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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to Application No. 18/693,915 to Sirac et al., assigned to L'Air Liquide, Societe Anonyme pour l'Etude et l’Exploitation des Procedes Georges Claude, Paris, France, filed 03/20/2024, and published as U.S. PG Publication 2025/0149609 on 05/08/2025.
This application is a 35 U.S.C. § 371 National Stage entry of International Patent Application PCT/EP2022/074038 filed 08/30/2022. It claims priority from French Patent Application FR2109861 filed 09/20/2021.
Status of the Claims
The status of the claims stand as follows:
4.1 Canceled 1-11
4.2 New 12-22
Claims 12-22 are currently pending in this application. All pending claims are under full consideration.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/20/2024 has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered by the examiner. A duly initialed and signed copy is attached herewith. Accordingly, information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered if signed and initialed by Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 12 recites the limitation, “… one of the plates of the first cell forming, with one of the plates of another of the cells, a first inter-cell cooling circuit”. The cell referred to as “another of the cells” cannot be any other of the plurality of cell, but must be a cell adjacent to the first cell. Thus, for better clarity of the claimed feature the “first inter-cell circuit” the claim language should be corrected to read, “… one of the plates of the first cell forming, with one of the plates of an adjacent cell, a first inter-cell cooling circuit” . The same also applies to the last cell as well. Appropriate correction is required.
Objection to the Drawing
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
(1) the first cell and the last cell must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
(2) The inter-cell cooling circuit given the reference number 15 in the instant specification is not shown in drawing Fig. 1 and 3, and in Fig. 2 the reference number 15 does not point out a specific feature but seem to indicate the space between the cathode plate 10 and anode plate 20 (presumably of adjacent cell but not expressly stated). Therefore, the inter-cell cooling circuit must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
(3) None of the drawing show the claimed first distribution orifice, whose reference number is unknow, and also does not show the first section, the second section and the third section. Therefore, the first distribution orifice must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
(4) The claim recite three components of the fuel cell namely the stack of plurality of cells, a distribution plate and an interface plate. However, none of the drawings show the positional relationships of these features in a very clear and unambiguous manner.
(5) It also does not show any of the sub-features constituting the three main features, such as inter-cell cooling circuit, the first distribution orifice, and its first section, second section and third section.
(6) None of the drawing show the first collection plate and a tongue projecting from the plane of the first collection plate. Therefore, the tongue must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The presented drawings do not add any clarity to the claimed fuel cell. For example the drawing in Fig. 1 shows only a section of the fuel cell, while a drawing showing the full structure of the claimed fuel cell is not presented. So Fig. 1 by itself and without comparison to a drawing of the full cell is deficient. Applicant is required to provide drawing that show all the claimed features.
No new matter should be entered.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 12-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terada et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2014/0234746; cited in the IDS dated 03/20/204
Regarding claim 12 Terada discloses a fuel cell comprising a stack of a plurality of power generating units 12 (Terada Fig. 1, paragraph 0007, 0025), equivalent to the plurality of cell; the stack of power generating units being sandwiched between a first end plate 104a and a second end plate 104b (Terada Fig. 1, paragraph 0007), considered equivalent to a first clamping plate and a second clamping plate that are configured to apply a predetermined clamping pressure to the stack. Since the fuel cell have reactant that can be air and hydrogen (Terada paragraph 0005), the ion exchanged through the electrolyte membrane is a hydrogen ion (i.e. a proton) the fuel cell can be referred to as proton exchange-membrane fuel cell.
The plurality of cells further comprising: a first cell at a first end of the stack and a last cell at a second end of the stack (Terada Fig. 1), each power generation unit 12 (Terada Fig. 1, 2), equivalent to the plurality of cell, having an anode plate 56 and a cathode plate 54 sandwiching a membrane electrode assembly 52 (Terada Fig. 2, 3, paragraph 0049), Terada discloses a metal separator plate 14, 16, 18, 20 for circulating a coolant (Terada Fig. 4) considered equivalent to the one of the plates of the first cell forming, with one of the plates of another of the cells, a first inter-cell cooling circuit (Fig. 4), the other of the plates of the first cell defining a first end plate, one of the plates of the last cell forming, with one of the plates of another of the cells, a last inter-cell cooling circuit, the other of the plates of the last cell defining a last end plate (Fig. 4); Terada discloses fluid, including coolant flows through the coolant channel 32 of the plates 14, 20 (Terda Fig. 4) of the metal separator (Terada paragraph Fig. 4, 0007, paragraph 0079). The metal separator is interposed between the cells and is therefore have a face facing the current collector plate of the cells and the cooling faces of the first end plate and second end plate.
Claim 12 includes the intended use limitation a distribution plate having a first electric current collection face intended to face a first electric current collection plate and a distribution face intended to face the cooling face of the first end plate, and the fuel cell of Terada would be capable to perform the intended use as described above.
The distribution plate 14, 20 having a fluid distribution manifold 25a, 25b formed through the plate 14, 20 (Terada Fig. 4); and an insulator plate 102, considered equivalent to the an interface plate interposed between the first clamping plate, that is the end plate 104, and the distribution plate, the interface plate having an outer face facing the first clamping plate and an inner face opposite the outer face (Terada Fig. 3), the interface plate having recessed portions, equivalent to the first distribution orifice formed through the plate to enable the fluid to pass between the first clamping plate 104 and the distribution plate 14 (Terada Fig. 3, paragraph 0065).
Terada is silent about the first distribution orifice having a third section defined by a plane extending in the plane containing the interface plate and passing through half the thickness thereof, the first distribution orifice opening through a first section into the outer face and through a second section into the inner face, the shape of the first section being different from the second section and/or different from the third section (Terada Fig. 1). However, changing the shape of the recessed portions, equivalent to distribution orifice, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art since according to the MPEP a change in shape or size of a component is generally considered as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
Regarding claim 13 Terada discloses recessed portion 120 a and 120 b are formed in the surface 102 b of the interface plate 102 so as to correspond to the coolant inlet manifolds 25 a and the coolant outlet manifolds 25 b the interface plate and the distribution plate being arranged such that all of the fluid passing through the first distribution orifice enters the distribution manifold of the distribution plate (Terada Fig. 1, paragraph 0065)
Regarding claim 14 Terada is silent about the surface area of the first section of the recessed portion, considered equivalent to the orifice in the interface plate, being less than 90% of the surface area of the third section, notably less than 70% of the surface area of the third section, for example less than 55% of the surface area of the third section. However, the size of the recessed portion affects the amount of coolant introduced into the fuel cell system, and it would have been obvious to a person or ordinary skill to have optimized through routine experimentation the size of the recessed portion so as to have optimum cooling effect of the fuel cell. See MPEP 2144.05(11).
Regarding claim 15 Terada is silent about the first section of the interface plate is substantially disk-shaped. The recessed portion 120 a and 120 b corresponding to the coolant inlet and outlet have an elongated shape. However, changing the shape of outlet would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art since according to the MPEP a change in shape or size of a component is generally considered as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
Regarding claim 16 the second section and/or the third section comprise at least one side including a line segment since it has an elongated shape(Terada Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 17 Terada discloses the recessed portion 120 a and 120 b are formed in the surface 102 b of the interface plate 102 so as to correspond to the coolant inlet manifolds 25 a and the coolant outlet manifolds 25 b the interface plate and the distribution plate being arranged such that all of the fluid passing through the first distribution orifice enters the distribution manifold of the distribution plate (Terada Fig. 1, paragraph 0065); thus, the second section has the same shape as the section of the distribution manifold so that the distribution manifold and the first distribution orifice can be aligned edge-to-edge.
Regarding claim 18 Terada discloses a first sealing member 46 is integrally formed on the surfaces 14 a and 14 b of the first metal separator 14 so as to surround the outer periphery of the first metal separator 14 (Terada Fig. 4, paragraph 0042), considered equivalent to a first flat seal interposed between the distribution plate and the interface plate.
Regarding claim 19 Terada also does not disclose an O-ring arranged on either side of the first flat seal to provide a fluid tight seal.
Regarding claim 20 the cell disclosed by Terada have a flat shape (Terada Fig, 1, 4) and will, therefore, have the distribution plate and the first collection plate together form a flat face to come into contact with the first flat seal.
Regarding claim 21 Terada discloses the first flat seal 46 has at least a second distribution orifice 25 a, b , to enable the fluid to pass between the interface plate and the distribution plate (Terada Fig. 4, paragraph 0032) .
Regarding claim 22 Terada is silent about the first collection plate comprises a tongue projecting from the plane of the first collection plate and the first flat seal having a slot enabling the tongue to pass through the first flat seal. However, discloses terminal portions extend from the collection plate to the outside of the fuel cell through the sealing plate (Terada paragraph 0062) considered equivalent to the claimed tongue
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR M KEKIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5918. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-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, NIKI BAKHTIARI can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/JONATHAN G JELSMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/OMAR M KEKIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights