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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The applicant filed an IDS on 6/12/25. It has been annotated and considered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-16 in the reply filed on 11/14/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that that an undue burden is not placed on the Examiner if Claims 1-16 and 17-20 are maintained in the same application. This is not found persuasive as stated in the original restriction.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-16 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 1 (and similarly 9), the Applicant claims “receiving, at a propulsion controller, power generation”. As the propulsion controller seems to be a microprocessor of sorts, it is not clear how it generates power. It is most likely the Applicant means a command/signal is sent to the propulsion controller to indicate power needs to be generated.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 20240194912 hereinafter Lee) in view of WO 2023083127 (hereinafter ‘127).
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly 9), Lee teaches a computer-implemented method when executed by data processing hardware causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
initiating, at a propulsion controller, power generation from a fuel cell system (See at least: Fig. 1 item 300 “controller”);
comparing, via the propulsion controller, battery data with a state of charge threshold (See at least: [0056] Meanwhile, when the fuel cell stack 100 enters the stop control mode and a SOC factor of the battery 200 is equal to or higher than a threshold value, the controller 300 may stop the drop of the voltage at the high voltage line 10 and maintain the voltage.);
executing, based on the comparison of the battery data, a power sink protocol including at least one mode control via the fuel cell system, the at least one mode control including a run mode and a standby mode (See at least: [0056] “stop control mode”; [0056] Meanwhile, when the fuel cell stack 100 enters the stop control mode and a SOC factor of the battery 200 is equal to or higher than a threshold value, the controller 300 may stop the drop of the voltage at the high voltage line 10 and maintain the voltage.; [0039] FIG. 1 is a schematic view of a fuel cell system according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. Referring to FIG. 1, according to the embodiment of the present disclosure, the fuel cell system includes a fuel cell stack 100 and a battery 200 that are connected to a high voltage line 10 in parallel, a converter 250 connected to the high voltage line 10 and the battery 200 while being located therebetween and configured to control a voltage at the high voltage line 10, and a controller 300.”);
generating,
regulating, via at least one of the compressor command and the valve command, an airflow of the airflow system (See at least: [0078] Meanwhile, the controller 300 compares the output voltage of the fuel cell stack 100 to the voltage at the high voltage line 10, and when the output voltage of the fuel cell stack 100 is dropped less than the voltage at the high voltage line 10, the controller 300 controls the air compressor 400 or the air adjustment valve 500 so that the output voltage of the fuel cell stack 100 may be maintained between the voltage upper limit value and the lower limit value in the stop control mode of the fuel cell stack 100) ,
but fails to explicitly teach executing, via the power sink protocol, an adaptive model configured to selectively transition between the run mode and the standby mode based on at least one of fuel cell data and a vehicle function.
However, ‘127 teaches executing, via the power sink protocol, an adaptive model configured to selectively transition between management system of a hybrid electric vehicle includes: starting the vehicle; judging whether the driver has a request for air conditioning and warm air; if the driver does not have the request for air conditioning and warm air, obtaining the actual temperature T1 of the power battery and Obtain the temperature T2 collected by the first temperature sensor; compare T1 with the first set temperature Th1, and T2 with the second set temperature Th2; respond to T1<Th1, or T2<Th2; turn on the warm-up mode; the warm-up mode includes: the A1 interface of the first three-way valve is disconnected, the B1 interface and the C1 interface are connected, the first interface of the thermostat is disconnected, the second interface and the The third interface is connected, the first electric water pump, the second electric water pump and the third electric water pump are turned on, the hydrogen combustion heater or the PTC heater is turned on; B2 of the second three-way valve The interface is disconnected, the A2 interface and the C2 interface are connected, and the temperature-adjusting air conditioner is turned off.
As an optional technical solution for the control method of the thermal management system of a plug-in fuel cell hybrid electric vehicle, in response to T1≥Th1, and T2≥Th2, the normal cooling mode is turned on; the turning on of the normal cooling mode includes: the hydrogen combustion heating Both the heater and the PTC heater are closed, the C1 interface of the first three-way valve is disconnected, the A1 interface and the B1 interface are connected, the second electric water pump is closed, the hydrogen combustion heater and the PTC heater Both are closed, the second interface of the thermostat is disconnected, the first interface and the third interface are connected, the first electric water pump is turned on, and the third electric water pump is turned on; compare T1 with the first threshold The size of the temperature Tbat1 and the second threshold temperature Tbat2, Tbat2>Tbat1; in response to T1>Tbat2, the A2 interface of the second three-way valve is disconnected, the B2 interface and the C2 interface are connected, and the temperature-adjusting air conditioner cools the In response to T1<Tbat1, the B2 interface of the second three-way valve is disconnected, the A2 interface and the C2 interface are connected, and the thermostat air conditioner is turned off. Note: normal-cooling mode and warmup mode and interaction of valves in each mode).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Lee in view of ‘127 to teach executing, via the power sink protocol, an adaptive model configured to selectively transition between the run mode and the standby mode based on at least one of fuel cell data and a vehicle function so that the vehicle can be controlled to switch to a stop mode automatically when the battery is in a stated which is not optimal or dangerous for the vehicle and operator, but allow the vehicle to continue to run at other times.
Regarding claim 2 (and similarly 10), Lee teaches wherein comparing the battery data with the state of charge threshold includes determining a state of charge of the battery data exceeds the state of charge threshold (See at least: [0056] Meanwhile, when the fuel cell stack 100 enters the stop control mode and a SOC factor of the battery 200 is equal to or higher than a threshold value, the controller 300 may stop the drop of the voltage at the high voltage line 10 and maintain the voltage.). Regarding claim 3 (and similarly 11), Lee teaches wherein executing the power sink protocol includes executing the standby mode of the at least one mode control in response to the state of charge exceeding the state of charge threshold (See at least: [0056] Meanwhile, when the fuel cell stack 100 enters the stop control mode and a SOC factor of the battery 200 is equal to or higher than a threshold value, the controller 300 may stop the drop of the voltage at the high voltage line 10 and maintain the voltage.).
Regarding claim 4 (and similarly 12), Lee teaches wherein executing the standby mode includes executing power management of a fuel cell of the fuel cell system (See at least: [0056] Meanwhile, when the fuel cell stack 100 enters the stop control mode and a SOC factor of the battery 200 is equal to or higher than a threshold value, the controller 300 may stop the drop of the voltage at the high voltage line 10 and maintain the voltage.).
Regarding claim 5 (and similarly 13), Lee teaches wherein regulating the airflow includes executing the valve command including closing at least one valve to the fuel cell, the at least one valve between a compressor of the airflow system and the fuel cell (See at least: Fig. 1 items 100 “fuel cell stack”, item 400 “air compressor” and item 500 “air adjustment valve”.)
Regarding claim 6 (and similarly 14), Lee teaches wherein regulating the airflow includes executing the compressor command including sinking power on a compressor of the airflow system (See at least: [0047] Specifically, when the fuel cell stack 100 enters the stop control mode, the speed of the air compressor 400 is reduced and the air adjustment valve 500 is closed, thereby reducing the flow of air flowing into the fuel cell stack 100, so that the output voltage of the fuel cell stack 100 may be dropped.).
Regarding claim 7 (and similarly 15), Lee teaches wherein executing the power sink protocol includes executing the run mode of the at least one mode control (See at least: [0039] FIG. 1 is a schematic view of a fuel cell system according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. Referring to FIG. 1, according to the embodiment of the present disclosure, the fuel cell system includes a fuel cell stack 100 and a battery 200 that are connected to a high voltage line 10 in parallel, a converter 250 connected to the high voltage line 10 and the battery 200 while being located therebetween and configured to control a voltage at the high voltage line 10, and a controller 300.”).
Regarding claim 8 (and similarly 16), Lee teaches wherein executing the run mode includes regulating the airflow from a compressor of the airflow system via at least one of an isolation valve and a bypass valve (See at least: Fig. 1 item 500 “air adjustment valve”; [0046] Meanwhile, referring to FIG. 1, the fuel cell system may include an air compressor 400 configured to send air to a cathode of the fuel cell stack 100, and an air adjustment valve 500 configured to adjust the air flowing from the air compressor 400 to the cathode. Furthermore, when the fuel cell stack 100 enters the stop control mode, the controller 300 can control the drop of the output voltage of the fuel cell stack 100 by adjusting the speed of the air compressor 400 or the air adjustment valve 500.).
(Note: The Examiner notes claims 17-20 need to be cancelled before any allowance is allowed in the future).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry Oh whose telephone number is (571)270-5912. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 9:00-3:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HARRY Y OH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights