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 § 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 4 and 5 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.
The term “relative” in claims 4 and 5 are a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “relative” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. In order to overcome the rejection, Applicant should amend the claimed language and /or delete term “relative”.
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(s) 1-4 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over English translation of KR20140083817A (Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a liquid gas separator for a fuel cell [abs]; a fuel cell system comprising: a fuel cell assembly with at least one fuel cell , a fuel inlet and a fuel outlet ; a supply line connected to the fuel inlet for supplying gaseous fuel; a discharge line connected to the fuel outlet for discharging excess fuel; a recirculation line connected to the discharge line and the supply line [0019-0023] ; a recirculation compressor [i.e. recirculation blower] arranged in the recirculation line [0005]; , which is configured to generate a fluid flow of excess fuel from the discharge line to the supply line [0005-0006; Kim teaches fuel cell assembly comprising fuel supply lines, discharge channels, recirculation loop, and centrifugal separator body with inlet/outlet pipes and receiving chamber] , said fluid flow having a speed component [0021-i.e. #120 rotating fan; The amount of the droplets to be contained in the recirculated hydrogen can be increased] ; and a water separator [i.e. gas liquid separator; 0018]. It is noted, Kim teaches the required structure of the fuel cell, i.e. fuel inlet/outlet, supply lines, discharge lines, compressor and separator. Kim does not teach some of these components are in the exact locations as required by the instant claim [i.e. specifically the speed component in a circumferential direction of the recirculation line; and the location of the compressor with respect to the water separator which is arranged between the recirculation compressor and the supply line and which comprises a receiving chamber arranged on an exterior of the recirculation line with respect to a radial direction and which is connected to the recirculation line via at least one discharge opening formed in the recirculation line in order to receive liquid constituents contained in the fluid flow]; however it is the examiners position it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structural components in the locations as required by the instant claim; as this is considered to be a rearrangement of parts; without changing how the fuel cell would function. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 2, modified Kim teaches wherein the receiving chamber of the water separator encloses an outer circumference of the recirculation line [0014, 0030; Discloses the droplet guide path extending along the entire outer rim/circumference of the separator body to catch driven droplets] [please refer to the explanation in claim 1 in regards to the structure and where the components are located] . Specifically, Kim teaches the required structure of the fuel cell, i.e. fuel inlet/outlet, supply lines, discharge lines, compressor and separator. Kim does not teach some of these components are in the exact locations as required by the instant claim; however it is the examiners position it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structural components in the locations as required by the instant claim; as this is considered to be a rearrangement of parts.
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches wherein the water separator comprises a guide piece [0008; droplet guide path] projecting into the recirculation line with respect to the radial direction, which partially circumscribes the discharge opening [0021; 0031- 0035; the internal guiding structures and inner rim grooves projecting radially to direct liquid through the discharge boundary].
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches wherein the guide piece extends in an extension direction at an angle relative an inner circumferential surface of the recirculation line , such that a free end of the guide piece [0008; droplet guide path] faces the recirculation compressor , and wherein the receiving chamber comprises a wall extending along the radial direction, which is arranged at a distance from the guide piece in the extension direction [0029, 0031; angled/curved blade orientation and the downward-inclined tangential outlet geometry spaced from the internal rotating center].
Regarding claim 10, Kim teaches the method comprising: supplying (M1) a gaseous fuel to a fuel inlet of a fuel cell assembly (1); discharging (M2) excess fuel from the fuel cell assembly (1); generating (M3) a swirling flow of the excess fuel comprising a speed component in a circumferential direction; directing (M4) the swirling flow across a flow surface (4i) extending along the circumferential direction, in which at least one discharge opening is formed, through which liquid constituents of the flow are drained into a collection container; and recirculating (M5) the fuel cell excess to the fuel inlet [0033-0036, 0040].
Claim(s) 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over English translation of KR20140083817A (Kim) in view of US20140102674A1 (Manz) and US20190249560A1 (Kuhns)
Regarding claim 5, Kim does not teach wherein the recirculation compressor comprises a stator with stator blades and a rotor with rotor blades rotatably mounted on the stator about an axis of rotation , wherein the axis of rotation extends perpendicular to the radial direction , and wherein the stator blades and the rotor blades are inclined relative to one another, flow is generated by a rotation of the rotor about the rotation axis, which comprises a speed component along the axis of rotation and a speed component along the circumferential direction. It is noted, the instant claim is directed to a compressor with a stator and rotor which are not obvious structural components of a fuel cell, rather a compressor is used externally and can be used across various other fields of invention, thus Examiner has used analogous art herein to reject the limitations claimed herein as it solves the problem as described in the instant specification.
Manz teaches a permanent magnet rotor for use with a stator for use in an electric motor/compressor [0032-0033]. Manz further teaches Stationary assembly includes a stator core 28, which includes a plurality of teeth 30 and a plurality of windings 32 wound around stator teeth 30. In the exemplary embodiment, stator core 28 is a twelve tooth stator structure. Alternatively, stator core 28 may include any number of teeth that enables motor 10 to function as described herein [corresponding to the claimed stator with blades; 0031]; Rotatable assembly 20 includes a permanent magnet rotor core 36 [corresponds to the claimed rotor; 0032] and a shaft 38. In the exemplary embodiment, rotor core 36 is formed from a stack of laminations made of magnetically permeable material. Alternatively, rotor core 36 is a solid core. Rotor core 36 is substantially received in a central bore of stator core 28 for rotation along an axis of rotation X; the motor is coupled to a fan or blower for moving air [i.e. corresponding to the claimed flow is generated by a rotation of the rotor about the rotation axis, which comprises a speed component along the axis of rotation and a speed component along the circumferential direction].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the components of the compressor i..e stator and rotor as taught by Manz to the fuel cell system of Kim, as a skilled artisan would easily understand that incorporating these structural components are fundamental components in many gas turbine engines and the like, it serves to increase pressure of a working fluid. Particularly in this instance it will aid to increase the flow of the liquid to enter back to the fuel cell as needed. As known in the art, a rotor imparts energy and accelerates fluid, the stator converts kinetic energy to pressure and directs flow for the next stage; both are required to effectively transform mechanical energy from a motor/compressor into increased fluid pressure while maintain flow alignment and minimizing loss. Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, F.).
Manz does not teach the rotor has blades and the stator and rotor blades are inclined relative to one another.
Kuhns teaches an improved architecture for rotary kinetic fluid motors and pumps [abs] and teaches the rotor has blades [0010; 0030] and the stator and rotor blades are inclined relative to one another [0030-0031; 0043-fig 9c]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim and Manz in view of Kuhns and incorporate the blades and the position as claimed, as directs working fluid through an alternating pattern of blade sets and fluid vortices. Each blade set represents an angular velocity ‘step’ and each fluid vortex represents a transition between ‘steps’ [0043].
Regarding claim 6, modified Kim in view of Manz and Kuhns teaches wherein the rotor blades are held inwardly on a carrier ring [Kim rotor core; 0032] with respect to the radial direction .
Regarding claim 7, modified Kim in view of Manz teaches wherein permanent magnets are attached to the carrier ring , and wherein an electrical coil arrangement is arranged on an outer circumference of the recirculation line, which is
Regarding claim 8, modified Kim in view of Manz teaches wherein the carrier ring on an outer circumferential surface comprises recesses in which the permanent magnets are arranged, and wherein one of the recesses [Manz 0039] and a sleeve [Manz 0042-0044] covering the permanent magnets arranged therein is arranged on the outer circumferential surface of the carrier ring.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over English translation of KR20140083817A (Kim) in view of US2017/0104426A1 (Mills)
Regarding claim 9, Kim does not teach the fuel cell system according to claim further comprising: a suction jet pump arranged in the supply line having a propel nozzle connected to an inlet of the supply line, a suction inlet connected to the recirculation line, and an output connected to the fuel inlet of the fuel cell assembly. Mills teaches an electrical power generation system [abs]; and teaches the suction jet pump [0490; i.e. #18]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to used modified Kim in view of Mills as adding a suction jet pump is a known structural component of a fuel cell which is used to recirculate/move gas in the system for efficient electrochemical reaction where one would expect a reasonable expectation of success. The prior art can be modified or combined to reject claims as prima facie obvious as long as there is a reasonable expectation of success. See In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (see MPEP § 2143.02).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARIKA GUPTA whose telephone number is (571)272-9907. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights