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
Claims 1 -16 are pending in the current application and under consideration on the merits. Claims 17 - 24 were subject to a restriction requirement and have since been canceled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/28/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 16 recites “comprising at least one shim located between the interconnect end plate an adjacent one of the fuel manifolds”. The term “an” should have the word “and” or a comma before it. Appropriate correction is required.
Election/Restriction
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1- 16, drawn to an electrochemical cell stack, classified in H01M 8/0258.
II. Claims 17 - 18, drawn to an electrochemical cell stack column, classified in C25B 13/02.
III. Claims 19 - 24, drawn to a method of making the interconnecting end plate, classified in H01M 8/0258.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because the electrochemical cell stack column does not require an electrochemical cell stack with recessed ring seal regions disposed on the air side surrounding the fuel holes. The subcombination has separate utility such as being used in an electrochemical cell stack column without a fuel manifold.
The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Inventions I and III are related as process of making and product made. The inventions are distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) that the process as claimed can be used to make another and materially different product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process (MPEP § 806.05(f)). In the instant case the electrochemical cell stack’s interconnecting end plate recessed ring seal regions could be made without the coating of the protective layer on the air side.
Inventions II and III are related as process of making and product made. The inventions are distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) that the process as claimed can be used to make another and materially different product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process (MPEP § 806.05(f)). In the instant case the electrochemical cell stack column’s interconnecting end plate could be made by adding the protective layer and not removing it to produce the recessed ring seal regions.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
The inventions of Groups I, II, and III are classified separately as set forth above. Separate classification shows that each invention has attained recognition in the art as a separate subject for inventive effort, and also requires a separate field of search. This is sufficient to demonstrate a serious search and/or examination burden. See MPEP 808.02.
If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
A telephone call was made to Leon Radomsky on September 10th, 2026, to request an oral election to the above restriction requirement, but did not result in an election being made. Applicant’s representative requested additional time to respond and make an election.
In a voicemail message left by Leon Radomsky on September 10th, 2026, a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of group I, claims 1 - 16. Claims 17 – 24 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
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.
(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.
Claims 1 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Darga et al. (US 9,368,810), herein referred to as “Darga”.
Regarding claim 1, Darga discloses a fuel cell stack (electrochemical cell stack) [col. 3 ln. 42, Fig. 1] with a plurality of solid oxide fuel cells, wherein each fuel cell has a cathode electrode, anode electrode, and solid oxide electrolyte [col. 4 ln. 10 - 11]. The cathode electrode is an air electrode [col. 4 ln. 31 - 32]. The anode electrode is a fuel electrode [col. 4 ln. 29 - 30]. The solid oxide electrolyte is placed between the cathode electrode and anode electrode [Fig. 1]. A gas flow separator is placed between adjacent fuel cells [co. 4 ln. 20 – 23, Fig. 1]. The gas flow separator is an interconnect [col. 4 ln. 26 - 28]. An end plate is located on either end of the fuel cell stack contacting only one fuel cell [col. 4 ln. 32 - 35]. The end plate and interconnect plate have embodiments wherein they are identical plates [col. 4 ln. 35 - 38].
The interconnect plate has a side which faces the fuel and an opposing side which faces the air, thereby creating a fuel and air side respectively [col. 4 ln. 28 – 32, Fig. 1]. The fuel side contains a plurality of ribs which make up fuel flow channels [col. 6 ln. 63 - 66]. The air side contains a plurality of ribs which make up gas flow passages [col. 4 ln. 63 – 65]. The interconnect plate further includes a riser channel which has an inlet riser hole which extends through the fuel cells and interconnects the fuel cells in the stack, therefore the inlet riser passage extends from the fuel side to the air side [col. 4 ln. 48 - 50]. This is further illustrated in Figure 10B. The cathode (air) side of the inlet riser hole is surrounded by an elevated flat surface wherein the elevated flat surface is recessed relative to the air flow channels and thus acts as a recessed ring seal regions [col. 10 ln. 48 - 49].
PNG
media_image1.png
556
700
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 1. Darga further discloses a hollow cylinder-shaped seal material for sealing around the air flow channels located on the elevated flat surface for the plurality of fuel cells [col. 5 ln. 1 – 10].
Regarding claim 3, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 2. Darga further discloses embodiments wherein the entire surface of an interconnect that in operation is exposed to an oxidizing environment (e.g., air), such as the gas flow passage on the cathode-facing side of the interconnect, is coated with a protective coating [col. 3 ln. 61 – 64, col. 12 ln. 4 – 6, Fig. 14].
Regarding claim 4, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 3. Darga further discloses embodiments wherein the protective layer is not placed upon the recessed elevated flat surface [col. 12 ln. 6 – 9, Fig. 14].
Regarding claim 5, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 4. Darga further discloses the interconnects between fuel cells have a side which faces the fuel and an opposing side which faces the air, thereby creating a fuel and air side respectively [col. 4 ln. 28 – 32, Fig. 1]. The fuel side contains a plurality of ribs which make up fuel flow channels [col. 6 ln. 63 - 66]. The air side contains a plurality of ribs which make up gas flow passages [col. 4 ln. 63 – 65]. The interconnects further include a riser channel which has an inlet riser hole which extends through the fuel cells and connects the fuel cells in the stack, therefore the inlet riser passage extends from the fuel side to the air side [col. 4 ln. 48 - 50]. This is further illustrated in Figure 10B. The cathode (air) side of the inlet riser hole is surrounded by an elevated flat surface (ring seal regions) [col. 9 ln. 62 - 66].
Regarding claim 6, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 5. Darga further discloses embodiments wherein the entire surface of the interconnects exposed to an oxidizing environment (e.g., air), such as the cathode-facing side of the interconnect, are coated with a protective coating [col. 3 ln. 61 – 64, col. 12 ln. 4 – 6, Fig. 14].
Regarding claim 7, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 6. Darga further discloses embodiments wherein both the interconnects and end plate protective layer are made of manganese cobalt oxide (MCO) or lanthanum strontium manganite (LSM) [col. 12 ln. 4 - 5]. Notably the interconnect and end plate interconnect are equivalent [col. 4 ln. 35 - 38].
Regarding claim 8, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 6. Darga further discloses embodiments wherein both the interconnects and end plate protective layer are made of lanthanum strontium manganite (LSM) [col. 12 ln. 4 - 5]. Furthermore, a (Mn, Co)3O4 spinel is disclosed as a protective coating for a cathode facing interconnect [col. 3 ln. 61 – 67, col. 4 ln. 1 - 8]
Regarding claim 9, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 5. Darga further discloses the protective layer can be omitted from the elevated flat surface [col. 12 ln. 6 - 9]. While the claim includes the product-by-process limitation wherein the recessed seal regions are partially formed by removal of the protective layer, patentability is based on the product itself. The product of claim 9 is merely the end plate with no coating on the recessed seal regions. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2113 for further discussion.
Regarding claim 10, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 5. Darga further discloses embodiments wherein an interconnect, which is equivalent to an end plate [col. 4 ln. 35 - 38], has an elevated flat surface which is recessed relative to the air flow channels [col. 10 ln. 48 - 49]. Additional embodiments are disclosed for the interconnect wherein the elevated flat surface of an interconnect is equal [col. 10 ln. 22 - 26] or greater than the air flow field [col. 9 ln. 66 – 68, col. 10 ln. 1 - 2].
Regarding claim 11, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 10. Darga further discloses the gas flow channels created by the ribs have air flow inside the channel (i.e. flow contained in the channel), the air flow inside the channel is also over the cathode electrode [col. 4 ln. 63 - 66]. This is further illustrated in figure 1 where the top of the ribs connect with the cathode electrode. The seal material, which sits upon the elevated flat surfaces surrounding the inlet and outlets riser channel openings, is placed to prevent the fuel on the anode side from reaching the cathode side of the electrode [col. 5 ln. 1 - 5]. Simply, the seal materials which surround the fuel inlet and outlet must prevent the fuel from entering the channels on the air side. The air side channels have a height equivalent to the ribs which define the channels. Therefore, Darga disclose embodiments where the seal material upon the elevated surface (recessed ring seal regions) has a height equivalent to the top of the air ribs, as any height less than that of the ribs would make the seal materials inoperable for the intended function.
Regarding claim 12, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 2. Darga further discloses the cathode (air) side of the inlet riser hole is surrounded by an elevated flat surface wherein the elevated flat surface is recessed relative to the air flow channels and thus acts as a recessed ring seal regions [col. 10 ln. 48 - 49]. The entire surface of an interconnect that in operation is exposed to an oxidizing environment (e.g., air), such as the gas flow passage on the cathode-facing side of the interconnect, is coated with a protective coating [col. 3 ln. 61 – 64, col. 12 ln. 4 – 6, Fig. 14]. Furthermore, the protective layer can comprise other layers as evident by the recitation of “Alternatively, other metal oxide coatings, such as a spinel, such as an (Mn, Co)3O4 spinel, can be used instead of or in addition to LSM” [col. 4 ln. 3 - 5], emphases added to “in addition to”. The purposes of the metal oxide coating is to prevent the growth of a chromium oxide (corrosion) [col. 3 ln. 63 - 65]. Therefore, Darga discloses an embodiment wherein the protective layer of LSM has an additional metal oxide coating laid upon it, the metal oxide layer is then in contact with the seal placed upon the multi-layer coated elevated flat surface.
Regarding claim 13, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 1. Darga further discloses the interconnects have batch-to-batch variations [col. 10 ln. 28 - 29]. Therefore, Darga implicitly disclose their interconnects are produced in a batch process.
Regarding claim 14, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 1. Darga further discloses the fuel cells are solid oxide fuel cells [col. 4 ln 9 - 10].
Regarding claim 15, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 1. Darga further discloses the interconnects have an internal fuel manifold [col. 5 ln. 23 – 27, Fig. 9A, Fig. 12A].
Regarding claim 16, Darga discloses the electrochemical cell stack as described above in the rejection of claim 15. Darga further discloses a window seal area extending around the periphery of the anode-facing side of the end plate [col. 10 ln. 42 - 46]. The window seal is a raised edge which sits between the end plate and adjacent chemical cell thereby acting as a shim.
PNG
media_image2.png
766
706
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Pertinent Prior Art
The following constitutes a list of prior art which are not relied upon herein, but are considered pertinent to the claimed invention and/or written description thereof. The prior art are purposely made of record hereinafter to facilitate compact/expedient prosecution, and consideration thereof is respectfully suggested.
Srivatsan et al. (US 9,673,457 B2 – Also disclosed on the IDS of 3/28/24) discloses various embodiments include interconnects and/or end plates having features for reducing stress in a fuel cell stack. In embodiments, an interconnect/end plate may have a window seal area that is recessed relative to the flow field to indirectly reduce stress induced by an interface seal. Other features may include a thicker protective coating and/or larger uncoated area of an end plate, providing a recessed portion on an end plate for an interface seal, and/or recessing the fuel hole region of an interconnect relative to the flow field to reduce stress on the fuel cell. Further embodiments include providing intermittent seal support to minimize asymmetric seal loading and/or a non-circular seal configuration to reduce stress around the fuel hole of a fuel cell.
Gasda et al. (US 2023/0238546 A1) discloses a fuel cell stack includes stacked solid oxide fuel cells, interconnects disposed between the fuel cells, and dielectric layers disposed on the interconnects and including a first glass-containing component and a corrosion barrier material. Optionally, the dielectric layers may cover only a portion of the interconnect riser seal surfaces which are covered by riser seals. Additionally or alternatively, the fuel cell stack may include an electrolyte reinforcement layer on the electrolyte of the solid oxide fuel cells.
El Batawi et al. (US 2016/0285122 A1) discloses a solid oxide fuel cells and methods for fabricating solid oxide fuel cells include an electrolyte reinforcement (EM) layer. An ink composition including a ceramic material and a sintering aid, such as a metal or metal oxide material, is applied to select portions of a solid oxide electrolyte and sintered to form an EM layer. The EM layer may improve the strength and durability of the electrolyte and may facilitate bonding to a high-temperature seal.
Armstrong et al. (US 2017/0222236 A1) discloses a reactant feed and return assembly, such as an anode splitter plate (ASP), are provided for facilitating reactant feed and exhaust flow in a solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) stack system. Embodiments include a reactant feed and return assembly including at least a first portion formed of a chromium-based alloy, such as a chromium-iron alloy, having a similar coefficient of thermal expansion as other SOFC components and may therefore reduce internal stress in an SOFC stack. Methods for making an a reactant feed and return assembly comprising a chromium-based alloy are also provided.
Patel et al. (US 2021/0351420 A1) discloses a fuel cell column includes first and second fuel cell stacks, a fuel manifold disposed between the first and second fuel cell stacks and configured to provide fuel to the first and second fuel cell stacks, and first and second dielectric separators located between the fuel manifold and the respective first and second fuel cell stacks, and configured to electrically isolate the respective first and second fuel cell stacks from the fuel manifold. The first and second dielectric separators each include a top layer of a ceramic material, a bottom layer of the ceramic material, a middle layer disposed between the top and bottom layers and including a material having a lower density and a higher dielectric strength than the ceramic material, and glass or glass ceramic seals which connect the middle layer to the top and bottom layers.
Couse et al. (US 2007/0287048 A1) discloses a SOFC includes a cathode electrode, a solid oxide electrolyte, an anode electrode, and a hydrocarbon fuel inlet. The SOFC is configured for internal reforming of a hydrocarbon fuel at the anode electrode. The SOFC is configured to limit an interaction between the hydrocarbon fuel and the anode electrode adjacent to the hydrocarbon fuel inlet, or to limit an area of the anode electrode exposed to the hydrocarbon fuel adjacent to the hydrocarbon fuel inlet, or to provide a gradual introduction of the hydrocarbon fuel to the anode electrode.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB R STANLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5447. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 5 PM.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571) 272-8935. 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.
/J.R.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782
