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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
In Paragraph [0029], the specification mentions “the bypass flow path 50” when referring to the present embodiment in FIG. 1, but the bypass flow path 50 is not illustrated in FIG. 1.
In Paragraph [0069], the specification describes anode off-gas and cathode off-gas being discharged into the atmosphere through the open-to-atmosphere discharge flow path 14 as an embodiment of the fourth scavenging mode in reference to FIG.6. However, FIG. 6 illustrates the valve 32C to the open-to-atmosphere discharge flow path 14 as being closed and depicts a flow of separated moisture from the vapor-liquid separator 40 being removed via the moisture discharge path 15 through the fifth on-off valve 32E.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Kikuchi et al (US 20140295306 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
Kikuchi teaches a fuel cell system comprising: an anode gas intake path (hydrogen feed pipe 32; Paragraph [0027]) through which anode gas is to be fed to an anode of a fuel cell, the anode gas intake path being linked to a hydrogen circulation path (hydrogen circulation flow passage; Paragraph [0027]); an anode gas discharge path (hydrogen exhaust pipe 33; Paragraph [0027]) linked to the anode; a cathode gas intake path (air feed pipe 42; Paragraph [0031]) through which cathode gas is to be fed to a cathode of the fuel cell; a cathode gas discharge path (air exhaust pipe 43; Paragraph [0031]) linked to the cathode; a bypass flow path that links the hydrogen circulation path to the cathode gas intake path and/or the cathode gas discharge path (stack bypass pipe 48 branches from air exhaust pipe 43 to hydrogen feed pipe 32; Paragraph [0031]); a circulating pump disposed on the hydrogen circulation path (hydrogen pump 36; Paragraph [0030]); on-off valves comprising an on-off valve on the anode gas intake path (main stop valve 312; Paragraph [0028]), an on-off valve on the anode gas discharge path (purge valve 33a; Paragraph [0030]), and an on-off valve on the bypass flow path (scavenging valve 48b; Paragraph [0034]); and a control device (electronic control unit (ECU) 7; Paragraph [0023]) configured to control the on-off valves and operation of the circulating pump (the dotted lines in FIG. 1 show features which are controlled by the ECU), the control device being configured to cause the circulating pump to rotate in a normal direction or a reverse direction (hydrogen pump 36 circulates the gas containing hydrogen; Paragraph [0030]) in a selective manner during control of the on-off valves to discharge water or water vapor out of the fuel cell.
PNG
media_image1.png
691
921
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Ogawa et al (EP 2287953 B1).
Regarding Claims 2 and 4,
Kikuchi teaches the fuel cell system according to Claim 1, but does not teach the stack bypass pipe 48 linked to the air exhaust pipe 43 or the circulating pump 36 discharging water or water vapor out of the anode gas and cathode gas intakes. However, Ogawa teaches a pump or compressor 33 linked to the cathode gas supplying tube 24 and the anode gas supplying tube 23 (via the scavenging gas injection pipe 54) which can be operated in a normal or backspin direction to remove water and water vapor from the anode and cathode intake paths (Embodiment 1; FIG. 1 below). When operated in the backspin direction, the cathode offgas discharge pipe 38 is linked to the scavenging gas injection pipe 54 via the cathode gas supplying tube 24. Additionally, the anode gas supplying tube 23 is connected in parallel with the cathode gas supplying tube 24. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary
PNG
media_image2.png
687
1020
media_image2.png
Greyscale
skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the existing circulating pump and bypass path layout in Kikuchi to be able to remove water and water vapor from the fuel cell system for the purpose of preventing gas flow paths from freezing.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Ogawa as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Inoue et al (US 12525626 B2).
Regarding Claim 3,
In view of Ogawa, Kikuchi teaches the fuel cell system according to claim 2, but does not teach a layout wherein the anode gas intake path and the cathode gas intake path are connected in series with the bypass flow path located therebetween. However, Inoue teaches a connection flow path 80 extending from the circulation flow path 44 of the anode system 16 to the cathode supply path 62B and
PNG
media_image3.png
698
1022
media_image3.png
Greyscale
linked to the cathode discharge flow path 64 via the cathode flow field 38 (Paragraph 19; FIG. 1 above). Inoue teaches this connection reduces hydrogen discharge and improves fuel efficiency; therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gas flow network taught by Ogawa to the series connection network taught by Inoue.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Hayashi (JP 4498707 B2).
Regarding Claim 5,
Kikuchi teaches the fuel cel system according to claim 1, in which the ECU is configured to receive signals from various sensors (anode pressure sensor 27, cathode pressure sensor 28, tank temperature sensor 318; Paragraphs [0037] and [0048]). As described in the disclosure of the instant application, the transition from a series to a parallel connection, or from a parallel to a series connection, is performed through selective closing and opening of on/off valves and operation of a circulating pump. The ECU 7 taught by Kikuchi is configured to perform these operations, but Kikuchi is silent on the inclusion of an outside air temperature sensor. However, Hayashi teaches an air temperature sensor 20 which communicates a signal to an ECU 19 configured to adjust the operation of a hydrogen pump and the opening and closing of on/off valves. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fuel cell system of Kikuchi to include an outside air temperature sensor for the purpose of identifying freeze risk from environmental conditions.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Ogawa as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Hayashi.
Regarding Claim 6,
In view of Ogawa, Kikuchi teaches the fuel cell system according to claim 2, but does not teach an outside air temperature sensor. However, Hayashi teaches an air temperature sensor 20 which communicates a signal to an ECU 19 configured to adjust the operation of a hydrogen pump and the opening and closing of on/off valves. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fuel cell system of Kikuchi to include an outside air temperature sensor for the purpose of identifying freeze risk from environmental conditions.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Ogawa and in further view of Inoue as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Hayashi.
Regarding Claim 7,
In view of Ogawa, and in further view of Inoue, Kikuchi teaches the fuel cell system according to claim 3, but does not teach an outside air temperature sensor. However, Hayashi teaches an air temperature sensor 20 which communicates a signal to an ECU 19 configured to adjust the operation of a hydrogen pump and the opening and closing of on/off valves. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fuel cell system of Kikuchi to include an outside air temperature sensor for the purpose of identifying freeze risk from environmental conditions.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Ogawa as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Hayashi.
Regarding Claim 8,
In view of Ogawa, Kikuchi teaches the fuel cell system according to claim 4, but does not teach an outside air temperature sensor. However, Hayashi teaches an air temperature sensor 20 which communicates a signal to an ECU 19 configured to adjust the operation of a hydrogen pump and the opening and closing of on/off valves. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fuel cell system of Kikuchi to include an outside air temperature sensor for the purpose of identifying freeze risk from environmental conditions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN M KNOWLAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00am - 4:30pm.
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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571)272-8519. 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.
/KEVIN M KNOWLAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1783
/MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights