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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on October 31, 2025. Claims 1-15 are pending. Claims 1 and 13 are independent.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. EP24211986.5, filed on 11/11/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/31/2025 are
in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mori (US-20050084723-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mori teaches a computer system comprising processing circuitry (see Mori, Abstract, figure 1, paragraph 40, regarding controller 13 (computer module/system comprising processing circuitry) controlling operation of fuel cell system 1) configured to:
predict an event during which a power ramp down of a fuel cell system is expected (see Mori, paragraphs 8 and 49, regarding “Under operation in a dry condition or at high temperature, a polymer electrolyte membrane of the fuel cell stack quickly dries, and large amount of water is required to humidify the fuel cell stack. In such a condition, the above-described device cannot make up for the vaporizing water. The water supply system thereof runs short of water, thereby affecting humidification and cooling of the fuel cell stack”, wherein such an expected/predicted condition/event is exemplary when a power ramp down of a fuel cell stack occurs),
control the fuel cell system to recuperate water from at least one fuel cell exhaust line and collect the recuperated water in a water reservoir in dependence on the predicted event (see Mori, figure 1, paragraphs 40 and 44, regarding controller 13 controls operation of the entire fuel cell system by changing operating points on a current-voltage characteristic of fuel cell stack 2 based in part on an amount of water in the pure water tank 8 (water reservoir), for example, when a power ramp down even has occurred, wherein “water generated by the reaction in the fuel cell stack 2 flows through the pure water piping 10 (fuel cell exhaust line) and is stored (recouped) in the pure water tank 8 (water reservoir)”),
control a water injector to inject water from the water reservoir into a cathode inlet line of the fuel cell system in connection with the power ramp down during the predicted event (see Mori, figure 1, paragraph 43, regarding “The pure water used for humidifying the solid polymer membrane in the fuel cell stack 2 is stored in the pure water tank 8 (water reservoir), pumped (controlled) by the pure water pump 9 (water injector), and supplied to the fuel cell stack 2 through the pure water piping 10 (cathode inlet line of the fuel cell system)”, for example, when a power ramp down event has occurred).
Regarding claim 2, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 1, including wherein the processing circuitry is configured to control the fuel cell system to recuperate and collect water by:
determining an amount of water to be injected during the predicted event, and
controlling an amount of water collected in the reservoir to at least the
determined amount of water to be injected (see Mori, figure 1, paragraphs 40 and 44, regarding controller 13 controls operation of the entire fuel cell system (including pure water pump 9/ water injector) by changing operating points on a current-voltage characteristic of fuel cell stack 2 based in part on an (determined) amount of water in the pure water tank 8 (water reservoir), exemplary of monitoring and maintaining a desired amount of water in the water reservoir by regulating (controlling) water injector volume), for example, during a power ramp down event).
Regarding claim 3, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 1, including wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to:
monitor at least one operational parameter of the fuel cell system, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to control the water injector based on the monitored at least one operational parameter (see Mori, figure 1, paragraphs 40 and 44, regarding controller 13 controls operation of the entire fuel cell system (including pure water pump 9/ water injector) by changing operating points on a current-voltage characteristic of fuel cell stack 2 based in part on an amount of water in the pure water tank 8 (water reservoir), exemplary of monitoring one operational parameter (water level in water reservoir) of the fuel cell system).
Regarding claim 4, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 3, including wherein the at least one operational parameter comprises at least a fuel cell voltage, and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to control the water injector by controlling the water injection to maintain a magnitude of the fuel cell voltage above a predetermined threshold level or within a predetermined voltage range injected (see Mori, figures 1 and 4, paragraphs 40 and 44, regarding controller 13 controls operation of the entire fuel cell system (including pure water pump 9/ water injector) by changing operating points on a current-voltage characteristic of fuel cell stack 2 based in part on an (determined) amount of water in the pure water tank 8 (water reservoir), exemplary of monitoring and maintaining a desired amount of water in the water reservoir by regulating (controlling) water injector volume), wherein, for example, changes in voltage (V1 and V2 in figure 4) is within a predetermined nominal (safe operating) range is to be maintained).
Regarding claim 9, Mori also teaches a fuel cell system comprising the computer system of claim 1 as taught by Mori (see Mori, figure 1, paragraph 40, regarding fuel cell system 1 comprising controller 13 (computer module/system comprising processing circuitry).
Regarding claim 10, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 9, including further comprising a fuel cell stack, a water reservoir for collection of water from at least one exhaust line from the fuel cell stack, and a water injector for injection of water from the water reservoir into a cathode inlet line of the fuel cell stack (see Mori, figure 1, paragraphs 40 and 43-44, regarding fuel cell stack 2, pure water tank 8 (water reservoir) collecting water from pure water piping 10 (fuel cell exhaust line from the fuel cell stack) with pure water pump 9 (water injector) injecting water from pure water tank 8 (water reservoir) into pure water piping 10 (cathode inlet line of the fuel cell stack)).
Regarding claim 11, Mori also teaches a vehicle comprising the fuel cell system of claim 9 as taught by Mori (see Mori, figure 1, paragraph 42, regarding fuel cell system 1 applied to a fuel cell vehicle, exemplary of a vehicle comprising a fuel cell system).
Regarding claim 12, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 11, including further comprising an electric energy storage system and an electric propulsion system, wherein the fuel cell system is arranged to provide output power for charging of the electric energy storage system and for driving the electric propulsion system (see Mori, figures 1 and 6A, paragraphs 4, 42 and 61, regarding “fuel cell system 1 is applied (provide output power) to a fuel cell vehicle, etc., the battery 16 (electric energy storage system) can also be charged with electric power which is regenerated by a load device at deceleration, rectified and adjusted voltage”, exemplary of fuel cell system providing battery charge and propulsion on a fuel cell vehicle).
Regarding claim 13, independent claim 13 is a computer-implemented method for controlling a fuel cell system, the method performing the identical function of the computer system comprising processing circuitry of independent claim 1, therefore, claim 13 is also rejected under 35 USC § 102 for the same rationale as claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Mori also teaches a computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by the processing circuitry, the method of claim 13 as taught by Mori (see Mori, figure 1, paragraph 40, regarding “controller 13 is a microprocessor (processing circuitry) including CPU, ROM (computer program product) which stores programs and control constants, RAM which provides work memory for program execution, and input/output interfaces”).
Regarding claim 15, Mori also teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to perform the method of claim 13 as taught by Mori (see Mori, figure 1, paragraph 40, regarding “controller 13 is a microprocessor (processing circuitry) including CPU, ROM (non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions) which stores programs and control constants, RAM which provides work memory for program execution, and input/output interfaces”).
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.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori (US-20050084723-A1) in view of Baek (US-20240025392-A1).
Regarding claim 5, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 1, except wherein the processing circuitry is configured to predict the event by: predicting an expected travelling route of a vehicle, in which the fuel cell system is arranged to provide output power for propulsion of the vehicle and for charging of an electric energy storage system, detecting a downhill road section along the expected travelling route, and determining that a predetermined power ramp down condition is expected to be fulfilled along the detected downhill road section.
However, Baek remedies this shortfall with a teaching of improving fuel efficiency of fuel cell vehicles by utilizing route information to predict grade changes, for example, a power ramp down during downhill sections, and applying power/battery management strategies during the predicted sections (see Baek, Abstract, figures 2 and 4, paragraphs 21, 26-30, 134).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s effective filing date to modify the computer system comprising processor circuitry of Mori to further comprise the downhill route prediction of power ramp down of Baek, because this improves to overall fuel cell vehicle operating efficiency by mitigating excessive energy loss during a downhill maneuver, therefore modified Mori enables wherein the processing circuitry is configured to predict the event by: predicting an expected travelling route of a vehicle, in which the fuel cell system is arranged to provide output power for propulsion of the vehicle and for charging of an electric energy storage system, detecting a downhill road section along the expected travelling route, and determining that a predetermined power ramp down condition is expected to be fulfilled along the detected downhill road section.
Regarding claim 6, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 5, including wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to predict the event by:
predicting a fuel cell power expected to be produced by the fuel cell system at least at a start of the detected downhill road section (see Baek, figures 2, paragraph 150, regarding steps S200 and S310 (calculating driving energy consumption of a vehicle) for each driving section of the travel route),
predicting a power capability of the electric energy storage system at least at the start of the detected downhill road section (see Baek, paragraph 144, regarding “controller 300 may control the battery 400 to reduce the charge amount of the battery 400 (Battery SOC down) in the driving section before the vehicle arrives at the corresponding driving”),
predicting a brake power request along the detected downhill road section, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to determine that the predetermined power ramp down condition is fulfilled based on the predicted brake power request, the predicted power capability of the electric energy storage system, and the predicted fuel cell power (see Baek, paragraph 134, regarding “the regenerative braking is generally performed in a downhill section. Accordingly, FIG. 3 illustrates an additional determination of whether the regenerative braking may be performed only when the slope of the road in the expected travel route of the vehicle corresponds to a downhill slope”).
Regarding claim 7, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 6, including wherein the predetermined power ramp down condition is considered fulfilled when a sum of the predicted fuel cell power and the predicted brake power exceeds the predicted power capability of the electric energy storage system during at least a part of the downhill road section, such as for at least a predetermined minimum duration (see Baek, figures 2, paragraph 153, regarding steps S420 and S520, wherein the battery capacity reaches a desired level, the power generation of the fuel cell is terminated (fulfilled)).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori (US-20050084723-A1) in view of Staley (US-20150099200-A1).
Regarding claim 8, Mori teaches the computer system of claim 1, excluding wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to control the fuel cell system to discard the water collected in the water reservoir in connection with shutdown of the fuel cell system.
However, Staley remedies this shortfall with a teaching of a vehicular fuel cell system discarding water in connection with a shutdown when a predicted ambient temperature is below a threshold value, thus preventing freezing and increasing the lifetime of the fuel cell stack (see Staley, Abstract, figure 3, paragraphs 5-6 and 9).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s effective filing date to modify the computer system comprising processor circuitry of Mori to further comprise the fuel cell freezing hazard avoidance method of Staley because this improves upon the performance and can extend the lifetime of the fuel cell stack, therefore modified Mori enables wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to control the fuel cell system to discard the water collected in the water reservoir in connection with shutdown of the fuel cell system.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached form PTO-892.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER NING whose telephone number is (408) 918-7664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT.
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, Peter D. Nolan can be reached at (571) 270-7016. 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.
/P.Y.N./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
September 19, 2026
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights