DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-17 are presented for examination, wherein the subject matter of Group II (claims 5-16) and the subject matter of Species I.B are withdrawn.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on August 13, 2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant’s election of Species I.A in said reply is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the specification indicates item 302 as a “membrane-electrode assembly,” which is claimed in claim 17. However, Figure 12 indicates item, 302 as a gas manifold/penetration part.
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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because the “111” indicating the item number of the prepreg sheet should be in parentheticals or deleted. Appropriate correction is respectfully required.
Claim 17 is objected to because the conjunction “but” should be “and.” Appropriate correction is respectfully required.
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 2 and 17 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.
Claims 2 and claim 17 recite the limitation “the weight condition of 0.035 to 0.090 g/cm2 at a thickness of 0.20 to 0.45 mm” (emphasis added). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otawa et al (US 2010/0159357).
Regarding independent claim 1, Otawa teaches a fuel cell and an improved fuel cell separator having a light and compact configuration with improved moldability and sealing properties, wherein said fuel cell comprises a plurality of unit cells (e.g. items 5), such as an illustrated 2 unit cells, stacked together, each unit cell comprising:
(i) an electrolyte film (e.g. item 1) comprising e.g. a fluorine resin;
(ii) an anode (e.g. item 2) on one side of said electrolyte film, said anode comprising a stacked carbon cloth acting as a gas diffusion layer and a current collector plate (not illustrated);
(iii) a cathode (e.g. item 3) on an opposite side of said electrolyte film to said anode, said cathode comprising a stacked carbon cloth acting as a gas diffusion layer and a current collector plate (not illustrated); plus,
(iv) a pair of separators (e.g. items 4) sandwiching therebetween said anode, cathode, and electrolyte film,
wherein adjacent unit cells provide an anode (e.g. item 2) of one unit cell is serially connected to a cathode (e.g. item 3) of an adjacent unit cell, separated by respective separators,
wherein said improved separator is formed from a preform (e.g. item 14) formed into a plate-like shape with a molding die, wherein said preform has a sandwich structure comprising:
(iv.a) a pair of first sheets (e.g. items 14A), wherein each of said first sheets may be formed by a papermaking process by adding a fibrous filler, which may be e.g. carbon fibers, to expanded graphite to form a sheet-like member, then impregnating said sheet-like member with a thermosetting resin, which may be composed of e.g. a phenol resin, wherein said phenol resin may be present in an amount of e.g. 5-30% of said first sheet; and,
(iv.b) a second sheet (e.g. item 14B) interposed between each of said pair of said first sheets, wherein said second sheet comprises a thermosetting resin, such as a phenol resin, and graphite, such as natural graphite,
wherein said second sheet (e.g. item 14B) may be formed from a carbon-phenol resin molding compound in a presence of a catalyst to mold said second sheet (e.g. item 14B),
said first sheets (e.g. items 14A) may be applied to said second sheet (e.g. item 14B)
(e.g. ¶¶ 0001, 08-25, 45-47, 56-60, 63, 65, and 67-69 plus e.g. Figures 4 and 6), reading on bipolar plate for a fuel cell;”
wherein Otawa teaches said separator is light (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the scope of the claimed property, “ultra-light;” alternatively, Otawa teaches a substantially identical fuel cell separator (e.g. infra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 08-14, and 25-27), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitation, see e.g. MPEP § 2112.01;
alternatively regarding the preamble limitation “for a fuel cell,” said preamble limitation may be interpreted as merely intended use, and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2111.02; and,
alternatively regarding the preamble limitation “bipolar,” said preamble limitation is outside of the scope of the claimed invention, “plate,” so the stacking structure of the fuel cell (e.g. anode and cathode stacked in series, separated by the plate) and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art; and,
said improved fuel cell separator comprising:
(1) said pair of first sheets (e.g. items 14A), wherein each of said first sheets may be formed by said papermaking process by adding said fibrous filler, which may be e.g. carbon fibers, to expanded graphite to form said sheet-like member, then impregnating said sheet-like member with said thermosetting resin, which may be composed of e.g. a phenol resin (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a carbon fiber fabric layer made of one or more prepreg sheets;” and,
(2) said second sheet (e.g. item 14B) interposed between each of said pair of said first sheets, wherein said second sheet comprises said thermosetting resin, such as said phenol resin, and graphite,
wherein said second sheet (e.g. item 14B) may be formed from said carbon-phenol resin molding compound in said presence of said catalyst to mold said second sheet (e.g. item 14B),
said first sheets (e.g. items 14A) may be applied to said second sheet (e.g. item 14B) (e.g. supra),
wherein the process limitation “coated and formed on” does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2113, see also instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0009, 14, 30, and 44,
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a graphite-resin composite layer coated and formed on at least one surface of the carbon fiber fabric layer.”
Regarding claim 3, Otawa teaches the separator of claim 1, wherein each said of first sheets (e.g. items 14A) may be formed by said papermaking process by adding said fibrous filler, which may be e.g. carbon fibers, to expanded graphite to form said sheet-like member, then impregnating said sheet-like member with said thermosetting resin, which may be composed of e.g. a phenol resin (e.g. supra), reading on “the prepreg sheet 111 is one or more fibers selected from carbon fiber, forged carbon fiber, fabric-type carbon fiber, and glass fiber, which are impregnated with one or more resins selected from phenol, epoxy, vinyl ester, maleimide, polypropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride, polyphenylene sulfide, polyethylene, polyethylene terephthalate, polyether ether ketone, and polyphenylene oxide.”
Regarding claim 4, Otawa teaches the separator of claim 1, wherein said second sheet comprises said thermosetting resin, such as said phenol resin, and natural graphite (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the proportions of each as claimed.
However, Otawa teaches said first sheet may be composed of carbon fibers, expanded graphite, and a phenol resin, wherein said phenol resin may be present in an amount of e.g. 5-30% (e.g. supra).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate said phenol resin of said second sheet in said amount of 5-30%, since Otawa teaches said amount is suitable for use in a layer within said separator, wherein said graphite is a balance of said second sheet, so may be calculated to be e.g. 70-95%, severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the graphite-resin composite layer comprises 15 to 45% by weight of one or more resins selected from phenol, epoxy, vinyl ester, maleimide, polypropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride, polyphenylene sulfide, polyethylene, polyethylene terephthalate, polyether ether ketone, and polyphenylene oxide and 55 to 85% by weight of one or more carbon composite material particles selected from natural graphite, flake graphite, highly crystalline graphite, microcrystalline graphite, expanded graphite, carbon nanotubes, graphene, carbon black, conductive carbon black, and carbon fiber.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al (CN114628714, published June 2022).
Regarding independent claim 1, Lin teaches an improved composite bipolar plate for use in a fuel cell, said bipolar plate having advantages such as high conductivity, high corrosion resistance, excellent mechanical properties, ultra-thin thickness, excellent dimensional stability, and high temperature resistance,
said bipolar plate comprising:
(i) a modified carbon fiber prepreg composite layer comprising three to ten layers of modified carbon fiber prepreg, each layer comprising carbon fiber cloth and a prepreg layer on its surface,
said carbon fiber cloth is one or more of unidirectional tape carbon fiber cloth and unidirectional woven carbon fiber, each with a thickness of 0.05-0.5 mm,
said prepreg layer includes a slurry of thermosetting resin such as vinyl ester resin, conductive filler, thickener, free radical initiator, and accelerator in amounts of respectively 20-60 wt%, 40–80 wt%, 0.1–10 wt %, 0.1–10 wt %, and 0.1–5 wt % of said modified thermosetting resin slurry,
wherein said modified carbon fiber prepreg composite layer with a thickness of 0.15-0.6 mm; and,
(ii) a pair of toughened conductive molding compound layers, each layer located directly on opposite sides of said prepreg composite layer
each toughened conductive molding compound layers comprising natural flake graphite in an amount of 60-95 wt% of said layer; and polyethylene elastomer in an amount of 3-30 wt% of said layer
each toughened conductive molding compound layers with a thickness of 0.2-1.2 mm,
wherein an outer surface of each toughened conductive molding compound layer forms a flow channel structure (e.g. ¶¶ 0001, 07-14, 23-25, 29-35, 37-38, 46, 50-53, and 61-89 plus e.g. Figures 1-2), reading on “…bipolar plate for a fuel cell;” alternatively, the preamble limitation “for a fuel cell” is interpreted as merely intended use, and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2111.02, said bipolar plate comprising:
(1) said modified carbon fiber prepreg composite layer comprising three to ten layers of modified carbon fiber prepreg, each layer comprising carbon fiber cloth and said prepreg layer on its surface, wherein said modified carbon fiber prepreg composite layer with a thickness of 0.15-0.6 mm (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a carbon fiber fabric layer made of one or more prepreg sheets;” and,
(2) said pair of toughened conductive molding compound layers, each layer located directly on opposite sides of said prepreg composite layer,
wherein each toughened conductive molding compound layers comprising natural flake graphite in said amount of 60-95 wt% of said layer; and polyethylene elastomer in said amount of 3-30 wt% of said layer,
wherein each toughened conductive molding compound layers with a thickness of 0.2-1.2 mm
(e.g. supra), wherein the process limitation “coated and formed on” does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2113, see also instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0009, 14, 30, and 44,
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a graphite-resin composite layer coated and formed on at least one surface of the carbon fiber fabric layer.”
Lin teaches said bipolar plate (see supra, incorporated herein by reference), but does not expressly teach the preamble limitation “ultra-light.”
However, Lin teaches a substantially identical composite bipolar plate (e.g. supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0008-15, 26-27, 32-35, and 44-45), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed preamble limitation, see e.g. MPEP § 2112.01, reading on “ultra-light bipolar plate.”
Regarding claim 2, Lin the bipolar plate of claim 1, wherein said modified carbon fiber prepreg composite layer with said thickness of 0.15-0.6 mm,
wherein said carbon fiber cloth is one or more of unidirectional tape carbon fiber cloth and unidirectional woven carbon fiber; and, said prepreg layer includes a slurry of thermosetting resin such as vinyl ester resin, conductive filler, thickener, free radical initiator, and accelerator in amounts of respectively 20-60 wt%, 40–80 wt%, 0.1–10 wt %, 0.1–10 wt %, and 0.1–5 wt % of said modified thermosetting resin slurry; plus,
said pair of toughened conductive molding compound layers, each layer located directly on opposite sides of said prepreg composite layer, wherein each toughened conductive molding compound layers with said thickness of 0.2-1.2 mm,
wherein each toughened conductive molding compound layers comprising natural flake graphite in said amount of 60-95 wt% of said layer; and polyethylene elastomer in said amount of 3-30 wt% of said layer,
(e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “satisfying … a thickness of 0.20 to 0.45 mm,” but does not expressly teach the limitation “satisfying the weight condition of 0.035 to 0.090 g/cm2 at a thickness of 0.20 to 0.45 mm.”
However, Lin teaches a substantially identical bipolar plate (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0014-15, 25, 27-30, and 44), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitation, see e.g. MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claim 3, Lin the bipolar plate of claim 1, wherein said carbon fiber cloth is one or more of unidirectional tape carbon fiber cloth and unidirectional woven carbon fiber; and, said thermosetting resin such as vinyl ester resin (e.g. supra), reading on “the prepreg sheet 111 is one or more fibers selected from carbon fiber, forged carbon fiber, fabric-type carbon fiber, and glass fiber, which are impregnated with one or more resins selected from phenol, epoxy, vinyl ester, maleimide, polypropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride, polyphenylene sulfide, polyethylene, polyethylene terephthalate, polyether ether ketone, and polyphenylene oxide.”
Regarding claim 4, Lin the bipolar plate of claim 1, wherein each toughened conductive molding compound layers comprising natural flake graphite in said amount of 60-95 wt% of said layer; and polyethylene elastomer in said amount of 3-30 wt% of said layer (e.g. supra), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the graphite-resin composite layer comprises 15 to 45% by weight of one or more resins selected from phenol, epoxy, vinyl ester, maleimide, polypropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride, polyphenylene sulfide, polyethylene, polyethylene terephthalate, polyether ether ketone, and polyphenylene oxide and 55 to 85% by weight of one or more carbon composite material particles selected from natural graphite, flake graphite, highly crystalline graphite, microcrystalline graphite, expanded graphite, carbon nanotubes, graphene, carbon black, conductive carbon black, and carbon fiber.”
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi et al (US 2013/0266885) in view of Lin et al (CN114628714, published June 2022).
Regarding independent claim 17, Lin is applied as provided supra, with the following modifications.
Still regarding independent claim 17, Yi teaches a fuel cell stack (e.g. item 100) with a plurality of unit fuel cells stacked and connected to each other plus an improved gasket (e.g. items 120 and 120’) for sealing the membrane electrode assembly (“MEA”) of each unit cell,
wherein said unit cells comprise
(i) an MEA comprising a first electrode, a second electrode, an electrolyte membrane interposed between and contacting a first surface of each of said first and second electrodes,
(ii) gas diffusion layers (“GDL,” items 140 and 140’) disposed in contact with a second surface of each of said first and second electrodes;
(iii) bipolar plates (e.g. items 110 and 110’) disposed on surfaces of said MEA; and,
(iv) said gaskets (e.g. items 120 and 120’) disposed between said bipolar plates, wherein said gaskets contact said bipolar plates and surround said MEA
(e.g. ¶¶ 0003, 16-20, and 33-45 plus e.g. Figure 1), reading on “fuel cell is a fuel cell composed of a plurality of unit cells,” said fuel cell stack comprising said plurality of unit fuel cells, wherein said unit fuel cells comprise:
(1) said MEA comprising said first electrode, said second electrode, said electrolyte membrane interposed between and contacting said first surface of each of said first and second electrodes (e.g. supra), reading on “the respective unit cells comprising: a membrane-electrode assembly;”
(2) said gas diffusion layers (“GDL,” items 140 and 140’) disposed in contact with said second surface of each of said first and second electrodes (e.g. supra), reading on “the respective unit cells comprising … a gas diffusion layer disposed on one surface and the other surface of the membrane-electrode assembly, respectively;” and,
(3) said bipolar plates (e.g. items 110 and 110’) disposed on surfaces of said MEA (e.g. supra), wherein a bipolar plate of a first unit cell located between a MEA of a second adjacent unit cell and one of said GDL of said first unit cell reading on “the respective unit cells comprising … a bipolar plate which is provided between the membrane-electrode assembly and the gas diffusion layer…,” as claimed; and,
(4) said gaskets (e.g. items 120 and 120’) disposed between said bipolar plates, wherein said gaskets contact said bipolar plates and surround said MEA (e.g. supra), wherein the process limitation “formed thereon” does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2113, see also instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0041 and 44, reading on “the respective unit cells comprising … a bipolar plate … and has a gasket formed thereon.”
Yi does not expressly teach the limitation “the bipolar plate comprises: a carbon fiber fabric layer made of one or more prepreg sheets; and a graphite-resin composite layer coated and formed on at least one surface of the carbon fiber fabric layer, but satisfies the weight condition of 0.035 to 0.090 g/cm2 at a thickness of 0.20 to 0.45 mm.”
However, Lin teaches an improved composite bipolar plate for use in a fuel cell, said bipolar plate having advantages such as high conductivity, high corrosion resistance, excellent mechanical properties, ultra-thin thickness, excellent dimensional stability, and high temperature resistance (see e.g. supra).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the bipolar plate of Lin (see supra, incorporated herein by reference) for the bipolar plates of Yi, since Lin teaches its bipolar plate having advantages such as high conductivity, high corrosion resistance, excellent mechanical properties, ultra-thin thickness, excellent dimensional stability, and/or high temperature resistance, reading on said limitations (see supra, incorporated herein by reference).
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yoshida et al (US 2023/0178758);
Lee et al (US 2015/0140472); and,
Otawa et al (US 2009/0130534).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights