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 Objections
Claims 16, 19-21, 23, 27, and 29 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites “each of the plurality of superimposed stacks”. It is suggested that this claim be amended to recite “each of the stacks of the plurality of superimposed stacks”.
Regarding claims 19-21, claims 19-21 recite “wherein one or more of the plurality of support devices”. It is suggested that these claims be amended to recite “wherein one or more of the support devices of the plurality of support devices”.
Regarding claims 23, 27, and 29, claims 23, 27, and 29 recite “wherein one or more of the plurality of devices”. It is suggested that these claims be amended to recite “wherein one or more of the devices of the plurality of devices”.
Regarding claim 27, claim 27 recites “one or more of the plurality of superimposed stacks”. It is suggested that this claim be amended to recite “one or more of the stacks of the plurality of superimposed stacks”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation is: “means for moving the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force…the means for moving the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force including elastic members, actuators, and/or pistons” in claim 1.
Because this claim limitation is not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation does not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 16-33 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.
Regarding claim 16, it is unclear what is meant by “SOEC/SOFC type”. For example, it is unclear if the claim requires a choice from either a SOEC or a SOFC, or if the claim requires both SOEC and SOFC be present. It is noted that the instant specification appears to identify SOEC and SOFC cells as being distinct types of cells with different electrochemical mechanisms (instant specification pg. 1-2).
Regarding the recitations of SOEC and SOFC, it is suggested that the full phrases be included before their respective abbreviations.
Regarding claim 16, claim 1 recites the limitation “the plurality of stacks" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this recitation of “the plurality of stacks” refers to the same stacks as the “plurality of superimposed stacks of solid oxide cells” in line 1 of claim 16.
Claims 17-33 are indefinite as they depend from an indefinite base and fail to cure the deficiencies of said claim.
Regarding claim 33, it is unclear what is meant by the method being “implemented under a neutral gas, directly inside the stacks or using the thermal enclosure”, specifically what is meant by “using the thermal enclosure”. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpretated as requiring the method be performed with neutral gas in the stacks or with the thermal enclosure being totally inert, pending further clarification from applicant.
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 16-21, 23-26, and 28-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahlanen (US 2012/0034544 A1) in view of Kakuwa (US 2018/0138540 A1) and Di (US 2015/0194693A1).
Regarding claim 16, Mahlanen teaches a system comprising:
a plurality of stacks, at least two stacks being at least partially superimposed on one another (Mahlanen Fig. 1)
a plurality of support devices at least partially superimposed on one another, on each of which one or more stacks which are not superimposed on one another are positioned (annotated Mahlanen Fig. 1 shown below)
a plurality of devices for applying a compressive force to one or more stacks, at least partially superimposed on one another (elements 5 and 6 together and element 12, Mahlanen Fig. 1)
means for moving the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force allowing an independent mechanical clamping of the stack(s) positioned on each of the plurality of support devices, the means for moving the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force including elastic return members (Mahlanen Fig. 1 element 7, spring [16])
PNG
media_image1.png
874
855
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Mahlanen teaches their invention is suitable for a high-temperature arrangement of solid oxide fuel cells (Mahlanen [18]); therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the stacks of Mahlanen to comprises solid oxide fuel cells operating at a high temperature.
Mahlanen does not teach:
a thermal enclosure delimiting an internal volume
each of the plurality of superimposed stacks including a plurality of electrochemical cells each formed of a cathode, an anode, and an electrolyte inserted between the cathode and the anode,
and a plurality of intermediate interconnectors each arranged between two adjacent electrochemical cells of the plurality of electrochemical cells;
Kakuwa teaches a system comprising a fuel cell stack comprising a plurality of fuel cells, such as solid oxide fuel cells that operate at high temperature (Kakuwa [29]), that is housed in a thermal enclosure (housing 4, Kakuwa Fig. 2), a device for applying compressive force (3, 7, 8, Kakuwa Fig. 2), and a means for moving the device that includes elastic return members (9, 11 Kakuwa Fig. 2). Since Kakuwa and Mahlanen both teach a stack of solid oxide fuel cells that operate at high temperature, a device for applying compressive force, and a means for moving the device that includes elastic return members and Kakuwa teaches that it is known and suitable for fuel cell stacks to be stored in a thermal enclosure, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a thermal enclosure to the system of Mahlanen, thus resulting in a thermal enclosure delimiting an internal volume, the plurality of stacks being placed in the internal volume, and the elastic return members being located outside of the thermal enclosure, to obtain the predictable result of a system comprising compressed fuel cells.
Kakuwa further teaches that fuel cells comprise a cathode, an anode, and an electrolyte inserted between the cathode and the anode (Kakuwa [54]). Since it is known that fuel cells comprise and anode, cathode, and electrolyte, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to fabricate the system of Mahlanen to have fuel cells having a cathode, an anode, and an electrolyte inserted between the cathode and the anode to achieve the predictable result of an operable fuel cell.
Di teaches that it is suitable for interconnectors to be present between adjacent cells in a fuel cell stack in order to ensure “the junction between two adjacent cells” (Di [8]) and that the interconnector “conveys the current and distributes the gases” (Di [11]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added interconnectors between adjacent cells in the system of modified Mahlanen in order to ensure sufficient connection between the adjacent cells.
Regarding claim 17, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa teaches all features of claim 16, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches a number of the stacks being between 2 and 20 (3, Mahlanen Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 18, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claim 16, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches the thermal enclosure consisting of a furnace floor, forming a lower horizontal wall of the thermal enclosure, an upper horizontal wall and side walls, together defining the internal volume (Kakuwa element 4, Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 19, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claims 16 and 18, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches one or more of the plurality of support devices being in a form of an arch comprising a substantially horizontal upper arch part, on which one or more of the plurality of superimposed stacks are disposed, and at least two lateral arch parts located on either side of the upper arch part and bearing directly or indirectly on the thermal enclosure (annotated Mahlanen Fig. 1 shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
874
855
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claims 16 and 18, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches one or more of the plurality of support devices being supported directly or indirectly by the side walls of the thermal enclosure (support devices are supported by the floor and the floor is supported by the side walls, thus the support devices are indirectly supported by the side walls). It is noted that claim 20 does not limit or provide further structural details regarding how the support devices are “supported”.
Regarding claim 21, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claims 16 and 18, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches one or more of the plurality of support devices being in a form of a substantially horizontal shelf and supported directly or indirectly by the thermal enclosure (element 13, Mahlanen Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 23 and 24, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claims 16 and 23, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches one of the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force being in a form of an arch comprising an upper arch part configured to bear directly or indirectly against one or more of the plurality of superimposed stacks (element 5, Mahlanen Fig. 1), and at least two lateral arch parts located on either side or through the upper arch part (elements 6, Mahlanen Fig. 1) and passing through the thermal enclosure, through first holes formed therein, wherein the at least two lateral arch parts comprise clamping rods passing through a floor of the thermal enclosure (holes that element 6 passes through, Mahlanen Fig. 1; Kakuwa Fig. 2 has holes in the thermal enclosure for arch parts to pass through).
Regarding claim 25, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claims 16 and 23, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches each arch including the upper arch part, configured to bear directly or indirectly against the one or more of the plurality of superimposed stacks, and the at least two lateral arch parts located through the upper arch part and passing through the thermal enclosure through the first holes formed therein (modified Mahlanen Fig. 1 in view of Kakuwa), and a plurality of through-holes being formed through the upper arch part for passage of the at least two lateral arch parts (holes that elements 6 pass through in element 5, Mahlanen Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 26, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claims 16 and 23, as described above. Mahlanen further teaches the elastic return members (element 7, Mahlanen Fig. 1) being positioned at ends of the lateral arch parts of the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force (Mahlanen Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 28, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claim 16, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches the means for moving the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force includes a system for controlling a displacement of the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force placed in a cold area below the thermal enclosure (the bolts at the ends of element 6, as shown below; these bolts and the spring are in a cold area, Mahlanen [16]).
PNG
media_image2.png
452
613
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 29, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claim 16, as described above. Mahlanen further teaches one system for supporting on of the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force, located in an upper part of the thermal enclosure (tie bolts, Mahlanen [18]).
Regarding claim 30, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claims 16 and 29, as described above. Mahlanen further teaches the means for moving the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force includes a crosspiece support (elements 31 and 32, Mahlanen Fig. 1) shared by all of the elastic return members making it possible to impose an identical movement on the elastic return members.
Regarding claim 31, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claim 16, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches the elastic return members being located below the thermal enclosure in a cold area (Mahlanen [16]).
Regarding claim 32, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claim 16, as described above. Modified Mahlanen further teaches a method comprising moving the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force using the means for moving in a direction of the plurality of stacks to allow the independent mechanical clamping of the stacks on each of the plurality of support devices (compression force is tuned by adjusting the spring which in turn moves the devices for applying the compressive force to achieve the desired compression, Mahlanen [16]).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di, as applied to claim 16 above, and in further view of Whittlesey (US 4,287,267 A).
Regarding claim 22, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claim 16, as described above. Modified Mahlanen does not teach a mechanical frame in the thermal enclosure that comprises a plurality of notches at various heights to variably position the support devices in a form of shelves.
Whittlesey teaches a battery frame that holds a plurality of battery modules that comprise a plurality of electrochemical cells (Whittlesey col. 2 lines 60-65). Whittlesey further teaches a mechanical frame comprising a plurality of notches at various heights, thus resulting in the battery modules being variably positioned in the form of shelves (Whittlesey Fig. 5). Since Whittlesey teaches that it is known to arrange battery modules in the form of shelves using a mechanical frame with notches, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a mechanical frame with notches within the internal volume of the thermal enclosure to the system of modified Mahlanen in order to obtain the predictable result of arranged electrochemical stacks and achieve a system with dimensions suitable for a desired application.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di, as applied to claim 16 above, and in further view of Yuichi (JPH09139223A, English translation used for text citations, original document used for figure citations).
Regarding claim 27, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claim 16, as described above. Modified Mahlanen does not teach one or more of the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force being configured to bear against one or more of the plurality of superimposed stacks by means of at least one contact element forming a ball-joint connection between the stack(s) and a corresponding one of the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force.
Yuichi teaches a compression device that is implemented with a stack of solid electrolyte fuel cells (Yuichi Fig. 1, [13]) , wherein the device compresses the stack and includes a sphere placed between the compression device (element 6, Yuichi Fig. 1) and the fuel cell stack (Yuichi Fig. 1, [13]) in order to apply a uniform and balanced compressive load in the stacking direction (Yuichi [12]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a sphere between one of the plurality of devices (element 5, Mahlanen Fig. 1) and the stack that the devices bears against, thus resulting in at least one contact element forming a ball-joint connection between the stack and the corresponding one of the plurality of devices for applying the compressive force, in order to obtain a system capable of achieve uniform and balanced compressive load in the stacking direction.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di, as applied to claims 16 and 32 above, and in further view of Morel (US 2014/0291165 A1).
Regarding claim 33, Mahlanen in view of Kakuwa and Di teaches all features of claims 16 and 32, as described above. Modified Mahlanen does not teach the method being implemented under a neutral gas. However, Morel teaches that supplying the stacks with neutral gas is a known method step when operating electrochemical cells operating at high temperature (Morel [12-21]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a method step of adding a neutral gas directly inside the stacks in order to obtain a method suitable for operating fuel cells operating at high temperature.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gao (CN112117477A): appears to disclose a system comprising superimposed stacks placed in an internal volume and a plurality of devices for applying a compressive force to the stacks (Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA S CASERTO whose telephone number is (571)272-5114. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights