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 .
Summary
This is the response to the Amendment/Request for Reconsideration filed on 07/31/2026.
Claims 16-30 remain pending in the application.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16-24 and 27-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Horiuchi et al. (EP3666843). Further evidence is provided by Murakami et al. (US 2006/0204819).
Addressing claim 16, Horiuchi discloses a method of manufacturing a graphite bipolar plate (the combination of two graphite separators, [0061-0062]) for a fuel cell [0061], comprising:
providing a pair of graphite monopolar plates (two graphite separators as described in paragraphs [0061-0062]) and
bonding the monopolar plates along opposing contact faces of the monopolar plates [0061-0062],
wherein a 1C epoxy resin is used for bonding (one part epoxy adhesive, [0009]),
wherein the 1C epoxy resin is adapted to have an activation temperature of at least 50oC [0063] by applying, as a hardener, aromatic amines which act as solid hardeners (paragraph [0016] discloses aromatic amines as curing agent, which corresponds to the claimed hardener and acting as solid hardeners; indeed, Murakami discloses in paragraph [0039] that aromatic amines, used in an epoxy resin, is a hardener; furthermore, the inclusion of aromatic amines as curing agent/hardener as disclosed by Horiuchi satisfies the limitation “wherein the 1C epoxy resin is adapted to have an activation temperature of at least 50oC by applying, as a hardener, aromatic amines which act as solid hardeners” because aromatic amines, as part of the 1C epoxy resin, affects the resin’s properties, including the activation temperature that falls within the claimed range; indeed, paragraph [0063] of Horiuchi discloses that bonding of the separators via the 1C epoxy adhesive, which includes the aromatic amines, is carried out in the heating temperature from 130 oC to 220 oC that corresponds to the claimed activation temperature of at least 50 oC).
Addressing claim 17, Horiuchi discloses in paragraph [0063] that the adhesive is heat to temperature of 220oC, which implies that the 1C epoxy resin is structurally adapted to withstand temperatures up to a limit temperature of at least 200oC as claimed and is heated to at least 200oC during bonding.
Addressing claim 18, Horiuchi discloses the graphite separators having the epoxy resin positioned therebetween are heated to temperature disclosed in paragraph [0063], which implies that the graphite separators are tempered (i.e. being heated) to a temperature below the final heating temperature of the 1C epoxy resin.
Addressing claim 19, Horiuchi discloses that the 1C epoxy resin is heated to a temperature of 220oC within 0.5 minutes that meet the limitation of current claim.
Addressing claim 20, Horiuchi discloses in table 1 ingredients (A)-(F) that include the claimed hardener and/or catalyst that becomes chemically active only upon being in a molten state due to being heated beyond activation temperature in order for the epoxy resin to cure after being heated beyond the activation temperature of the hardener and/or catalyst.
Addressing claim 21, paragraph [0088] discloses the glass transition temperature of at least 90oC, which encompasses the claimed range, and table 1 discloses working examples with glass transition temperatures that re greater than 100oC.
Addressing claim 22, Horiuchi discloses in paragraph [0063] that the adhesive has to be heated to a temperature of 130oC to 220oC to be activated, which implies a latency of between 0oC – 50oC as claimed.
Addressing claim 23, Horiuchi discloses in paragraph [0065] that the 1c epoxy resin is applied to the outer periphery of the separator, which is qualified as being applied locally to a surface of the monopolar plates serving as contact surface, and implicitly discloses the limitation then to remain self-supportingly stable on this surface because Horiuchi discloses the adhesive does not bleed out from the application location [0025, 0085].
Addressing claim 24, Horiuchi discloses in paragraph [0031] that inorganic filler is used in the 1C epoxy resin to impart suitable viscosity, which implies that the 1C epoxy resin is adapted to be structurally viscous.
Addressing claim 27, Horiuchi discloses in paragraph [0034] that the filler has an average particle size of 2 to 15 µm, which satisfies the claimed limitation of being free of fillers with diameters greater than 50 µm.
Addressing claim 28, Horiuchi does not disclose any ingredients of the 1C epoxy resin that are qualified as the claimed catalyst poisons affecting catalysts used in the fuel cell, or ingredients that are qualified as substances that promote corrosion of materials used in the fuel cell or that promote membrane degradation, or ingredients that reduce proton conductivity in the fuel cell.
Addressing claim 29, Horiuchi discloses a bipolar plate (combination of two separators) for a fuel cell [0062], comprising:
a pair of graphite monopolar plates (graphite separators, [0061]) bonded together by means of a 1C epoxy resin (one-part epoxy resin, [0011]) along opposing contact surfaces (along the periphery of the separators),
wherein the 1C epoxy resin is adapted to have an activation temperature of at least 50oC [0063] by applying, as a hardener, aromatic amines which act as solid hardeners (paragraph [0016] discloses aromatic amines as curing agent, which corresponds to the claimed hardener and acting as solid hardeners; indeed, Murakami discloses in paragraph [0039] that aromatic amines, used in an epoxy resin, is a hardener; furthermore, the inclusion of aromatic amines as curing agent/hardener as disclosed by Horiuchi satisfies the limitation “wherein the 1C epoxy resin is adapted to have an activation temperature of at least 50oC by applying, as a hardener, aromatic amines which act as solid hardeners” because aromatic amines, as part of the 1C epoxy resin, affects the resin’s properties, including the activation temperature that falls within the claimed range; indeed, paragraph [0063] of Horiuchi discloses that bonding of the separators via the 1C epoxy adhesive, which includes the aromatic amines, is carried out in the heating temperature from 130 oC to 220 oC that corresponds to the claimed activation temperature of at least 50 oC).
Addressing claim 30, the fuel cell of Horiuchi that comprises the aforementioned separators joined by the 1C epoxy adhesive corresponds to the claimed energy storage assembly with at least one fuel cell with a bipolar plate according to claim 29.
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.
Claim(s) 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horiuchi et al. (EP3666843) in view of Einhart et al. (US 2022/0197519).
Addressing claim 25, Horiuchi discloses the 1C epoxy resin is applied by means of a dispenser (screen-printing) locally confined to the outer periphery surface or the claimed contact faces of the monopolar plates and the monopolar plates are then pressed together with their opposing contact faces [0062-0066].
Horiuchi is silent regarding the adhesive is applied as a bead.
Einhart discloses epoxy adhesive is deposited as a bead via screen printing [0008] for joining opposing contact faces of fuel cell separator plates [0025].
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the method of Horiuchi with the known step of screen-printing epoxy adhesive as a bead in the manner disclosed by Einhart in order to obtain the predictable result of joining separator plates of a fuel cell (Rationale B, KSR decision, MPEP 2143).
Addressing claim 26, Horiuchi discloses in paragraph [0064] that the thickness of the adhesive layer between the opposing separator plates is 50 to 100 µm which results in a gap width less than 200 µm between the contact faces as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regard to the Applicants’ argument that Horiuchi does not disclose the limitation “wherein the 1C epoxy resin is adapted to have an activation temperature of at least 50 oC by applying, as a hardener, aromatic amines which act as solid hardeners. The argument is not persuasive because, as discussed above, Horiuchi discloses aromatic amines as curing agent, which corresponds to the claimed hardener acting as solid hardeners. Furthermore, aromatic amines, as curing agent of the epoxy resin, affects the overall properties of the epoxy resin, including the activation temperature in the claimed range since the epoxy resin of Horiuchi is heated to a temperature range that falls within the claimed range. For the reasons above, Examiner maintains the position that claims 16-24 and 27-30 are anticipated by Horiuchi.
The argument regarding the rejection of claims 25-26 is not persuasive because the arguments regarding the rejection of claims 16-24 and 27-30 are not persuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571)-272-1307. 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.
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 08/18/2026
Prosecution Insights