CTNF 19/129,756 CTNF 88329 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. Specification 06-16 AIA Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-6 and 8- 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andreas (US 2025/0084964) in view of Godard et al. (US 2022/0290817) Regarding claims 1, 2, and 10 Andreas discloses a tank system comprising a cylindrical tank 300, fig. 2, a valve device 100, fig. 4, as seen in fig. 2, Andreas discloses the tank container has an interior, the valve device has a flow device at least partly within the interior [0048]: “protrudes into the storage tank”, to fill the tank with hydrogen [0012], the flow device has a bypass with a first 103 and second 102A branch, as seen in fig. 4, the first branch is coaxial and the second branch has an axis at an angle with respect to the longitudinal axis of the tank, between 15 and 45 degrees [0023]. Andreas does not disclose deflecting elements in the interior. Godard is analogous art in regard to fuel tanks and teaches deflecting elements - baffle component, 20, two are seen in fig. 10, arranged on inner tank walls of the tank interior via connection means at 26 that direct the flow of gas when filling the tang to provide better temperature homogeneity [0072-0073], [0083]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tank system of Andreas to include internal deflecting elements as taught in order to provide better mixing of the gas and better temperature homogeneity as per the teaching of Godard. Regarding claim 3, the references applied above teach all of claim 1, as applied above. Godard further teaches that components 20 can be connected to the tank via connection portions 24 that are also gas guiding elements 24 with a helical form [0053]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connecting elements of Andreas as modified above to have the helical guiding elements in order to provide additional gas mixing. Regarding claim 4, the references applied above teach all of claim 2, as applied above. Godard teaches a first and a second deflecting element 20 in fig. 10. Godard teaches that the tank can have a plurality of baffles to optimize gas mixing [0074]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the number of baffles of Andreas as modified above based on the required amount of mixing and length of the tank such that at least an additional baffle is provided in order to mix gas along the length. Regarding claim 5, the references applied above teach all of claim 2, as applied above. Godard teaches that the baffles should face the gas inlet, [0083], [0086], and that the baffles are intended to deflect the flow of hydrogen gas for the purpose of better mixing of gas, [0016], [0073]. With this in mind, it follows that any of the directions of subsequent gas flow should be deflected by a baffle as that is the intention of the baffles taught by Godard. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the baffles of Goddard such that subsequent baffles direct gas flow in order to mix the gas as per the teaching of Goddard [0073]. Regarding claim 6, Andreas further discloses the tank is used for operating a fuel cell [0010], [0060]. Regarding claim 8, Andreas further discloses the tank is used for operating a fuel cell powered vehicle [0010], [0060]. Regarding claim 9, Andreas further discloses the tank is used for a hydrogen powered vehicle [0010] . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andreas and Godard as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sarioglu et al. (DE 102016107146 A1) . Regarding claim 7, the references applied above teach all of claim 1, as applied above. Andreas further discloses the tank is used for operating a hydrogen vehicles [0010], [0060]. Andreas does not disclose that the hydrogen is used for internal combustion engines. Sarioglu is analogous art in regard to hydrogen fuel tanks and teaches it is known to use a tank 109 for storing gaseous or liquid hydrogen in an internal combustion engine. With this in mind, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fuel tank of hydrogen of Andreas in any fuel powered engine that is capable of running on hydrogen fuel. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOLLIE L IMPINK whose telephone number is (571)270-1705. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (7:30-3:30). 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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571) 272-4561. 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. MOLLIE LLEWELLYN IMPINK Primary Examiner Art Unit 3799 /MOLLIE IMPINK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799 Application/Control Number: 19/129,756 Page 2 Art Unit: 3799 Application/Control Number: 19/129,756 Page 3 Art Unit: 3799 Application/Control Number: 19/129,756 Page 4 Art Unit: 3799 Application/Control Number: 19/129,756 Page 5 Art Unit: 3799 Application/Control Number: 19/129,756 Page 6 Art Unit: 3799
Prosecution Insights