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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show a heat exchanger 15 (see [0029]) as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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 § 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, 5, 6, and 12 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.
The term “nearly” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “nearly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The use of the term “nearly” renders the time as indefinite.
The term “briefly” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “briefly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The use of the term “briefly” renders the mass flow increase as indefinite.
In claims 5 and 12, what is the metes and bounds of the phrase “a pilot-controlled manner”? For the purposes of examination, the Examiner will be interpreting this phrase as manually controlled by an operator.
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) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartung et al. (DE 102016110451 A1, hereinafter “Hartung”; listed in the IDS filed 9 April 2024; using US 2017/0352901 for the English translation and citations), in view of Schnabel (WO 2020/223754 A1; using US 2022/0320537 for the English translation and citations).
Regarding claim 1, Hartung teaches a method for starting a fuel cell system (fuel cell system 100, see Fig. 1; [0041]), wherein the fuel cell system (fuel cell system 100, see Fig. 1; [0041]) comprises a fuel cell stack (fuel cell stack 10, see Fig. 1; [0041]), an air path (cathode supply line 31, see Fig. 1; [0049]), an exhaust gas line (exhaust line 32, see Fig. 1; [0047]), and a fuel line (anode supply line 21, see Fig. 1; [0046]) having a recirculation circuit (fuel recirculation line 25, see Fig. 1; [0046]), wherein, prior to a starting process, a first valve (first cathode shut-off valve 40, see Fig. 1; [0048]) in the air path (cathode supply line 31, see Fig. 1; [0049]) and a second valve (second cathode shut-off valve 41, see Fig. 1; [0048]) in the exhaust gas line (exhaust line 32, see Fig. 1; [0047]) are closed (see [0060]) and the bypass valve (wastegate adjusting means 38, see Fig. 1; [0050]) is opened (see [0060]), said comprising the following steps:
a. starting an air compressor (compressor 33, see Fig. 1; [0061]) in the air path (cathode supply line 31, see Fig. 1; [0049]);
c. opening the first valve (first cathode shut-off valve 40, see Fig. 1; [0048]) or the second valve (second cathode shut-off valve 41, see Fig. 1; [0048]) after the anode (see [0062]) has been flushed with hydrogen (In process step S4, second cathode shut off valve 41 is opened; see [0062] –[0064]);
d. reducing a flow through the bypass valve (see [0066]);
e. opening the first valve (first cathode shut-off valve 40, see Fig. 1; [0048]) or the second valve (62) so that the first valve (first cathode shut-off valve 40, see Fig. 1; [0048]) and the second valve (62) are open (In process step S6, the first cathode shut-off valve 40 is opened; see [0060]); and
f. closing the bypass valve (see [0066]);
Hartung is silent to:
b. throttling a pressure controller in the exhaust gas line so that a pressure greater than 1.1 bar is generated upstream of the pressure controller; and
g. dethrottling the pressure controller so that the pressure in the exhaust gas line corresponds approximately to a target pressure for the starting process.
Schnabel teaches a method for removing water from a fuel cell system (see [0005]). Schnabel teaches that purging processes are in particular carried out to avoid icing in the fuel cell system as well as to prepare for a start process of the fuel cell system (see [0004]). In a second step S2, the back pressure in the cathode portion 4 is simultaneously increased, with the back pressure valve 6 (equated to the claimed pressure controller) closed, to a back pressure setpoint KP1, which according to the illustrated example corresponds to an approximately maximum permitted system pressure of, for example, around 3 bar or around 2.5 bar, wherein the back pressure is always kept around 100 mbar lower than the purge pressure (equated to step b). In a third step S3, the purge valve 5 and the back pressure valve 6 are opened to reduce, in a pulsed or abrupt manner, the increased purge pressure as well as the increased back pressure to ambient pressure or approximately ambient pressure (equated to step g). This can be recognised in FIG. 2 from the steep decline of the pressure gradient Al in the anode portion 3 as well as from the steep decline of the pressure gradient K1 in the cathode portion 4 after reaching the respective maximum setpoint AP1 or KP1. As shown in FIG. 2, the procedure explained in FIG. 3 is repeated twice more, whereby additional repetitions are naturally also possible. The method explained with reference to FIGS. 2 and 3 is carried out during a purging and drying mode of the fuel cell system 1 (see [0038]). Schnabel teaches that the purging process helps to avoid icing in the fuel cell system as well as prepare for a start process of the fuel cell system (see [0004]).
In view of Schnabel’s teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the method of Hartung to include b. throttling a pressure controller in the exhaust gas line so that a pressure greater than 1.1 bar is generated upstream of the pressure controller, and g. dethrottling the pressure controller so that the pressure in the exhaust gas line corresponds approximately to a target pressure for the starting process, because the purging process helps to avoid icing in the fuel cell system as well as prepare for a start process of the fuel cell system.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel teaches wherein, in method step b.), a pressure of 2 bar is set (Schnabel: around 2.5 bar, see [0038] - a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel teaches wherein method steps c.) and d.) are performed at nearly the same time (Hartung: see [0062]-[0066]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel teaches wherein the throttling or dethrottling of the pressure controller is controlled by measuring a cathode outlet pressure (Schnabel: see [0038] – as Schnabel teaches back pressure setpoints, it would be obvious that this pressure at the back pressure valve 6 is measuring a cathode outlet pressure).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel is silent to wherein the throttling or dethrottling of the pressure controller is performed in a pilot-controlled manner by approaching one or two predetermined positions. However, as the combination of Hartung and Schnabel teaches a controller dethrottling the pressure controller (Schnabel: see [0034]-[0038] and rejection for claim 1 above – equated to wherein the back pressure valve 6 is opened to reduce the increased purge pressure as well as the increased back pressure to ambient pressure or approximately ambient pressure), it would have been an obvious alternative to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed that this automated step could be performed manually by an operator.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel is silent to wherein a mass flow of the air compressor is briefly increased. However, it would be obvious to do so in order to expedite the purging process of the combination of Hartung and Schnabel in the cathode line (Schnabel: see [0038]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel is silent to wherein the pressure in the recirculation circuit (Hartung: fuel recirculation line 25, see Fig. 1; [0046]) is increased during flushing of the anode. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to do so in order to expedite flushing of the anode.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel is silent to wherein a pressure in the recirculation circuit (Hartung: fuel recirculation line 25, see Fig. 1; [0046]) is increased during steps a.) to d.). However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to do so in order to help purge the lines on the anode side during starting the fuel cell system.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel is silent to, wherein, after filling the cathode with oxygen-containing air, the pressure in the recirculation circuit is reduced. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to do so in order to help prevent mechanical stress on the member separating the anode and cathode and to aid in pulling the oxygen through the cathode side by creating a negative pressure at the back side of the fuel cell.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel teaches wherein the pressure in the exhaust gas line corresponds approximately to an external pressure when the pressure controller is dethrottled in step g (Schnabel: see [0038]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel teaches wherein the throttling or dethrottling of the pressure controller is controlled by measuring a cathode outlet pressure (Schnabel: see [0038] – as Schnabel teaches back pressure setpoints, it would be obvious that this pressure at the back pressure valve 6 is measuring a cathode outlet pressure).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Hartung and Schnabel is silent to wherein the throttling or dethrottling of the pressure controller is performed in a pilot-controlled manner by approaching one or two predetermined positions. However, as the combination of Hartung and Schnabel teaches a controller dethrottling the pressure controller (Schnabel: see [0034]-[0038] and rejection for claim 1 above – equated to wherein the back pressure valve 6 is opened to reduce the increased purge pressure as well as the increased back pressure to ambient pressure or approximately ambient pressure), it would have been an obvious alternative to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed that this automated step could be performed manually by an operator.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN HA whose telephone number is (571)270-5934. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458 . 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.
/S.S.H/Examiner, Art Unit 1735 19 September 2026
/KEITH WALKER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights