the radiator (33) (Figure 1, [0059]). Upon the modifications detailed in the rejection of Claim 1 above, the skilled artisan would appreciate that as the control valve (34) regulates the amount of coolant flow into the radiator (33), it would also circulate the coolant through the cooling channel and control a flow rate of the coolant flowing through the cooling channel as all are connected through the circulation channel. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met. In Regards to Claim 3 (Dependent Upon Claim 2): Ohashi as modified by Sawai and de Miguel disclose the vehicle of Claim 2 as set forth above. Ohashi further discloses a temperature sensor (32) configured to detect a temperature of the fuel cell stack (Figure 1, [0059]). Ohashi further discloses a control device (control unit, 80) configured to perform feedback control on an opening degree of the control valve (34) based on the temperature of the fuel cell stack that is detected by the temperature sensor (32) (Figure 1, [0075, 0083]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 3 are met. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1498. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM. 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)-270-5256. 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. /E.E.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724 Application/Control Number: 18/537,979 Page 2 Art Unit: 1724 Application/Control Number: 18/537,979 Page 3 Art Unit: 1724 Application/Control Number: 18/537,979 Page 4 Art Unit: 1724 Application/Control Number: 18/537,979 Page 5 Art Unit: 1724 Application/Control Number: 18/537,979 Page 6 Art Unit: 1724
Prosecution Insights