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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.5.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/18/2023 and 12/14/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 09/20/2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
. There are two abstracts one file. The original abstract included (Fig. 2). The abstract filed 18/20/2023 removed the additional “(Fig.2)”. Applicant has not shown a strikethrough to remove “(Fig.2)”.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 3 be found allowable, claim 10 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finger et. al (WO-02086997-A2; hereinafter Finger) in view of Thomann (DEG0018003A; hereinafter Thomann). Machine translations are being used for the references.
Regarding claim 1, Finger teaches an air-supply device for fuel-cell systems with two-stage compression (two-stage fuel cell air supply system, Abstract), characterized in that for supplying fuel-cell stacks electrically connected in parallel, a turbocompressor (see 16 figure 1) which is mechanically coupled to an exhaust-air turbine (see 17 figure 1) for the respective fuel- cell stack, is provided for each of the fuel-cell stacks wherein at least one electrically driven flow compressor (see 14 figure 1) which respectively provides at least two of the turbocompressors with air in parallel, is provided upstream of the respective turbocompressor (see arrangement figure 1) in the direction of flow of the compressed air. Finger fails to teach a duplication of the fuel cell system. Finger fails to teach that the flow compressor supplies at least two parallel turbo-compressors. Thomann however in the same field of endeavor namely a turbo-compressors discloses the efficiency and economic benefits of including a pre-compressor upstream to the two parallelly connected impeller groups of a multistage turbo compressor (see figure 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
439
555
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Figure 1 Thomann
Before the effective filing date of the current invention, in seeking an efficient system it would have been obvious to apply the method disclosed by Thomann to the system disclosed by Finger as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known method for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result. Adding a second or multiple parallel turbo-compressors to increase the volume stream is a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In reHarza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) and a duplicated version is disclosed as known prior Art in the current application.
PNG
media_image2.png
607
519
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2: Figure 1 Finger
Claims 2 – 6, 10 - 19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finger et. al (WO-02086997-A2; hereinafter Finger) in view of Thomann (DEG0018003A; hereinafter Thomann) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sumser et al. (DE 102007028297 A1; hereinafter Sumser). Machine translations are being used for the references.
Regarding claim 2, Finger discloses the air-supply device according to claim 1 but fails to disclose that at least one of the exhaust-air turbines comprises a variable turbine guide grille. Sumser discloses a variable turbine guide grille (see part 12 figure 3 or [0034]). Finger and Sumser are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely air supply systems for fuel cells.
Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to apply the variable turbine guide grille as disclosed by Sumser to the air-supply device disclosed by Finger as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known component for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
Regarding claim 3, Finger discloses the air-supply device according to claim 1 but fails to disclose that each of the exhaust-air turbines comprises a variable turbine guide grille. Sumser discloses a variable turbine guide grille (see part 12 figure 3 or [0034]). Finger and Sumser are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely air supply systems for fuel cells.
Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to apply the variable turbine guide grille as disclosed by Sumser to the air-supply device disclosed by Finger as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known component for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
PNG
media_image3.png
607
416
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 3: Finger 1 Sumser
Regarding claim 4, Finger teaches the air-supply device as disclosed in claim 1 above but fails to teach that the at least one variable turbine guide grille and a drive motor of the flow compressor are controlled via a common control. Sumser discloses the fuel cell system further comprises a control unit 23, by means of which the valves 15 and 19, the electric motor 9 and the guide vane structure 12 of the turbine 11 can be controlled ([0038]).
Regarding claim 5, the air-supply device (27) according to claim 1 wherein one flow compressor and exactly two turbo-compressors are provided. In the following adding a second air supply line and fuel cell stack according to Finger or alternatively relying on Figure 1 of the current application that discloses an air supply system comprising exactly two turbo-compressors and two air flow compressors would have come to the same result. Thomann teaches the economic benefits of adding a pre-condenser to two parallelly operating groups of an impeller. While Thomann discusses two parallelly operating groups of an impeller to increase its economic efficiency, Thomann is analogous prior art to the current invention because both are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely multi-stage turbo compressors systems. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, to apply the method disclosed by Thomann and add an additional compressor upstream of the two parallelly operated compressors as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known method for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
Regarding claim 6, Finger teaches a respective intercooler arranged in the flow direction downstream of the respective turbocompressor (cooling downstream of the high-pressure compressor (16 in Figure 2) or placed between the low-pressure compressor (14,16, in Figure 2) ([0032]).
Regarding claim 10, Finger discloses the air-supply device as described in claim 2 above but fails to disclose that each of the exhaust-air turbines comprises a variable turbine guide grille. Sumser discloses a variable turbine guide grille (see part 12 figure 3 or [0034]).
Regarding claim 11, Finger discloses the air-supply device according to claim 1 but fails to disclose that at least one of the exhaust-air turbines comprises a variable turbine guide grille. Sumser discloses a variable turbine guide grille (see part 12 figure 3 or [0034]).
Regarding claim 12, Finger teaches the air-supply device according to claim according as disclosed above but fails to teach that the at least one variable turbine guide grille and a drive motor of the flow compressor are controlled via a common control. Sumser discloses a fuel cell system including the variable turbine grille (see figure 3 above) that further comprises a control unit 23, by means of which the valves 15 and 19, the electric motor 9 and the guide vane structure 12 of the turbine 11 can be controlled ([0038]).
Regarding claim 13, Figure 1 of the current application, displaying the prior art, discloses an air supply system comprising exactly two turbo-compressors and two air flow compressors (the claim requires only one). Thomann teaches the economic benefits of adding a pre-condenser to two parallelly operating groups of an impeller. While Thomann discusses two parallelly operating groups of an impeller to increase its economic efficiency, Thomann is analogous prior art to the current invention because both are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely multi-stage turbo compressors systems. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, to apply the method disclosed by Thomann and add only one additional compressor upstream of the two parallelly operated compressors as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known method for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
Regarding claim 14, Figure 1 of the current application discloses an air supply system comprising exactly two turbo-compressors and two air flow compressors. Thomann teaches the economic benefits of adding a pre-condenser to two parallelly operating groups of an impeller. While Thomann discusses two parallelly operating groups of an impeller to increase its economic efficiency, Thomann is analogous prior art to the current invention because both are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely multi-stage turbo compressors systems. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, to apply the method disclosed by Thomann and add an additional compressor upstream of the two parallelly operated compressors as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known method for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
Regarding claim 15, The air-supply device according to claim 4, wherein one flow compressor and exactly two turbocompressors are provided. Figure 1 of the current application discloses an air supply system comprising exactly two turbo-compressors and two air flow compressors. Thomann teaches the economic benefits of adding a pre-condenser to two parallelly operating groups of an impeller. While Thomann discusses two parallelly operating groups of an impeller to increase its economic efficiency, Thomann is analogous prior art to the current invention because both are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely multi-stage turbo compressors systems. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, to apply the method disclosed by Thomann and add an additional compressor upstream of the two parallelly operated compressors as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known method for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
Regarding claim 16, Finger teaches the air-supply device according to claim 2 and further teaches a respective intercooler arranged in the flow direction downstream of the respective turbocompressor (cooling downstream of the high-pressure compressor (16 in Figure 2) or placed between the low-pressure compressor (14,16, in Figure 2) ([0032]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Finger teaches the air supply device as described by claim 3 and further discloses a respective intercooler arranged in the flow direction downstream of the respective turbocompressor (cooling downstream of the high-pressure compressor (16 in Figure 2) or placed between the low-pressure compressor (14,16, in Figure 2) ([0032]).
Regarding claim 18, Finger discloses the air supply system according to claim 4 and further discloses a respective intercooler arranged in the flow direction downstream of the respective turbocompressor (cooling downstream of the high-pressure compressor (16 in Figure 2) or placed between the low-pressure compressor (14,16, in Figure 2) ([0032]).
Regarding claim 19, modified Finger discloses the air-supply device composed of exactly two turbocompressors and one flow compressor as described in claim 5 and further teaches a respective intercooler arranged in the flow direction downstream of the respective turbocompressor (cooling downstream of the high-pressure compressor (16 in Figure 2) or placed between the low-pressure compressor (14,16, in Figure 2) ([0032]).
Claims 7, 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finger et. al (WO-02086997-A2; hereinafter Finger) in view of Thomann (DEG0018003A; hereinafter Thomann) as applied to claim 1,2 or 6 above, and further in view of Harr et. al (DE102021000329 A1; Harr hereinafter). Machine translations are being used for the references.
Regarding claim 7, Finger discloses the fuel cell system with an air supply device (two-stage fuel cell air supply system, Abstract) but fails to disclose the at least two fuel-cell stacks. Harr discloses a system comprising two parallel fuel cell systems, each of which include at least one fuel cell stack with anode-side and cathode-side periphery, and with a common air delivery device (Abstract). Finger and Harr are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely air supply systems for fuel cell systems. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to apply the air supply system as disclosed by Finger to a multi stack set up as disclosed by Harr, as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known method for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
Regarding claim 8, Finger discloses the fuel cell system and it being used in a vehicle [0004]. Harr discloses the at least two fuel cell stacks.
Regarding claim 20, Finger discloses the fuel cell system with an air supply device but fails to disclose the at least two fuel-cell stacks. Harr discloses a system comprising two parallel fuel cell systems, each of which include at least one fuel cell stack with anode-side and cathode-side periphery, and with a common air delivery device (Abstract). Finger and Harr are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely air supply systems for fuel cell systems. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to apply the air supply system as disclosed by Finger to a multi stack set up as disclosed by Harr, as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known method for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finger et. al (WO-02086997-A2; hereinafter Finger) in view of Thomann (DEG0018003A; hereinafter Thomann) as applied to claim 8 above and in further view of Schaller et al. (DE 10006344 C1; Schaller hereinafter). Machine translations are being used for the references.
Regarding claim 9, Finger discloses the fuel cell system and it being used in a vehicle but fails to disclose that the vehicle is a commercial vehicle. Schaller discloses a motor vehicle with a fuel cell system, particularly a commercial vehicle with a fuel cell system, which has fuel cells supplied with compressed air…(Abstract). Finger and Schaller are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely fuel cell systems. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to apply the fuel cell system for a general vehicle as disclosed by Finger to a commercial vehicle as disclosed by Schaller as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known method for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure:
Huifang (CN107579266A) teaches a set of air compressors for a fuel cell system in various arrangements including operating the compressors in parallel or in serial connection.
Pan (CN 210245631U) discloses a hydrogen turbocharger for a fuel cell engine.
Hibino (JPS6325198B2) teaches a multi-stage compression system and a control method thereof
Kemmer (US20210372412) discloses a turbo compressor for a fuel cell system
Ogawa (JP2000315510A) discloses a variable geometry turbocharger
Ju (US20190264967) teaches a multi-stage compressing system and control method thereof
Kang (KR20160045251A) teaches a turbocharger for a fuel cell vehicle and a control method thereof
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMANTHA LEE HANYON whose telephone number is (571)272-8881. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-5pm.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/S.L.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights