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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/14/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings received on 05/17/2024 are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: the empty parenthesis after the terms 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 3, and 6 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 3 recites the limitation "the axial direction (X)" in page 1 last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, it will be assumed that the axial direction refers to the fan’s axis of rotation. It is recommended applicant change the limitation to recite “an axial direction”.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the axial direction (X)" in page 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, it will be assumed that the axial direction refers to the fan’s axis of rotation.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crossley et al. (WO 2022/248818 A1, citations from enclosed machine translation) hereinafter referred to as CROSSLEY in further in view of Bauer et al. (WO 2015/039850 A1, citations from enclosed machine translation) hereinafter referred to as BAUER.
In regard to Claim 1, CROSSLEY teaches a fuel cell system (1) comprising: - a housing (2) a fuel cell compartment (Fig.1; p. 18, line 13) which encloses an inner housing space (3) fuel cell compartment, 108, (Fig. 1; p. 24, line 20) and has housing sides (4) 107 and 101 (Fig. 1; p. 24, lines 22-24) which delimit the inner housing space (3) 108 (Fig. 1; p. 24, line 20) and are at least partially air-permeable, outflow vent disposed on an external wall to allow a fan to blow air out the housing (p. 55, lines 7-9) with at least one fuel cell stack (5) 102 hydrogen fuel cell or a stack of fuel cells (Fig1; p. 22, lines 16-17) arranged in the housing interior (3) Fig.1 102, which has a plurality of fuel cells (6) 102 hydrogen fuel cell or a stack of fuel cells (Fig1; p. 22, lines 16-17), with a cooling circuit (7) a fuel cell cooling loop, 1388, for removing heat from the fuel cell (Fig.13; p. 63, lines 14-15) for cooling the fuel cell stack (5) removing heat from the fuel cell 1032 (Fig.13; p. 63, lines 14-15), in which a liquid coolant circulates a fluid or a liquid for remove heat from the fuel cell (Fig. 13; p. 63 lines 16-18), - with a heat exchanger (9) heat extracted from the fuel cell during cooling for a local application is within a fuel cell heat exchanging cooling module, 188 (Figs. 1 & 13; p. 63, lines 3-6), which is integrated into the cooling circuit (7) 1389 for transferring heat from the fuel cell cooling loop, 1388 (Fig. 13, p. 63, lines 20-23) for cooling the coolant an additional cooling loop for receiving heat from the fuel cell cooling loop 1388 through the heat exchanger 1389 (Fig. 13; p. 63, lines 29-30) and through which an air flow (10) can flow, - with a fan (11), 172, moves air from the fuel cell compartment to the outside (Fig. 1; p. 55, lines 4-5), which is arranged in the housing interior (3) adjacent to the back wall of the fuel cell compartment (Fig. 1; p. 55, lines 1-3) for driving the air flow (10) and which has a pressure side (12) and a suction side (13) to control the pressure of the compartment through an outflow vent where the pressure side is reduced to ambient pressure (Fig. 1; p. 55, lines 6-7), wherein the air flow (10) flows during operation of the fan (11) from an environment (16) of the housing (2) into the housing interior (3) wherein the air flow (10) flows during operation of the fan (11) from an environment (16) of the housing (2) into the housing interior (3) and flows in the housing interior (3) an additional inflow vent, 1174, is where the fan, 1172, draws air in from the battery compartment, 1178, into the into the fuel cell compartment (Fig. 11; p.55, lines 20-25) and from the housing interior (3) back into the environment (16) the outflow vent, 1286, at the top of the fuel cell compartment, 1201, is used to assist in exhausting any hydrogen from the fuel cell (p. 61, lines 27-29). Crossley further teaches that the heat extracted from the fuel cell during cooling can be used for any local applications that require heat (p. 63, lines 4-5).
CROSSLEY does not teach a line for transferring the fuel cell exhaust to the heat exchanger. Rather CROSSLEY does teach that the hydrogen is vented from the housing via the fan 172 (p. 61, lines 27-29).
BAUER teaches the limitation of an exhaust gas line (14) a gas outlet for removing exhaust gas from the exhaust gas system (p.4, [0013], lines 30-31) that feeds exhaust gas (15) exhaust gas from the exhaust gas system (p.4, [0013], lines 30-31) from the fuel cells (6) the fuel cell exhaust gas refers to anode-side exhaust gas and/or anode purge gas and/or cathode-side exhaust gas and/or fuel cell exhaust gas comprising a mixture of anode- side exhaust gas and cathode-side exhaust gas (p.4, [0013], lines 33-35) to the suction side (13) of the fan (11) the outlet of the exhaust system can be before and/or after the air conveying device (p. 6, [0015]. Lines 15-18), and through the heat exchanger (9) the air conveying device and heat exchanger are connected by an air duct where air flow occurs (p.5, [0014], lines 36-37). BAUER further teaches that the air conveying path of the exhaust gas can be specifically adjusted, and an arrangement of the air conveying device and the heat exchanger can be easily carried out depending of the spatial conditions of the apparatus (pgs. 5-6, [0016]).
Further, CROSSLEY and BAUER are considered analogous in the art as both inventions are directed towards a power generating device utilizing a fuel cell stack and the regulation of the exhaust gas and environment of the apparatus housing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the fan disposed on the case of the power generation system of CROSSLEY and combine the air conveying path of exhaust gas from BAUER to utilize the space of fuel cell housing, recycle the exhaust gas, and to place the fan on the heat exchanger to control the pressure and gas composition of the fuel cell housing. As the arrangement of the fan, exhaust line and the heat supplied heat exchanger heat can be utilized for a variety of applications and for safe operation of the apparatus.
In regard to Claim 2, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1 see above rejection and that the suction side (13) faces the housing interior (3) the fan, 172, moves air from within the fuel cell compartment to the outside (p. 55, lines 4-5),
CROSSLEY does not teach that the fan is arranged in respect to the heat exchanger, only the fan directs airflow outside of the housing.
BAUER teaches the limitation of the fan (11) is arranged upstream of the heat exchanger (9) with respect to the air flow (10) a general air conveying device to be positioned in a flow direction of the supplied before the heat exchanger (p. 6, [0014], lines 2-3) faces the heat exchanger (9) are connected by an air duct (p. 5, [0014], lines 36-36). BAUER also teaches that due to the spatial conditions of the housing it is advantageous to position the air conveying device in a matter of arrangements in regards to the heat exchanger including: after, within, or side by side (pgs. 5-6, [0014]) and the advantages of having a pressure difference in the exhaust gas system and the heat exchanger/air conveying device to allow the suction effect to act on the air flowing through the heat exchanger (p. 8, [0020], lines 5-7). A skilled artisan would know that an air conveying device could comprise a fan, blower, or similar structure.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the fan disposed on the case of the power generation system of CROSSLEY and combine the air conveying path of exhaust gas from BAUER to utilize the space of fuel cell housing, recycle the exhaust gas, and to place the fan facing the heat exchanger to control the pressure and gas composition of the fuel cell housing so the airflow is directed through the heat exchanger. As the arrangement of the fan, exhaust line and the heat supplied heat exchanger heat can be utilized for a variety of applications and for safe operation of the apparatus.
In regard to Claim 3, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1 see above claim 1 rejection.
CROSSLEY further teaches wherein - the fan (11) is designed as an axial fan which has a hub (18) rotatable about an axis of rotation (17) of the fan (11) and a plurality of blades (19) projecting from the hub (18) transversely to the axial direction (X) the fan, 172, is shown with a central hub and a plurality of blades extending into a transversely axial direction (Fig. 1).
A skilled artisan would find it obvious to combine the exhaust gas line and heat exchanger arrangement of CROSSLEY modified by BAUER with the fan disposed on the interior of the fuel cell stack’s housing of CROSSLEY.
In regard to Claim 4, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 3 see above rejection.
BAUER further teaches wherein - the exhaust gas line (14) ends in the region of the hub (18) the anode-side exhaust gas to be fed in front of the and/or into an inlet of the exhaust gas system (p. 6, [0016], lines 29-30). Additionally, BAUER teaches mixed exhaust gas outlet and its shape including its structure, angularity, and arrangement are designed to optimally route the exhaust gas (p.5, [0017], lines 1-2).
A skilled artisan would find it obvious to combine the exhaust gas line and heat exchanger arrangement of CROSSLEY modified by BAUER with the fan disposed on the interior of the fuel cell stack’s housing of CROSSLEY and ensure the gas enters in the immediate vicinity of the air conveying device axially to the hub.
In regard to Claim 5, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 4 see above rejection.
BAUER further teaches wherein - the exhaust gas line (14) guides the exhaust gas (15) axially to the hub (18) the anode-side exhaust gas to be fed in front of the and/or into an inlet of the exhaust gas system (p. 6, [0016], lines 29-30). Additionally, BAUER teaches mixed exhaust gas outlet and its shape including its structure, angularity, and arrangement are designed to optimally route the exhaust gas (p.5, [0017], lines 1-2).
A skilled artisan would find it obvious to combine the exhaust gas line and heat exchanger arrangement of CROSSLEY modified by BAUER with the fan disposed on the interior of the fuel cell stack’s housing of CROSSLEY and ensure the gas enters in the immediate vicinity of the air conveying device and is optimal for mixing.
In regard to Claim 14, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
CROSSLEY does teach the heat exchanger (9) is arranged in or on one of the housing sides (4) the heat exchanger is located within a fuel cell heat exchanging cooling module, 188, that is affixed to an exterior surface of the container 101 which is defined as a side of the fuel cell compartment housing (Fig 1; p. 63, lines 3-8).
Therefore, a skilled artisan would find it obvious to combine the two elements of CROSSLEYS heat exchanging module and exhaust fan with the exhaust lines of BAUER to control the exhaust gas of the system and utilize the heat exchanger in the fuel cell system.
Claims 11, 13, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CROSSLEY as modified by BAUER as applied to claim 1 in further in view of Horiguchi (JP 2008171808 A, citations from enclosed machine translation) hereinafter referred to as HORIGUCHI.
In regard to Claim 11, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1.
CROSSLEY does not teach a separator layer of the fuel cell, only that there are a cathode and anode in the fuel cell.
HORIGUCHI teaches the limitation of wherein - the respective fuel cell (6) has a polymer electrolyte membrane which separates an anode side from a cathode side in the fuel cell (6) the fuel stack is made up of multiple fuel cell units U connected together in which a solid polymer electrolyte is sandwiched between an air electrode and a fuel electrode (p. 20, [0024], lines 14-18). HORIGUCHI further teaches that the fuel electrode is defined as the anode (p. 4, [0004], line 2) and the air electrode is the cathode (p. 4, [0004], line 8).
HORIGUCHI is considered analogous in the art as it is directed toward a fuel cell stack and the use/control of the exhaust gases generated during operation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to ensure that the fuel cell component of CROSSLEY modified by BAUER contains a polymer electrolyte membrane in between the anode and cathode as taught by HORIGUCHI. As a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cell is well known in the art.
In regard to Claim 12, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1 see above claim 1 rejection.
CROSSLEY does not teach a water tank or a mixture of gasses.
BAUER teaches the limitation of a water tank (32), 15, water tank (Fig. 1; p. 25, [0078]), a water line which is connected on the input side to an anode outlet (34) of the fuel cell stack (5), 16, water line to the anode side, 2, of the fuel stack from the water tank (Fig. 1). carrying anode exhaust gas water line anode-side exhaust gas (p. 9, [0025], line 35) carrying cathode exhaust gas (p. 9, [0025], line 35) so that the exhaust gas line (14) leads the exhaust gas (15) formed by a mixture of anode exhaust gas and cathode exhaust gas cathode-side exhaust gas (p. 9, [0025], line 34) from the water tank (32) to the fan (11) where the line opens into the cathode-side exhaust gas and/or a mixing device for mixing the anode-side exhaust gas and the cathode-side exhaust gas and/or the air inlet into the heat exchanger and mixing area for the anode exhaust gas as previously described (p. 9, [0025], lines 34-37).
BAUER does not explicitly teach that the water tank has input lines coming from the outlet lines of the anode and cathode exhaust gas lines.
In the same field of invention, HORIGUCHI, does teach collecting water carried in anode exhaust gas recovers water from exhaust air (p. 15, [0017], lines 5-7) to a cathode outlet (35) of the fuel cell stack (5) and which is connected on the output side to the exhaust gas line (14) the tank, 53, is located below the drain, 516, below the fuel stack where the line, 520, connects the cathode side to the tank (Fig. 3; p. 33, [0036], lines 1-2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the existing water tank of BAUER and lines connecting said tank to the fuel cell stack and use the flow path taught by HORIGUCHI to supply the fuel stack with water. As the reversal of flow would be an obvious change in order to supply the fuel cell with water from the cathode exhaust as taught by BAUER (p. 10, [0025], lines 12-15).
In regard to Claim 13, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 12 see above rejection.
Modified CROSSLEY does not teach a structure attached to the heat exchanger for condensate drainage.
BAUER does teach a condenser or water separator can be inserted into the cathode-side exhaust gas to supply the fuel cell with water from the exhaust (p. 18, [0051], lines 9-10).
HORIGUCHI in the same field of invention teaches the limitation of the heat exchanger (9) has a condensate drainage structure (37) coupled to the water tank (32), which feeds condensate produced at the heat exchanger (9) to the water tank (32) where air in the exhaust port is cooled by heat exchange with the air in the intake and causes water vapor in the exhaust air to condense and then flow back to the water tank, 50, via drain.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the condenser of HORIGUCHI to the heat exchanger of CROSSLEY modified by BAUER as the inclusion would be an obvious addition to recycling the water vapor in the exhaust gas.
In regard to Claim 16, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 12 see above claim 1 rejection.
CROSSLEY does not teach a vehicle utilizing the fuel cell system.
BAUER does teach an electric vehicle (48) a hybrid vehicle as a fuel cell-powered device (p. 2, [0004], line 10).
HORIGUCHI in the same field of invention teaches a vehicle utilizing the fuel stacks with an electric motor drive (49) the motor, 77 (p. 25, [0031], line 7), the fuel cell (1) generating electrical energy for supplying the electric drive (49) the fuel supply system when it is installed in a vehicle (Fig. 9; p. 41, [0046], lines 1-2) - wherein the fuel cell system (1) is coupled to the drive (49) for the transmission (50) of electrical energy the load system, 70, takes the output of the fuel cell stack, 2, and drives loads such as the motor, 77 (p. 25, [0031], lines 1-2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the fuel stack of HORIGUCHI and the housing arrangement of CROSSLEY with the hybrid vehicle of BAUER. As a skilled artisan would find it obvious to include the power generating fuel stack and have that generated electricity power coupled to an electric drive to power a hybrid electric vehicle.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CROSSLEY as modified by BAUER as applied to claim 1 in further in view of CUI (CN 108825340 B, citations from enclosed machine translation) hereinafter referred to as CUI.
In regard to Claim 1, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1 and the exhaust gas line (14) the anode-side exhaust gas to be fed in front of the and/or into an inlet of the exhaust gas system (p. 6, [0016], lines 29-30) has a distributor chamber (22) at its outlet end (21), a mixing area in which anode-side exhaust gas to be fed in (p. 6, [0016], lines 29-30).
CROSSLEY does not teach pipes within a chamber or any structure.
BAUER teaches the outside of the gas outlet and its shape including its structure, angularity, and arrangement are designed to optimally route the exhaust gas (p.5, [0017], lines 1-2).
CUI teaches the limitation of from which a plurality of distributor pipes (23) extend transversely to the axial direction (X) a number of radially distributed exhaust nozzles, 11 (Figs. 2-5; p. 20, [0035], line 20), each of which opens in the region of the rotor blades (19) the external energy conversion blade, 76, as an axial flow fan blade (Figs. 2-3; p. 21, [0036], line 10). CUI further teaches that the flow is directed to a flue gas heat exchange channel (p. 21, [0036], line 11).
Further, CUI is considered in the field of endeavor as modified CROSSLEY as it is directed towards the power generation of new energy vehicles and utilizing the exhaust gases generated during operation and utilizing said gas.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapted the distributor nozzles of CUI to the exhaust chamber of modified CROSSLEY to direct the exhaust gas to a fan and heat exchanger for power generation.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CROSSLEY as modified by BAUER as applied to claim 1 in further in view of Tanfara (WO 2014032814 A1, citations from enclosed machine translation) hereinafter referred to as TANFARA.
In regard to Claim 7, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1 and the fan portion which is axially open to the exhaust gas line (14) the outlet of the exhaust system before the air conveying device (BAUER; p. 6, [0015], line 15) and/or to the housing interior (3) fan, 172, that is facing the fuel cell interior (CROSSLEY; p. 55, lines 1-2), - the exhaust gas line (14) opens in the area of the hub (18) air duct that connects the heat exchanger and the air conveying device (BAUER; p. 5, [0014] lines 36-37).
Modified CROSSLEY does not teach additional structure to the fan blades are an inlet in the hub of the fan.
TANFARA teaches the limitation of contains a central hub channel (24) a central cylindrical inlet portion, 28, of the rotor (Figs. 7-10; p.13, line 28) - at least one of the rotor blades (19) inlet blades, 34, (Figs. 7-10; p.13, line 28) contains at least one blade channel (25) 50 (Figs. 7-10; p.13, line 28) which is radially open towards the hub channel (24) Figs. 7a, 8a, 9a, 9b where the opening of the channel, 54, is directed towards the central hub (p. 14, lines 4-7), - the respective blade channel (25) is fluidically connected to at least one outlet opening (26) Fig. 10 openings 62 are adjacent to channels 50 (p. 15, lines 3-4) which is formed on the respective blade (19) Fig. 10 channel opening 50 and which is open to the environment of the respective blade (19) Fig. 11 the rotor blades are open to the inside and outside of the air conveying device.
Further TANFARA is considered in the same field of endeavor as CROSSLEY and BAUER as TANFARA is directed to the purification of an exhaust gas and is utilizing an air conveying device (fan) and heat exchanger to control the gas and temperature levels of an apparatus.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the blade construction of TANFARA with the exhaust-gas system of CROSSLEY modified by BAUER to more efficiently distribute the gas on the fan and subsequent heat exchanger for a greater surface area and more efficient heat exchange.
Claims 8, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CROSSLEY as modified by BAUER as applied to claim 1 in further in view of Yapp (WO 9009526 A1, citations from enclosed machine translation) hereinafter referred to as YAPP.
In regard to Claim 8, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1 and the exhaust gas line (14) the outlet of the exhaust system in the vicinity of the air conveying device (p. 6, [0015], lines 16-17).
Modified CROSSLEY does not explicitly teach an impeller disposed between the gas outlet and the fan/heat exchanger as an embodiment of the air conveying device.
YAPP teaches the limitation of wherein - an additional fan (27) is arranged between the fan (11) and is designed as a radial fan and has an impeller (28) centrifugal blowers and fans generally include an impeller (p. 1, lines 6-7) that feeds exhaust gas (15) supplied axially by the exhaust gas line (14) rotating impeller draws air in through a central inlet (p. 2, lines 26-27) radially to the region of the impeller blades (19) and forces it radially outward (p. 2, line 27).
YAPP also teaches that such blowers with an impeller are used to dictate pressure difference, volume, speed, power, space and inlet and outlet configuration (p. 1, lines 11-15).
Further, modified CROSSLEY and YAPP are considered in the same field of endeavor as an air conveying device is being used to direct exhaust air flow in an apparatus to a heat exchanging element including an automobile air condition evaporator (YAPP; p. 4, lines 7-8) or fuel cell stack (BAUER; p. 9, 25)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include an impeller in the air conveying device and fan of modified CROSSLEY and incorporate the impeller of YAPP to improve the airflow volume of the exhaust gas being supplied to the air conveying device and heat exchanger.
In regard to Claim 9, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 8 see above rejection and in the exhaust gas (15) supplied by the exhaust gas line (14) the outlet of the exhaust system in the vicinity of the air conveying device (BAUER; p. 6, [0015], lines 16-17).
Modified CROSSLEY does not teach an impeller disposed between the gas outlet and the fan/heat exchanger as an embodiment of the air conveying device.
In the same field of endeavor, YAPP teaches the limitation of wherein - the impeller (28) is connected to the hub (18) in a rotationally fixed manner impeller is driven by an electric motor attached to the impeller axle and rotates within that stator. 20 (Fig. 5; p. 4, lines 23-25), so that the impeller (28) sucks in axially and drives it radially into the region of the impeller blades (19) draws in air axially and discharges it radially outwardly (p. 2, lines 26-27) when the hub (18) is rotating the rotating impeller (p. 2, line 26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the conveying device and fan of modified CROSSLEY and incorporate the impeller of YAPP to improve the airflow volume of the exhaust gas being supplied to the air conveying device and heat exchanger.
In regard to Claim 10, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 8 see claim 8 rejection above at an outlet end (21) of the exhaust gas line (14) and/or at the hub (18) the outlet of the exhaust system in the vicinity of the air conveying device (BAUER; p. 6, [0015], lines 16-17).
Modified CROSSLEY does not teach an attachment of an impeller or parameters thereof.
In the same field of endeavor, YAPP teaches the limitation of the impeller (28) is rotatably arranged and in rotation, a centrifugal blower having the impeller draws air in though a central inlet () the impeller (28) deflecting the incoming exhaust gas (15) radially and supplying it to the region of the impeller blades (19) draws in air axially and discharges it radially outwardly (p. 2, lines 26-27).
YAPP does not explicitly disclose so that the exhaust gas (15) supplied by the exhaust gas line (14) drives the impeller (18). However, a skilled artisan would find it obvious that the gas flow supplied by the cathode exhaust would also drive the rotation of the impeller blades and would result in the same radial arrangement of the exhaust gas by the impeller.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the conveying device and fan of modified CROSSLEY and incorporate the impeller of YAPP to improve the airflow volume of the exhaust gas being supplied to the air conveying device and heat exchanger and to drive the impeller with the supplied air flow pressure of the anode exhaust line.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CROSSLEY as modified by BAUER as applied to claim 1 in further in view of Rheaume et al. (US 2020/0317360 A1) hereinafter referred to as RHEAUME.
In regard to Claim 15, CROSSLEY modified by BAUER teaches the fuel cell system (1) according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection.
CROSSLEY does not teach a flame arrestor device or an air purifier.
BAUER does teach the exhaust gas (15) is arranged on or in an end portion () of the exhaust gas line (14) facing the fan (11) where the outlet shape and structure are designed to optimize the distribution of exhaust gas (p. 7, [0017], lines 1-5) and a hydrogen sensor being located in the exhaust gas path and the exhaust path is directed to the fan/air conveying device (p. 9, [0025], line 28).
RHEAUME teaches the limitation of wherein - a flame arrestor device () for preventing the spread of a flame within the exhaust gas line (14) gas from the cathode supply gas source, 54, is directed by a fan or blower through an optional flame arrestor, 62 (p. 4, [0056], lines 48-50) and/or a particle filter () for filtering 716 for a water purification system (p. 7, [0074], line 41). A skilled artisan would find it obvious to include the particulate filter in the gas line if it is required for containment of waste and possible toxic material.
Further RHEAUME is in the same field of endeavor as it discloses an electrochemical stack utilizing a cathode with a gas supply source in a vehicle and has to take safety precautions associated with volatile gases.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the known safety precautions of a gas flame arrestor and a particle filter as taught by RHEAUME to the gas outlet line and air conveyance of modified CROSSLEY as the exhaust gas will contain flammable hydrogen gas and water vapor from the fuel stack. As containing and working with flammable and possibly contaminated gases and/or vapors would be obvious to a skilled artisan to apply.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE WALTER VIGIL JR whose telephone number is (571)270-7652. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571) 270-7457. 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.
/WAYNE WALTER VIGIL/Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/JACOB T MINSKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights