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 .
Status of Claims
Claim(s) 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim(s) 17-20 have been withdrawn.
Claim(s) 20 has been amended.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group 1, claims 1-16, in the reply filed on 09/04/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the method claims of Group OO are directed to recovery by means of a recovery system and therefore have a technical relationship with the recovery-system claims of Group 1. This is not found persuasive because the shared technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art (See previously cited US 2008/10038618 A1, Naito et al.; see also the rejection of the claims over US 20200194814 A1, Fung et al. as set forth below.)
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected method of recovery (Group 2, claims 17-20), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 09/04/2026.
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 3, 5-10 and 16 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.
Regarding claim 3
The limitation “a separator drive which is in particular controllable and/or electromotive” is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. The phrase “in particular” makes it uncertain whether the separator drive is required to be controllable and/or electromotive, or whether these limitations are merely optional or exemplary. One of ordinary skill in the art cannot reasonably ascertain the scope of the claims. Appropriate correction and clarification is required.
Regarding claims 5 and 6
The limitation “preferably designed to implement, in addition to the separating function, a conveying function for conveying the recirculation flow in a conduit system of the recovery system” is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear if the separating apparatus is required to implement the recited conveying function or whether the limitation is merely optional. One of ordinary skill in the art cannot reasonably ascertain the scope of the claims. Appropriate correction and clarification is required.
Claim 6 is rejected at least for it dependency on claim 5.
Regarding claims 7-10
The limitation “wherein the conveying apparatus is preferably arranged upstream or downstream of the separating apparatus in the direction of flow of the recirculation flow” is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. The term “preferably” expresses a preference or possibility and does not clearly set forth if the limitations following said term are required by the claim or merely optional. One of ordinary skill in the art cannot reasonably ascertain the scope of the claims. Appropriate correction and clarification is required.
Claims 8-10 are rejected at least for their dependency on claim 7.
Regarding claim 16
The limitation “which is designed to separate liquid water from an oxygen supply flow containing oxygen, in particular on a cathode side of the fuel cell, wherein the additional separating apparatus and the separating apparatus are preferably kinematically coupled to one another” is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. The phrase “in particular” makes it uncertain whether the additional separating apparatus is designed to separate the liquid water from an oxygen supply flow containing oxygen on a cathode side of the cell, or whether these limitations are merely optional or exemplary. Further, the term “preferably” expresses a preference or possibility and does not clearly set forth if the limitations following said term are required by the claim or merely optional. One of ordinary skill in the art cannot reasonably ascertain the scope of the claims. Appropriate correction and clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 11, 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20200194814 A1, Fung et al.
Regarding claim 1
Fung teaches a recovery system (corresponding to a side-channel compressor 1 and fuel cell system 37) for recovering a recirculation flow (corresponding to a gaseous medium containing hydrogen and heavy component parts such as water and/or nitrogen) that exits a full cell (39) and contains hydrogen (the gaseous medium contains hydrogen) [Fig. 1, paras. 0014, 0024, 0042 and 0048-0049], the recovery system comprising an active centrifugal separator (see components of the side-channel compressor 1 comprising disk-type compressor wheel 2-area delimited by broken lines in Fig. 1) designed to separate liquid water from the recirculation flow (centrifugal separation takes place and the heavy component parts of the gaseous medium such as nitrogen and/or water are separated and discharged through channel 46) [Figs. 1 and 7, paras. 0048 and 0051].
PNG
media_image1.png
569
460
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1
Regarding claim 2
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, wherein the active centrifugal separator (area in broken lines) is formed as a disk separator (see disk-type compressor wheel 2) [Figs. 2-3, paras. 0028 and 0042].
Regarding claim 3
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, further comprising a separator drive (rotary drive 6) which is, in particular, controllable and/or electromotive (electric drive) [Fig. 1 and para. 0028], and which is designed to rotationally drive the active centrifugal separator (electric drive 6 serves as a rotary drive 6 of the compressor wheel 2) [Fig. 1 and para. 0028].
Regarding claim 4
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, further comprising a conduit system (see inlet and outlet openings, 14 and 16 OR discharge channel 46) via which the recirculation flow (gaseous medium) can be fed to the active centrifugal separator (area in broken lines) and/or via which the recirculation flow can be discharged from the active centrifugal separator [Figs. 1 and 6-7, paras. 0031, 0033, 0035, 0051], wherein the active centrifugal separator is designed to support the conveyance of the recirculation flow (gaseous medium) in the conduit system (a high pressure and a high conveying rate of the medium to be conveyed in the fuel cell system are maintained) [paras. 0031, 0033, 0035, 0044 and 0051].
Regarding claim 5
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, wherein the active centrifugal separator (area in broken lines) has a rotatably drivable separating apparatus (corresponding to disk-type compressor wheel 2) for separating water from the recirculation flow (gaseous medium) [Figs. 1 and 3, paras. 0032, 0035, 0048 and 0051], wherein the separating apparatus (2) is preferably designed to implement, in addition to the separating function, a conveying function for conveying the recirculation flow in a conduit system of the recovery system (the gaseous medium already situated in the compressor chamber 30 herein is entrained by the conveyor cell 28 and is conveyed and/or compressed herein) [para. 0032].
Regarding claim 6
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, wherein the separating apparatus (2) has one or more separator disks (conveyor cell 28) [Fig. 3 and para. 0037], wherein one separator disk or several or all separator disks each have one or more conveyor elements (V-shaped blades 5) supporting the conveying of the recirculation flow (gaseous medium) [Figs. 3-4, paras. 0038-0039].
Regarding claim 11
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, wherein the active centrifugal separator is designed to separate gaseous nitrogen from the recirculation flow (centrifugal separation takes place and the heavy component parts of the gaseous medium such as nitrogen and/or water are separated and discharged through channel 46) [Figs. 1 and 7, paras. 0048 and 0051].
Regarding claim 13
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, further comprising a feeding apparatus (corresponding to jet pump 41) which is designed to feed the recirculation flow (gaseous medium), after water separation by the active centrifugal separator (2), to a hydrogen main feed stream for the fuel cell (39) [Fig. 1 and para. 0033].
Regarding claim 14
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, wherein the feeding apparatus is formed as a jet pump (41) [Fig. 1 and para. 0033].
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.
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) 7-9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200194814 A1, Fung et al. as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 13 and 14 above, and further in view of US 20220102742 A1, Hero et al.
Regarding claim 7
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above.
Fung does not teach the active centrifugal separator comprising a conveying apparatus for supporting the recirculation flow, wherein the conveying apparatus is preferably arranged upstream or downstream of the separating apparatus in the direction of flow of the recirculation flow.
Hero teaches a recovery system (see delivery unit 3) comprising conveying apparatus (corresponding to recirculation blower 8) for supporting recirculation flow [Figs. 1-2 and para. 0035], wherein the conveying apparatus is preferably arranged upstream or downstream of a separating apparatus (corresponding to compressor wheel 12) in the direction of flow of the recirculation flow [Fig. 2 and para. 0038].
Fung and Hero are analogous inventions in the field of gaseous medium recovery systems for fuel cells. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the recovery system of Fung, to comprise a conveying apparatus, as discloses in Hero, to facilitate return of the recirculation gas in the system [para. 0002 of Hero].
Regarding claim 8
Modified Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above, wherein the conveying apparatus (blower) and the separating (2) apparatus are kinematically coupled to one another (the recirculation blower 8 has a compressor wheel 12, wherein the compressor wheel 12 is mounted, rotatably about a horizontally running axis of rotation 48, in the housing 7) [Hero, Fig. 2 and para. 0038].
Regarding claim 9
Modified Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above wherein the conveying apparatus comprises a pump wheel, a conveying wheel, a screw compressor and/or a side channel blower (i.e., blower) [Hero, Fig. 2 and para. 0038].
Regarding claim 15
Fung teaches the recovery system as set forth above.
Fung does not teach a dosing valve via which the feeding apparatus can be fed with hydrogen in a pulsed manner.
Hero teaches a recovery system (see delivery unit 3) comprising a dosing valve (6) via which the feeding apparatus can be fed with hydrogen in a pulsed manner (pressurized H2, which is in particular a motive medium, is fed in a flow direction VII to the jet pump 4 by means of the dosing valve 6) [paras. 0035 and 0040].
Fung and Hero are analogous inventions in the field of gaseous medium recovery systems for fuel cells. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the recovery system of Fung, to comprise a dosing valve, as discloses in Hero, in order to regulate the delivery rate of the circulation medium and adapt the recirculation flow to the operating requirements of the fuel cell system [Hero, para. 0040].
It is noted that, although disclosed in the art, the limitation “via which the feeding apparatus can be fed with hydrogen in a pulsed manner” is considered a functional limitation and is given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the claimed function. It has been held that when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent (see MPEP § 2112.01). “When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not.” In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200194814 A1, Fung et al. as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 13 and 14 above, and further in view of US 20080160363 A1, Tsukada.
Regarding claim 10
Fung teaches the recovery system set forth above.
Fung does not teach a bypass conduit which is designed to direct the recirculation flow past the conveying apparatus.
Tsukada teaches a recovery system for a fuel cell [see Abstract] comprising a bypass conduit (corresponding to direct circuit 15) which is designed to direct the recirculation flow past the conveying apparatus (the direct circuit 15 bypasses the humidifier 2 which enables the water contained in the unconsumed gas to be removed therefrom) [Fig. 1, para. 0020 and Abstract]. Such enables the control of the respective proportions of the dry and moist gases [para. 0027].
Fung and Tsukada are analogous inventions in the field of gaseous medium recovery systems for fuel cells. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the recovery system of Fung, to comprise a bypass conduit, as discloses in Tsukada, for the purpose of controlling the proportions of the dry and moist gases.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200194814 A1, Fung et al. as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 13 and 14 above, and further in view of DE 102014202574 A1, FRISCH et al.
Regarding claim 12
Fung teaches the recovery system set forth above.
Fung does not teach one or more physical or chemical filters or adsorbents which are designed to separate nitrogen from the recirculation flow.
FRISCH teaches a recovery system for a fuel cell [Abstract], wherein nitrogen is separated from the recirculation flow (mixed gas) using a filter so as to ensure successful separation of nitrogen.
Fung and FRISCH are analogous inventions in the field of gaseous medium recovery systems for fuel cells. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the recovery system of Fung, to comprise a filter designed to separate nitrogen, as discloses in FRISCH, so as to ensure successful separation of nitrogen.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200194814 A1, Fung et al. as applied to claims 1-6, 11, 13 and 14 above, and further in view of US 20140377675 A1, Peterson et al.
Regarding claim 10
Fung teaches the recovery system set forth above.
Fung does not teach an additional separating apparatus which is designed to separate liquid water from an oxygen supply flow containing oxygen, in particular on a cathode side of the fuel cell, wherein the additional separating apparatus and the separating apparatus are preferably kinematically coupled to one another.
Peterson teaches a recovery system for a fuel cell [see abstract] comprising a separating apparatus (36) and a further additional separating apparatus (50) which is designed to separate liquid water from an oxygen supply flow containing oxygen (cathode side 16 receives oxygen, wherein liquid water from the humidified air flow is removed before it enters the cathode side 16 of the stack 12 at input 52) [paras. 0020-0022], in particular, on a cathode side of the fuel cell [para. 0022].
Fung and Peterson are analogous inventions in the field of gaseous medium recovery systems for fuel cells. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the recovery system of Fung to comprise an additional separating apparatus, as discloses in Peterson, in order to prevent water blockages within the cells of the cathode side, leading to decreases in cell voltage and/or instabilities within the fuel cell stack [Peterson, para. 0022].
The limitation “wherein the additional separating apparatus and the separating apparatus are preferably kinematically coupled to one another” is considered an optional limitation and therefore not required by the claim. It is noted that Peterson teaches that a drain line 38 from separator 36 and a drain line 58 from separator 50 may be connected to a line 60 downstream of the valve 56 [para. 0022].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 115224316 A, Zhou et al. teaches a recovery system for a fuel cell [Abstract], wherein nitrogen is separated from the recirculation flow (mixed gas) using a filter so as to improve the performance of the fuel cell [Page
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5054. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 9:00-5:00 - 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303)297-4684. 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.
/MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights