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 Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: incorrect tense of word.
Claim 10 recites: A control unit comprising a memory unit in which a code is stored and a computing unit, wherein, the computing unit is configure to…” The word “configure” is grammatically incorrect. The correct word is “configured”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-4 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites: “The method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises at least one of the following steps: -initiating a process of deactivating the fuel-cell system (100)…” This limitation is considered indefinite because it is unclear as to what applicant refers to. It is unclear if applicant is referring to the same process of deactivating the fuel-cell system as recited in claim 1 or if it is a different one.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret claim 2 as reciting: ““The method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises at least one of the following steps: -initiating the process of deactivating the fuel-cell system (100)…”
Claim 3 recites: “The method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises at least one of the following steps: -initiating a process of deactivating the fuel-cell system (100)…” This limitation is considered indefinite because it is unclear as to what applicant refers to. It is unclear if applicant is referring to the same process of deactivating the fuel-cell system as recited in claim 1 or if it is a different one.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret claim 3 as reciting: ““The method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises at least one of the following steps: -initiating the process of deactivating the fuel-cell system (100)…”
Claim 10 recites: “A control unit comprising a memory unit in which a code is stored and a computing unit, wherein, the computing unit is configured to
initiate a process of deactivating the fuel-cell system (100), monitor the time (t) since the initiation of the deactivation process for excess of the determined deactivation time (tab), deactivate the supply of fuel when the time (t) has reached the determined deactivation time (tab), monitor a current pressure (p) in the region (H, M, L) of the anode system (20) for falling below a minimum limit (Pmin), activate the supply of fuel when the pressure (p) has fallen below the minimum limit (Pmin) in order to raise the current pressure (p), deactivate the supply of fuel, and end the deactivation process.” The underlined limitations have not been mentioned previously in the claim. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 11 recites: “A non-transitory, computer-readable media comprising commands that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer
to initiate a process of deactivating the fuel-cell system (100),monitor the time (t) since the initiation of the deactivation process for excess of the determined deactivation time (tab), deactivate the supply of fuel when the time (t) has reached the determined deactivation time (tab),monitor a current pressure (p) in the region (H, M, L) of the anode system (20) for falling below a minimum limit (Pmin), activate the supply of fuel when the pressure (p) has fallen below the minimum limit (Pmin) in order to raise the current pressure (p), deactivate the supply of fuel, and end the deactivation process.” The underlined limitations have not been mentioned previously in the claim. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 4 is rejected because it depends on rejected claim 3. Claims 8-9 are rejected because they depend on rejected claim 2.
Examiner’s Comments
In regards to Claims 2-4 and 8-11, no art rejection has been made for these claims. These have only been rejected under 35 USC 112 as explained in the above office action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 5-7 are allowed.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Morita et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2012/0077102)-which is considered the closest prior art of record, discloses a method of shutting down and fuel cell system (#10) comprising:
Initiating a process of deactivating the fuel-cell system (#10) (S1 in figure 4 and paragraphs [0071]-[0072]);
Ending the process of deactivating the fuel-cell system (#10) (S6 in figure 4 and paragraph [0079]; Morita discloses it is determined whether or not the calculated hydrogen gas partial pressure P1 is equal to or higher than the preset lower-limit value P1L for the fuel gas pressure (step S5). If it is judged that the calculated hydrogen gas partial pressure P1 is equal to or higher than the preset lower-limit value P1L for the fuel gas pressure (YES in step S5), then control proceeds to step S6, at which time the discharging process is completed. More specifically, the back pressure control valve 58 is temporarily opened to atmospheric pressure, and the FC contactor 86 is turned off.); and
Calculating a pressure profile in the region of the anode system during the deactivation process in dependence on an accumulated amount of fuel (S3 in figure 4 and paragraph [0078]; Morita discloses during the discharging process, the controller #18 detects, through the pressure sensor, the anode pressure P2 including the pressure of hydrogen gas supplied to the fuel cell stack #12, and the controller #18 also detects the hydrogen gas temperature, i.e., the anode gas temperature, through the temperature sensor #102. The controller #18 calculates a water vapor partial pressure P3 from the detected hydrogen gas temperature, and calculates a hydrogen gas partial pressure P1 by subtracting the water vapor partial pressure P3 from the detected anode pressure P2.).
The differences between Morita and the instant invention is that Morita fails to disclose: (1) recording a fuel throughput through a region of an anode system during the deactivation process, (2) accumulating, from the recorded fuel throughput, an amount of fuel that has been passed through the region of the anode system during the deactivation process, (3) raising the calculated pressure profile by a pressure difference between a desired end pressure and an end pressure according to the calculated pressure profile, and (4) determining a deactivation time for deactivating the supply of fuel in dependence of the raised pressure profile and an initial pressure in the region of the anode system.
Applicant discloses on paragraph [0021] of instant specification that: “Advantageously, with the aid of the invention, the pressure in the anode system can be significantly reduced when deactivating the fuel-cell system, e.g., from 15 bar to e. g. 1 bar. Also, using the invention, a reduction of the pressure load on the components of the anode system can be enabled, because the shut-off valve is closed in a timely manner during the deactivation process or deactivation process. In this way, a relaxing of the requirements for the components of the anode system can be brought about, such as the pressure reducer, pressure regulator, pressure sensors, etc. In addition, this can reduce system costs and enable the use of inexpensive materials. Moreover, this can reduce the added consumption of fuel upon deactivating the system.”
Applicant further discloses on paragraph [0026] of instant specification that: “Thus, the method can be carried out with increased safety and flexibility, in particular during a normal operation of the fuel-cell system (100). Advantageously, the actually prevailing pressure in the relevant region of the anode system can be considered in an improved manner in order to ensure that the pressure does not fall below a determined minimum limit. In addition, the possibility can thus be created to adjust a theoretically calculated deactivation time.”
Applicant further discloses on paragraph [0073] of instant specification that: “Using the invention, when deactivating the fuel-cell system 100, the pressure p in the anode system 20, in particular on the components used for the supply of fuel, can be significantly reduced. The compressive load on the components of the anode system 20 can also be reduced as a result. Thus, the requirements for the components of the anode system 20 can be reduced, so that system costs can be reduced and the use of inexpensive materials can be enabled. In addition, using the invention, the additional consumption of fuel can be reduced when deactivating the fuel-cell system 100.”
There is no reason, motivation or suggestion in Morita, alone or in combination, which would motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to have a method for operating a fuel-cell system which the above configuration, as claimed by the applicant, in order to arrive at the claimed invention. For this reason, the above claims are considered allowable.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JELITZA M PEREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-6:00pm.
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, Claire Wang can be reached at (571) 270-1051. 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.
/JELITZA M PEREZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights