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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because “the hater core” should be amended to “the heater core”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: “the hater core” should be amended to “the heater core” in at least paragraphs [0005] and [0007].
Appropriate correction is 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 1-15 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the hater core” in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the limitation has been interpreted as “the heater core”.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the hater core” in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the limitation has been interpreted as “the heater core”.
Claims 2-14 are rejected for being dependent thereon.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-2, 8-9, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamada (JP 2020/187940, see machine translation).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Yamada discloses a fuel cell system 1 in which waste-heat from the fuel cells is available for heating (abstract). The fuel cell system includes a fuel cell 11; an FC cooling unit 60 including a radiator 64; a heating utilization unit 70 including a heating pump 72, an electric heater 73 [heater], and a heating heat exchanger 75 [heater core] in a heating flow path unit 79 ([0013], [0031], [0034]-[0036], Fig 1).
A control unit 90 controls the fuel cell and heating adjustment, and adjusts the flow paths ([0006]). The control unit 90 further includes a determination unit 92 which makes a determination to determine the control based on the information acquired by sensors and calculated information [selection one of a plurality of control modes] ([0056]).
The controller can set the system into a heat utilization mode where exhaust heat generated by driving the fuel cell 11 is utilized for heating ([0068]). In the heat utilization mode, it can be determined that the fuel cell temperature is low, and a heating connection mode S114 [first control mode] is used ([0077], [0081]-[0082]). The flow of cooling water passes through the heater 73, the heating heat exchanger 75 [heater core], and the fuel cell 11 and circulates [first flow path] ([0083]-[0084], see Fig 7 and dark lines in fuel cell 11 and heat utilization unit 70 area with path portions 69 and 79).
The controller can set the system into a standby mode [second control mode] when the fuel cell 11 has a high temperature ([0064]-[0067]), and the standby mode has a heating flow path portion 79 [second flow path] in which the water passes the heater 73 and heat exchanger 75 [heating core] and recirculates (see Fig 5, and dark path in heating utilization unit 70 area with path portion 79), and has a cooling flow path portion 69 [third flow path] in which the water passes through the fuel cell 11 and the radiator 64 and circulates (see Fig 5, and dark path in fuel cell and cooling unit 60 area, with path portion 69). The cooling flow path portion 69 [third flow path] with the fuel cell and radiator is closed off [independent] from the heating flow path portion 79 [second flow path] of the heating utilization unit 70 (see Fig 5 and broken lines).
Regarding claim 2, Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamada teaches that the first flow path [of the first control mode] does not pass through the radiator ([0083], see Fig 7, where dark lines pass through the fuel cell and heating portion, but only broken lines in the radiator).
Regarding claims 8-9, Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamada teaches that the fuel cell system can be used in a vehicle ([0011]).
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) 3, 5-7 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (JP 2020/187940, see machine translation), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (CN 110828866, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 3, Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamada teaches that if the fuel cell temperature is below a specified value S113, then a heating connection S114 is performed ([0081], Fig 6), and the connections are made to heat the fuel cell by circulating the cooling fluid through the heater 73, and not the radiator (see [0082]-[0083], Fig 7). However, while Yamada teaches that the fuel cell is warmed if the fuel cell is less than a threshold and to perform/execute the heating connection mode [first control mode], Yamada does not explicitly disclose wherein the threshold is a temperature value lower than a temperature at which a power generation efficiency of the fuel cell unit lowers.
Chen discloses a cooling circulation system of a vehicle mounted fuel cell and control method (abstract, title). The system includes a fuel cell 1, water pump 2, electric heater 7, and a radiator 5 ([0093]-[0094], Fig 1). Chen teaches that the fuel cell needs to be kept at a suitable temperature to function properly (typically in a range of 60-80C), and if the temperature is low the efficiency of the fuel cell is reduced ([0102]). A controller 14 controls valves 3, 8, 10 and electric heater 7 to control the temperature of the fuel cell and thereby improve the working efficiency of the fuel cell ([0103]). In a heating mode, where the temperature threshold can be 60C which is the temperature noted for efficiency ([0111]), the valves are operated to pass the cooling water through the electric heater 7 ([0111]). Therefore, Chen equates a temperature related to fuel cell efficiency to a threshold value to maintain the fuel cell.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the determined threshold temperature related to fuel cell efficiency as taught by Chen with the threshold value of Yamada to increase fuel cell efficiency.
Regarding claim 5, modified Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamada teaches temperature sensors 62t and 65t that measure the temperature of the third flow path [fuel cell and radiator] ([0033], Figs 1 and 5), and teaches that the control unit 90 takes into consideration the values ([0050]), and that temperatures sensors 62t can be used to estimate the temperature of the fuel cell 11 ([0033]), and has a determination unit 92 that makes a determination to determine the control based on the information acquired by each sensor and calculated information ([0056]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamada teaches temperature sensor 51t that measures the intake air, which is from the outside ([0029], [0050], Fig 1), and the sensors measure the outside air temperature ([0061]). Further, the intake air can be used to maintain the temperature of the fuel cell ([0112]), and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ambient or intake air temperature as the fuel cell temperature. Further, the control unit 90 takes into consideration the values ([0050]), and has a determination unit 92 that makes a determination to determine the control based on the information acquired by each sensor and calculated information ([0056]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamada teaches that the fuel cell system is in standby mode [second control mode] when the temperature is higher than a threshold ([0067]).
Regarding claims 10 and 12-14, modified Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamada teaches that the fuel cell system can be used in a vehicle ([0011]).
Claim(s) 4 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (JP 2020/187940, see machine translation) in view of Chen (CN 110828866, see machine translation), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Manabe et al. (JP 2009-032605).
Regarding claim 4, modified Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Yamada teaches temperature sensors 51t, 62t, 65t, and 74t that respectively monitor the intake air temperature, cooling temperature after the fuel cell, cooling temperature after the radiator, and cooling water flowing into the heating heat exchanger ([0050], Fig 2), and teaches that a control unit 90 takes into consideration the values ([0050]), and has a determination unit 92 that makes a determination to determine the control based on the information acquired by each sensor and calculated information ([0056]), modified Yamada does not explicitly disclose the system further comprising a temperature sensor configured to detect the temperature of the fuel cell unit.
Manabe discloses a fuel cell system 10 having a fuel cell 100 with a current sensor 102, a voltage sensor 104, and a temperature sensor 106, where each detected value is input to the control unit ([0030], Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the temperature sensor monitoring the fuel cell of Manabe with the fuel cell system of Yamada for the purpose of monitoring the fuel cell temperature. Further, as the control unit of Yamada uses the values of the sensors ([0050], [0056]), said fuel cell temperature sensor is used to execute determination processes.
Regarding claim 11, modified Yamada discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamada teaches that the fuel cell system can be used in a vehicle ([0011]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB BUCHANAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1186. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 PM (ET).
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/JACOB BUCHANAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights