Ex Parte ShirvanianDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardMar 31, 201412504044 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 31, 2014) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 12/504,044 07/16/2009 Alireza Pezhman Shirvanian 81186464 9355 28395 7590 03/31/2014 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL 1000 TOWN CENTER 22ND FLOOR SOUTHFIELD, MI 48075-1238 EXAMINER YANCHUK, STEPHEN J ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 1723 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 03/31/2014 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) ` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte ALIREZA PEZHMAN SHIRVANIAN ____________ Appeal 2012-011708 Application 12/504,044 Technology Center 1700 ____________ Before CHARLES F. WARREN, JEFFREY T. SMITH, and BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN Administrative Patent Judges. FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner's rejection of claims 1, 2, and 4-17. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6. Appeal 2012-011708 Application 12/504,044 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Claim 1 is representative of the subject matter on appeal and is set forth below: 1. A fuel cell comprising: a catalyst layer; a corrugated plate forming a plurality of channels that define a flow field in fluid communication with the catalyst layer; and a coating on at least one of the channels, wherein the plate and coating are configured such that, if a gas flows through the channels, an obstruction blocking the at least one of the channels causes a pressure gradient between the channels that drives convection of the gas through the coating and around the obstruction. The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on appeal is: Blanchet US 2010/0040926 A1 Feb. 18, 2010 THE REJECTION Claims 1-2, 4-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(e) as being anticipated by Blanchet. ANALYSIS It is Appellant’s position that Blanchet does not anticipate claim 1 (reproduced below), in particular, with respect to the recitation highlighted in bold, below: 1. A fuel cell comprising: a catalyst layer; a corrugated plate forming a plurality of channels that define a flow field in fluid communication with the catalyst layer; and Appeal 2012-011708 Application 12/504,044 3 a coating on at least one of the channels, wherein the plate and coating are configured such that, if a gas flows through the channels, an obstruction blocking the at least one of the channels causes a pressure gradient between the channels that drives convection of the gas through the coating and around the obstruction. In the Answer, the Examiner refers to the Final Office Action mailed on November 1, 2011. Ans. 4. It is the Examiner’s position that Blanchet (Fig. 6) discloses the same structure as claimed, and that therefore the functional limitations are inherently met by Blanchet. Final Office Action 2, 3, and 5. Appellant disputes that the same structure as claimed is disclosed by Blanchet for the reasons set forth in the Briefs. App. Br. 3-4. Reply Br. 2. We determine claim 1 requires “a coating on at least one of the channels” of the corrugated plate. The Examiner does not direct us to disclosure in Blanchet that indicates that there is a coating on the channels of the corrugated plate. The Examiner directs us to paragraph [0030] of Blanchet for teaching a coating (Final Office Action 2), but this coating is deposited on the support layer and not the channels of a corrugated plate. In his response to argument, the Examiner does not adequately address this issues raised by Appellant. Ans. 5. Hence, we are in agreement with Appellant’s position and reverse the Examiner’s decision. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION The rejection is reversed. REVERSED lp Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation