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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keskula et al. (US 9,397,354 B2 hereinafter Keskula), in view of Lebzelter et al. (US 9,153,828 B2 hereinafter Lebzelter).
As to claim 1, Keskula discloses in Figs. 1, 2A, and 3, a humidifier leak diagnosis system for a fuel cell system (system 100 with fuel cell stack 112 as shown in Fig. 1; Col. 4, lines 35-47, col. 5, lines 45-55), comprising: a fuel cell stack (112 as shown in Fig. 1); an air supply system comprising at least one of an air compressor (202 as shown in Fig. 2A; Col. 4, lines 35-60, col. 5, lines 45-50), a humidifier (implied in cathode air supply path 216 as shown in Fig. 2A; Col. 1, lines 5-12, col. 5, lines 40-45); an air cutoff valve (implied in air supply controls as shown in Fig. 2A), or an air pressure control valve (backpressure valve 210 as shown in Fig. 2A; Col. 4, lines 48-64); and a controller (control system 104 as shown in Fig. 1; Col. 5, lines 38-55) configured to enter a humidifier leak diagnosis mode based on an inlet air pressure of the fuel cell stack (mode entered on measured vs. modeled pressure deviation as shown in Fig. 3 steps 308-320; Col. 5, lines 38-55), and determine whether or not a humidifier leak has been generated based on an output or an output voltage of the fuel cell stack generated through adjustment of at least one of an opening degree of the air cutoff valve or an opening degree of the air pressure control valve in humidifier leak diagnosis (leak determination on pressure criterion with backpressure valve 210 adjustment as shown in Fig. 3 step 320; Col. 6, lines 18-26).
Keskula does not explicitly disclose a humidifier in the air supply system or determination based on stack output or output voltage.
However, Lebzelter discloses in Fig. 1, a humidifier in the air supply system (water vapor transfer (WVT) unit 34 as shown in Fig. 1; Col. 2, lines 1-15, col. 4, lines 50-60); and determination based on stack output or output voltage (HFR signal tied to stack water content and output changes as shown in Fig. 2; Col. 3, lines 1-15, col. 5, lines 35-55).
Therefore, it 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, to modify the system of Keskula and provide a humidifier in the air supply system (water vapor transfer (WVT) unit 34 as shown in Fig. 1); and determination based on stack output or output voltage (HFR signal tied to stack water content and output changes as shown in Fig. 2), as taught by Lebzelter for enhancing diagnostic precision in PEM fuel cell systems by isolating humidifier faults that cause pressure and performance deviations.
As to claims 2, 12 Keskula discloses a reference pressure determination based on compressor speed and valve openings (modeled pressure based on compressor 202 and backpressure valve 210 position as shown in Fig. 2A; Col. 5, lines 24-38).
As to claim 3, Keskula discloses accumulation of low-pressure instances (ongoing monitoring of pressure difference changes over time as shown in Fig. 2B; Col. 5, lines 38-50).
As to claims 4, 13, Lebzelter discloses additional diagnosis if voltage is low under valve conditions (HFR changes exceeding physical rates under humidification conditions as shown in Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 40-55).
As to claim 5, Keskula discloses a delay in entering diagnosis mode (corrective actions initiated after criterion satisfaction, implying threshold time as shown in Fig. 3 step 320; Col. 6, lines 35-45).
As to claims 6, 14, Keskula discloses stepwise valve opening and average deviations (backpressure valve 210 configurable in range of positions for adjustments as shown in Fig. 2A; Col. 4, lines 30-40); Lebzelter discloses averaging in models for deviations (HFR averages in water content model as shown in Fig. 2; Col. 6, lines 20-35).
As to claims 7, 15, Lebzelter discloses entry based on output and SoH (HFR for water content akin to SoH, with model revisions for degradation as shown in Fig. 2; Col. 4, lines 10-30).
As to claim 8, Keskula discloses references including output (baseline includes operational parameters impacting output as shown in Fig. 3 step 314; Col. 1, lines 5-12).
As to claim 9, Keskula discloses references including SoH (baseline tolerances account for system variations as shown in Fig. 3 step 314; Col. 5, lines 10-20); Lebzelter discloses explicit SoH integration (model revisions for degradation as shown in Fig. 2; Col. 5, lines 10-20).
As to claim 10, Keskula discloses leak degree via maximum valve opening (valve adjustments to extremes for control and assessment as shown in Fig. 2A; Col. 5, lines 1-15); Lebzelter discloses severity via model limits (change magnitudes as shown in Fig. 2; Col. 3, lines 1-15).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keskula et al. (US 9,397,354 B2 hereinafter Keskula), in view of Lebzelter et al. (US 9,153,828 B2 hereinafter Lebzelter).
As to claim 11, Keskula discloses in Figs. 1, 2A, and 3, a humidifier leak diagnosis method for a fuel cell system, comprising: measuring, by a controller, an inlet air pressure of a fuel cell stack (step 308 as shown in Fig. 3; Col. 4, lines 45-55); entering, by the controller, a humidifier leak diagnosis mode based on the inlet air pressure (step 320 as shown in Fig. 3; Col. 5, lines 40-60); and determining, by the controller, whether or not a humidifier leak has been generated based on an output or an output voltage of the fuel cell stack generated when the controller adjusts at least one of an opening degree of an air cutoff valve or an opening degree of an air pressure control valve upon diagnosing humidifier leak (step 320 as shown in Fig. 3, with valve adjustment; Col. 6, lines 35-45).
Keskula does not explicitly disclose a humidifier or determination based on stack output or output voltage.
However, Lebzelter discloses a humidifier (WVT unit 34 as shown in Fig. 1; Col. 2, lines 15-25); and determination based on stack output or output voltage (HFR tied to water content changes as shown in Fig. 2; Col. 2, lines 45-65).
Therefore, it 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, to modify the system of Keskula and provide a humidifier in the air supply system (water vapor transfer (WVT) unit 34 as shown in Fig. 1); and determination based on stack output or output voltage (HFR signal tied to stack water content and output changes as shown in Fig. 2), as taught by Lebzelter for enhancing diagnostic precision in PEM fuel cell systems by isolating humidifier faults that cause pressure and performance deviations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUNG X NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1967. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30am-6:30pm M-F.
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-2258. 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.
/TUNG X NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858 12/12/2025