Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/988,171

INCREASED OXYGEN OUTLET PRESSURE IN AN ELECTROLYZER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 19, 2024
Examiner
HASKE, WOJCIECH
Art Unit
1794
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kyros Hydrogen Solution S GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
417 granted / 571 resolved
+8.0% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
610
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§112
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 571 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 8, 10, 13-15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tang et al. (CN 106222687 A1, machine translation). Considering claims 1 and 10, Tang discloses an electrolyzer system and method comprising: a water storage tank (4) configured to store water; an electrolyzer (2) in fluid communication with the water storage tank (4), the electrolyzer configured to generate a water-oxygen mixture from the water; a pressure reducer (check valve 5) capable of reducing pressure of the water upstream of the of the electrolyzer, the pressure reducer (5) located between the water storage tank (4) and the electrolyzer (2); and a post-stack pump (7) configured to increase pressure of the water-oxygen mixture downstream of the electrolyzer (2) (Fig. 2 and page 3). Please note, that the components, such as the pump, valves etc. are placed on a line between the electrolyzer and the water storage tank, therefore, for example, in the limitation reciting “the pressure of the water-oxygen mixture downstream of the electrolyzer” will be both increased and decreased in the piping segments connecting the water storage tank and the electrolizer, divided by the valve or pump. PNG media_image1.png 332 444 media_image1.png Greyscale Considering claims 4 and 13, Tang discloses the electrolyzer system further comprising: a water-oxygen separator (9) located downstream of the post-stack pump (7) (Fig. 2). Considering claims 5 and 14, Tang discloses the water-oxygen separator (9) is configured to: separate water and oxygen gas from the water-oxygen mixture; and supply the water to the water storage tank (4) as the water pressure will inherently increase in the system (Fig. 2). Considering claims 6 and 15, Tang discloses pressure within the water storage tank is dependent on the post-stack pump, since it is part of the connected system. Considering claims 8 and 17, Tang discloses the pressure reducer (5) comprises one or more valves (page 2, 2nd paragraph). Claim(s) 1-3, 10-12, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ueda et al. (JP 2021085081 A, machine translation). Considering claims 1 and 10, Ueda discloses an electrolyzer system and method comprising: a water storage tank (41) configured to store water; an electrolyzer (10) in fluid communication with the water storage tank (41), the electrolyzer configured to generate a water-oxygen mixture from the water [0010]; a pressure reducer (valve 22) configured to reduce pressure (inherently) of the water upstream of the of the electrolyzer (10), the pressure reducer located between the water storage tank (41) and the electrolyzer (10) [0022]; and a post-stack pump (77) configured to increase pressure (inherently) of the water-oxygen mixture downstream of the electrolyzer (10) (Fig. 2 and [0052]). PNG media_image2.png 574 356 media_image2.png Greyscale Considering claims 2, 3, 11 and 12, Ueda does not disclose a pre-stack pump (41) located between the pressure reducer (22) and the electrolyzer (10), the pre-stack pump inherently capable to control pressure of the water supplied to the electrolyzer (Fig. 2). Considering claim 19, Ueda discloses a fluid circuit for an electrolyzer system, comprising: a water storage tank (41) configured to store water; and an electrolyzer in fluid communication with the water storage tank, the electrolyzer (10) configured to generate a water-oxygen mixture from the water; wherein the electrolyzer is pressure isolated from the water storage tank through one or more controllable pressure isolating components, by valves (22) and (44). Considering claim 20, Ueda discloses pressure within the water storage tank is greater than pressure within the electrolyzer [0007]. 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 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(s) 1-3 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda et al., as applied to claim 1. Considering claims 1-3 and 10-12, Ueda discloses an electrolyzer system comprising: a water storage tank (41) configured to store water; an electrolyzer (10) in fluid communication with the water storage tank (41), the electrolyzer configured to generate a water-oxygen mixture from the water [0010]; and a post-stack pump (77) configured to increase pressure (inherently) of the water-oxygen mixture downstream of the electrolyzer (10) (Fig. 2 and [0052]). Ueda does not disclose a pressure reducer configured to reduce pressure of the water upstream of the of the electrolyzer, the pressure reducer located between the water storage tank and the electrolyzer. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add valves at the inlet and the outlet of the pump, because it is well-known pluming practice to have the valves in order to service the pump without need to drain the whole system. In this case there will be an inherent pressure reducing valve (closed position) located between the storage tank and the electrolizer. The pre-stack pump inherently capable to control pressure of the water supplied to the electrolyzer by pumping water or stopping pumping, this inherently increasing the pressure of the water in the water storage tank. Claim(s) 7 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al., as applied to claim 5 and further in view of Blanchet et al. (US 20230002920 A1). Considering claims 7 and 16, Tang does not disclose the post-stack pump is configured to increase pressure within the water storage tank to a pressure greater than 10 bars. However, Blanchet discloses water pumps for delivering water to an electrolysis cell may have pressure capability of up to 10 bar [0077]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the water pump of Tang has the capability of up 10 bar, because Tang is silent about the capability and Blanchet discloses that water pumps for delivering water to an electrolysis cell may have pressure capability of up to 10 bar. Claim(s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al., as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Ballantine et al. (US 20230175155 A1). Considering claims 9 and 18, Tang does not disclose the electrolyzer system is configured to provide oxygen to a downstream sewage treatment system. However, Ballantine teaches supplying oxygen generated by water electrolyzer to sewage to increase the oxygen concentration of the water to disrupt bacterial growth and to facilitate oxidation of organic effluents contained in the wastewater supply [0021]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to supply the oxygen generated by the electrolyzer of Tang to treat sewage, because Ballantine teaches supplying oxygen generated by water electrolyzer to sewage to increase the oxygen concentration of the water to disrupt bacterial growth and to facilitate oxidation of organic effluents contained in the wastewater supply. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Wojciech Haske whose telephone number is (571)272-5666. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30 am - 6:00 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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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. /WOJCIECH HASKE/Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 19, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601068
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING CARBON MONOXIDE OR ORGANIC COMPOUND
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601079
HIGH HEAT-RESISTANT ANTIOXIDANT SOLUTIONS FOR LITHIUM BATTERY COPPER FOIL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601069
MEMBRANE ELECTRODE ASSEMBLY FOR HYDROGEN PRODUCTION, ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL COMPRISING THE SAME, AND METHOD FOR HYDROGEN PRODUCTION USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595581
COPLANARITY IMPROVEMENT OF HIGH-RATE CU PILLAR PROCESSES USING HIGH AGITATION TO ENABLE USE OF HIGH ACID, LOW CU CHEMISTRIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595570
METHOD FOR OPERATING AN ELECTROLYSIS PLANT, AND ELECTROLYSIS PLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+17.6%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 571 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month