Ex Parte SkalaDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardAug 4, 201411669922 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 4, 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. 11/669,922 01/31/2007 Glenn W. Skala GP-306461-FCA-CHE 6210 65798 7590 08/04/2014 MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION 42690 WOODWARD AVENUE SUITE 300 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48304 EXAMINER YANCHUK, STEPHEN J ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 1723 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 08/04/2014 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 GLENN W. SKALA ____________ Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,9221 Technology Center 1700 ____________ Before PETER F. KRATZ, RICHARD M. LEBOVITZ, and KAREN M. HASTINGS, Administrative Patent Judges. LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This appeal involves claims to a fuel cell system. The Examiner has rejected the claims as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 134. We affirm-in-part and reverse-in-part. 1 According to Appellant, the real party in interest is GM Global Technology Operations LLC. (Appeal Br. 3). Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 2 I. STATEMENT OF CASE Claims 1-35 are pending and stand rejected by the Examiner as follows: 1. Claims 1-35 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious in view of Bai,2 Schäfer,3 and Kondo.4 Final Rejection 2, dated Nov. 10, 2011 (“Final Rej.”). 2. Claims 1-35 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious in view of Schäfer, Bai, and Kondo. Final Rej. 10. II. CLAIM 1 There are four independent claims in this appeal: Claims 1, 12, 19, and 28. Appellant did not provide separate arguments for their patentability, but rather argued them as a group. Appeal Br. 12. Claim 1 is representative and reads as follows: 1. A fuel cell system comprising: a first sub-stack including an anode input and an anode output; a second sub-stack including an anode input and an anode output; a plurality of control valves that control the flow of an anode reactant gas to the anode side of the first and second sub-stacks in a stack order switching manner; and a first humidifier positioned at the anode input of the first sub-stack that includes a plurality of corrugated walls separated by plates and a second humidifier positioned at the anode input of the second sub-stack that includes a plurality of corrugated walls separated by plates, wherein the walls and the plates of the first and second humidifiers absorb water, and wherein liquid water in the anode reactant gas that is output from the anode output of the first sub-stack and input into the anode input of the second sub- stack is absorbed by the second humidifier, liquid water in the anode 2 Schäfer, US 7,087,333 B2, patented Aug. 8, 2006. 3 Bai et al., US 2006/0008695 A1, published Jan. 12, 2006. 4 Kondo et al., US 2007/0287036 A1, published Dec. 13, 2007. Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 3 reactant gas that is output from the anode output of the second sub-stack and input to the anode input of the first sub-stack is absorbed by the first humidifier, fresh hydrogen being provided to the anode input of the first sub- stack is humidified by the first humidifier and fresh hydrogen being provided to the second sub-stack is humidified by the second humidifier. III. REJECTION 1 Claim 1 is directed to a fuel cell system which comprises, inter alia, first and second sub-stacks, and first and second humidifiers. The humidifiers are recited in the claim to include “a plurality of corrugated walls separated by plates, wherein the walls and the plates of the first and second humidifiers absorb water.” The claim recites that “fresh hydrogen being provided to the anode input of the first sub-stack is humidified by the first humidifier and fresh hydrogen being provided to the second sub-stack is humidified by the second humidifier.” The Examiner found that Bai describes a humidifier attached to a fuel cell, where the anode humidification region is separate from the active region of the fuel cell. Final Rej. 2. The active region of the fuel cell of Bai corresponds to the claimed “first sub-stack including an anode input and an anode of output” of claim 1. The “humidifier” and “humidification region” of Bai correspond to the “first humidifier positioned at the anode input of the first sub-stack.” The Examiner found that Bai failed to teach the claimed “second sub- stack” and the anode of the first sub-stack “being cycled into the inlet” of the second sub-stack (Final Rej. 2), i.e., the following claim limitation: liquid water in the anode reactant gas that is output from the anode output of the first sub-stack and input into the anode input of the second sub-stack is absorbed by the second humidifier, liquid water in the anode reactant gas that is output Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 4 from the anode output of the second sub-stack and input to the anode input of the first sub-stack is absorbed by the first humidifier. The Examiner also found the Bai did not teach a humidifier “that includes a plurality of corrugated walls separated by plates” as recited in the claims. Final Rej. 3. For the “second sub-stack” of the claim, the Examiner relied upon the teaching in Schäfer of “a first sub-stack with an anode inlet (88) and a second sub-stack with an anode input (90) [Fig 3].” Final Rej. 2. The Examiner found “[v]alves (128, 130, 132, 134) operate in a manner to control the flow anode reactant gas between the sub-stacks [Fig 3; p. 31].” Id. at 2-3. The finding was apparently made to address the limitations in claim 1 involving gas flow between the stacks, inter alia, of “liquid water in the anode reactant gas that is output from the anode output of the first sub- stack and input into the anode input of the second sub-stack is absorbed by the second humidifier.” The Examiner determined that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Bai “by the system of inputting anode exhaust into the inlet of a second cell as taught by Schäfer in order to utilize non-reacted fuel.” Id. at 3. With respect to the claimed feature of a humidifier, which “includes a plurality of corrugated walls separated by plates,” the Examiner found that Kondo describes a humidifier with such structure. Final Rej 3. The Examiner determined it would have been obvious to have employed this structure in Bai’s humidifier to provide “more area of membrane within the same volume to increase efficiency [p. 71] and to provide walls (reinforcement membrane) which promote efficient membrane use by App App prev of th Inde plura 12-1 prov teach “that The hum below Exam plate of co abov elem eal 2012-0 lication 11 enting clos e pleats [p pendent cl Appellan lity of cor 3. This ar ides such a ing. Fina Appellan are separa Examiner idifier com (Answer The figu iner. An s are uppe rrugated w e. See als ents. App 11345 /669,922 e contact . 73].” Id. aims 1, 12 t contend rugated w gument is structure l Rej. 3. t also argu ted by pla considered prises two 5-6): re reprodu swer 6. 23 r 23B are alls and p o, paragra ellant atte between a , and 19 s that Bai d alls separa unavailing , but rather es that Ko tes.” App this argum plated su ced above A is the “ lower 23B lates, both ph 181 of mpts to dis 5 djacent ga oes not d ted by pla . The Exa expressly ndo does eal Br. 14 ent and r rfaces as s is Figure plurality o . Appellan which are Kondo des tinguish th s separatio escribe a h tes” as cla miner did relied on not teach -15 (emph ejected it hown in th 2 of Kond f corrugate t’s claims described cribing a p e claimed n membra umidifier imed. App not find th Kondo for the corrug asis in the because K e figure re o as annot d walls,” require a in Kondo lurality o structure nes inside with “a eal Br. at Bai this ated walls original.) ondo’s produced ated by the and the plurality as shown f pleat from Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 6 Kondo (Appeal Br. 14), but did not specifically identify how Kondo’s pleated structure is not “a plurality of corrugated walls” nor how the two plates on both sides of the corrugated walls do not constitute “plates” that separate the walls as recited in the claim. With regard to Appellant’ arguent about size constraints (Reply Br. 2), insufficient evidence was provided that scaling the humidifier to meet the requirements of the system as described in Bai (Bai at ¶¶ 14 and 43) could not be accomplished using the pleated humidifier structure of Kondo. Appellant states that the humidifier membrane material in Kondo passes water which is contrary to the claimed requirement that water be absorbed. Appeal Br. 14-15; Reply Br. 2. This argument is unpersuasive since Bai was relied on by the Examiner for the material utilized in the humidifier. Answer 5. The claims require the corrugated walls and plates of the humidifier to absorb water. The claimed system recirculates the hydrogen gas through both humidifiers and sub-stacks (see limitation reproduced above), where “fresh hydrogen being provided to the anode input of the first sub-stack is humidified by the first humidifier and fresh hydrogen being provided to the second sub-stack is humidified by the second humidifier.” Appellant asserts: Furthermore, nothing in Bai suggests that “the walls and the plates of the humidifiers absorb water” as claimed by Appellant in independent claims 1, 12, 19 and 28. Bai teaches that a water permeable membrane is used for proper humidification to occur. Thus, if the walls and the flow field plate channels of Bai acted to absorb water, the water permeable membrane that provides the humidification would have less water available to permeate through and to provide the proper humidification. Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 7 Appeal Br. 14 (emphasis in the original). This argument is not persuasive. Bai teaches the gas is humidified by passing through the humidifier: The fluid flow plate 30 of the present invention, as generally depicted in FIG. 1, has at least two areas, one termed as active area 400 and the other as humidification area 410. It may also be divided into three areas in which one serves as active area and the other two as humidification areas for humidifying cathode air and anode fuel, respectively. Bai at ¶42; Final Rej. 4; Answer 5. Appellant acknowledges that a water permeable membrane is used for proper humidification to occur. Appeal Br. 14 (quoted above.) Appellant has not fully explained why such membrane and structure described by Bai for its humidification zone would not serve to absorb water as required by the claims when configured with corrugated walls and plates to increase surface area as described by Kondo. It is logical that a membrane which serves to humidify a gas must have absorbed water therein in order to humidify a gas passed through or over the membrane. Appellant describes the function of the claimed humidifier to “absorb water and release water as needed” (Appeal Br. 16), but does not explain why Bai’s water permeable membrane would not operate in this fashion when gas is passed through it using the multiple stack system described in Schäfer. Appellant asserts that the claimed fuel cell “utilizes the anode inputs and anode outputs of the first and second sub-stacks in a cyclical manner” which is not described in the publications cited by the Examiner. Appeal Br. 16-17; Reply Br. 3 (quoting limitation of claim 19 that “liquid water in the reactant gas output from one of the stacks is absorbed by one of the Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 8 humidifiers, and fresh hydrogen being provided to one of the stacks is humidified by one of the humidifiers.”) This argument does not persuade us that the Examiner erred. The Examiner cited Schäfer for teaching first and second sub-stacks that have valves which enable the path of the reactant gas to be controlled as it moves through the stacks. Final Rej. 2-3 and 4. The Examiner referred to Figure 3 of Schäfer. Id. Schäfer’s Figure 3 of is reproduced below (annotated herein with circles and square boxes to emphasize the check valves): Figure 3 is described by Schäfer as follows: Referring now to FIG. 3, a first alternate embodiment of fuel cell system 20' is shown and indicated as fuel cell system 20". . . . Check valves 128', 130', 142'and 143' limit flow through the respective flow paths 114, 118, 122 and 126 to a sing[l]e direction. Check valves 128', 130', 132' and 134' are oriented so that flow through the respective flow paths 114, 118, 122 and 126 goes from an anode outlet portion of a fuel Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 9 cell stack to an anode inlet portion of the connected fuel cell stack. Schäfer, col. 10, ll. 18-31. Thus, the Examiner’s finding that Schäfer teaches circulating gas between the sub-stacks as claimed is supported by a preponderance of the evidence. Final Rej. 4; see also title of Schäfer containing the term “recirculation” and Abstract. Appellant did not adequately address Schäfer’s teachings or address the Examiner’s explanation as to how one of ordinary skill in would have modified Bai with Schäfer to arrive at the so- called functional limitations of the claim. Final Rej. 3-4. We affirm the rejection of independent claims 1, 12, and 19. Claims 2, 7-13, 18-20, 25-27, 31, and 35 were not separately argued and fall together with the independent claims. Claims 3, 14, and 21 Dependent claims 3, 14, and 21, recite, inter alia, that “the first and second humidifiers include corrugated walls that absorb liquid water where the anode reactant gas flows between the walls.” Appellant states this feature is not disclosed by Bai who is said to only describe a humidification zone. Appeal Br. 18. The Examiner reasonably found that a membrane permeable to water would absorb liquid water from the vapor when it flows through it. Ans. 7. Appellant has not provided arguments as to why the permeable membrane of Bai would not absorb water from the vapor. The rejection is therefore affirmed. Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 10 Claims 4, 15, and 22 Dependent claims 4, 15, and 22, recite, inter alia, that “the first and second humidifiers are circular humidifiers including annular flow channels.” The Examiner relied on Bai’s Figure 2 for this feature. Ans. 7. The term “annular” means “relating to, or forming a ring.”5 The channels which constitute the humidification portion appear to be square or rectangular. While it might have been obvious to have made them circular or annular, the Examiner did not give a reason for it. In addition, the Examiner asserted incorrectly that a “circular” humidifier is not claimed. Id. Consequently, we reverse the rejection of claims 4, 15, and 22. Claims 5, 16, and 23 Dependent claims 5, 16, and 23 recite, inter alia, that “the first humidifier is positioned outside of the first sub-stack and the second humidifier is positioned outside of the second sub-stack.” The Examiner found that the humidification portion (410) of Bai is separate from the sub- stack (400: active region). Final Rej. 15. Appellant argues that paragraph 43 of Bai “states that integration of the humidification zone (410) eliminates the need for external humidifiers. Clearly Bai is not teaching humidifiers that are positioned outside of sub- stacks.” Appeal Br. 19. Appellant’s argument boils down to interpreting “positioned outside of the . . . sub-stack” to mean external to the fuel cell system. However, this language is not recited in the claim. Appellant has not provided a basis for reading the limitation in this manner. Rather, the 5 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/annular (accessed August 4, 2014). Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 11 Examiner’s position that the humidification zone is located outside the sub- stack is supported by Bai’s Figure 2 which shows channels 210 and 240 outside the stacks of active region 110 and 230. The rejection of these claims is affirmed. Claims 6, 17, and 24 Dependent claims 6, 17, and 24 recite, inter alia, that “the first humidifier is positioned within an anode inlet manifold of the first sub-stack and the second humidifier is positioned within an anode inlet manifold of the second sub-stack.” Citing Figure 2, the Examiner found “Bai teaches the humidification portion of the anode to be inboard of the inlet from the manifold.” Final Rej. 9. The Examiner stated that Bai “teaches the humidification portion of the anode to be inboard of the inlet from the manifold [Fig 2].” Final Rej. 9. In other words, the Examiner has interpreted “positioned within” to mean that the humidifier is part of the duct work of Bai’s fuel cell. Appellant contends that “Bai does not teach humidifiers that are within inlet manifolds of sub-stacks.” Appeal Br. 19 (emphasis in the original). A “manifold” is defined as a “pipe or chamber having multiple apertures for making connections.6 The claims, therefore, require the humidifier to be in a pipe or chamber (“positioned within an anode inlet manifold. The Examiner did not identify the manifold of Bai in which the humidifier is positioned. The Examiner’s interpretation did not account for the word “manifold” in the claims. Bai teaches that a “source for incoming 6 http://www.thefreedictionary.com/manifold (accessed August 4, 2014). Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 12 reactant gas is provided through a manifold to the humidification area.” Bai at ¶16 (emphasis added). Bai does not describe the humidification zone as positioned within such manifold. Consequently, the rejection of these claims is reversed since the Examiner did not provide adequate factual basis for the findings. Claims 28, 29, and 30-35 Dependent claim 29 recites, inter alia, that “the water trap humidifier is positioned upstream from the recirculation pump.” Dependent claim 30 recites, inter alia, that “the water trap humidifier is positioned downstream from the recirculation pump.” The Examiner made the following finding: Schafer teaches a pump being located upstream and downstream of the water trap humidifiers. The pump of Schafer operates to pump hydrogen into the system which draws anode exhaust from a subsequent cell (downstream). The pump of Schafer also operates to pump hydrogen into the system forcing hydrogen into a fuel cell (upstream) [Fig 3; p. 42-46]. Final Rej. 9. Appellant contends “a recirculation pump that is in a recirculation loop does not appear to be disclosed by Schafer.” Appeal Br. 20. The Examiner’s position is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The Schäfer patent is titled “Hydrogen recirculation without a pump.” In its Summary of the Invention, Schäfer teaches: A fuel cell system according to the principles of the present invention and the methods disclosed herein provide for recycling of anode effluent exhausted by a fuel cell stack by routing at least a portion of the anode effluent through an anode side of another fuel cell stack. This is accomplished without the use of expensive and space consuming pumps. Schäfer at col. 2, ll. 19-25. Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 13 The Examiner did not identify a pump in Figure 3. Schäfer does not have numbered pages nor does Schäfer have numbered paragraphs, so it is unclear what part of the Schäfer patent the Examiner is referencing at “p. 42-46.” Final Rej. 9. The Examiner identified 88, 90, 92, and 94 of Schäfer as a “fresh hydrogen injector,” but did not provide evidence that the injector operated like a “recirculation pump” as claimed. Rejection (dated January 20, 2011), 3. Consequently, since the Examiner did not meet the burden of showing a pump in Schäfer, the rejection of claims 29 and 30 is reversed. Although claim 28 was not separately argued, the claim is drawn to a fuel cell system comprising a “recirculation pump.” Appellant did not separately argue this claim, but because it has the same disputed limitation that the Examiner did not establish by a preponderance of the evidence to be described in Schäfer, we shall reverse the rejection of claim 28, and dependent claims 31-35, as well. IV. REJECTION 2 Appellant’s arguments for under the combination of Schäfer, Bai, and Kondo appear to be the same as for rejection 1. Consequently, we affirm and reverse the rejections for the same reasons as rejection 1 over the same cited publications. V. SUMMARY 1. The rejections of independent claims 1, 12, and 19, and dependent claims 2, 3, 5, 7-14, 16, 18-21, 23, and 25-27 are affirmed. 2. The rejection of claims 4, 6, 15, 17, 22, 24, 28-35 are reversed. Appeal 2012-011345 Application 11/669,922 14 TIME PERIOD No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). AFFIRMED-IN-PART AND REVERSED-IN-PART cdc Notice of References Cited Application/Control No. 11/669,922 Applicant(s)/Patent Under Reexamination Glenn W. Skala Examiner Stephen Yanchuk Art Unit 1700 Page 1 of 1 U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS * DOCUMENT NO. DATE NAME CLASS SUBCLASS DOCUMENT SOURCE ** APS OTHER A B C D E F G H I J K L M FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS * DOCUMENT NO. DATE COUNTRY NAME CLASS SUBCLASS DOCUMENT SOURCE ** APS OTHER N O P Q R S T NON-PATENT DOCUMENTS * DOCUMENT (Including Author, Title Date, Source, and Pertinent Pages) DOCUMENT SOURCE ** APS OTHER U Merriam-Webster, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/annular (accessed August 4, 2014). V The Free Dictionary, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/manifold (accessed August 4, 2014). W X *A copy of this reference is not being furnished with this Office action. (See Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, Section 707.05(a).) **APS encompasses any electronic search i.e. text, image, and Commercial Databases. thefreedictionary.com man·i·fold (m n - ld ) adj. 1. Many and varied; of many kinds; multiple: our manifold failings. 2. Having many features or forms: manifold intelligence. 3. Being such for a variety of reasons: a manifold traitor. 4. Consisting of or operating several devices of one kind at the same time. n. 1. A whole composed of diverse elements. 2. One of several copies. 3. A pipe or chamber having multiple apertures for making connections. 4. Mathematics A topological space or surface. tr.v.man·i·fold·ed, man·i·fold·ing, man·i·folds 1. To make several copies of, as with carbon paper. 2. To make manifold; multiply. [Middle English, from Old English manigfeald : manig, many; see many + -feald, -fald, -fold.] man i·fold ly adv. man i·fold ness n. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. manifold (ˈmænɪˌfəʊld) adj 1. of several different kinds; multiple: manifold reasons. 2. having many different forms, features, or elements: manifold breeds of dog. n 3. something having many varied parts, forms, or features 4. (Printing, Lithography & Bookbinding) a copy of a page, book, etc 5. (General Engineering) a chamber or pipe with a number of inlets or outlets used to collect or distribute a fluid. In an internal-combustion engine the inlet manifold carries the vaporized fuel from the carburettor to the inlet ports and the exhaust manifold carries the exhaust gases away 6. (Mathematics) maths a. a collection of objects or a set b. a topological space having specific properties 7. (Philosophy) (in the philosophy of Kant) the totality of the separate elements of sensation which are then organized by the active mind and conceptualized as a perception of an external object vb 8. (Printing, Lithography & Bookbinding) (tr) to duplicate (a page, book, etc) 9. to make manifold; multiply [Old English manigfeald. See many, -fold] ˈmaniˌfolder n ˈmaniˌfoldly adv ˈmaniˌfoldness n Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged© HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003 Page 1 of 4manifold - definition of manifold by The Free Dictionary 8/4/2014http://www.thefreedictionary.com/p/manifold man•i•fold (ˈmæn əˌfoʊld) adj. 1. of many kinds; numerous and varied: manifold duties. 2. having numerous different parts, features, or forms: a manifold social program. 3. using or operating similar or identical devices at the same time. 4. being such for many reasons: a manifold enemy. n. 5. something having many different parts or features. 6. a carbon copy; facsimile. 7. a pipe or fitting with several openings for funneling the flow of liquids or gases, as in the exhaust system of an automobile engine. 8. a set of elements having in common a number of topologic properties. adv. 9. very much; in great measure: to multiply burdens manifold. v.t. 10. to make copies of, as with carbon paper. [before 1000; Middle English; Old English manigf(e)ald] man′i•fold`ly, adv. man′i•fold`ness, n. syn: See many. Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved. manifold (m n - ld ) A topological space or surface. The American Heritage® Science Dictionary Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. manifold Past participle: manifolded Gerund: manifolding Imperative Imperative manifold manifold Collins English Verb Tables © HarperCollins Publishers 2011 Thesaurus Legend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms Noun 1. manifold - a pipe that has several lateral outlets to or from other pipes exhaust manifold - a manifold that receives exhaust gases from the cylinders and conducts them to the exhaust pipe inlet manifold - manifold that carries vaporized fuel from the carburetor to the inlet valves of the cylinders Page 2 of 4manifold - definition of manifold by The Free Dictionary 8/4/2014http://www.thefreedictionary.com/p/manifold intake manifold - a manifold consisting of a pipe to carry fuel to each cylinder in an internal-combustion engine pipage, pipe, piping - a long tube made of metal or plastic that is used to carry water or oil or gas etc. 2. manifold - a lightweight paper used with carbon paper to make multiple copies; "an original and two manifolds" manifold paper paper - a material made of cellulose pulp derived mainly from wood or rags or certain grasses 3. manifold - a set of points such as those of a closed surface or an analogue in three or more dimensions mathematical space, topological space - (mathematics) any set of points that satisfy a set of postulates of some kind; "assume that the topological space is finite dimensional" Verb 1. manifold - make multiple copies of; "multiply a letter" re-create, copy - make a replica of; "copy that drawing"; "re-create a picture by Rembrandt" 2. manifold - combine or increase by multiplication; "He managed to multiply his profits" multiply increase - make bigger or more; "The boss finally increased her salary"; "The university increased the number of students it admitted" double, duplicate - increase twofold; "The population doubled within 50 years" triple, treble - increase threefold; "Triple your income!" quadruple - increase fourfold; "His stock earning quadrupled" quintuple - increase fivefold; "The population of China quintupled" proliferate - cause to grow or increase rapidly; "We must not proliferate nuclear arms" Adj. 1. manifold - many and varied; having many features or forms; "manifold reasons"; "our manifold failings"; "manifold intelligence"; "the multiplex opportunities in high technology" multiplex multiple - having or involving or consisting of more than one part or entity or individual; "multiple birth"; "multiple ownership"; "made multiple copies of the speech"; "his multiple achievements in public life"; "her multiple personalities"; "a pineapple is a multiple fruit" Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc. manifold adjective (Formal) numerous, many, various, varied, multiple, diverse, multiplied, diversified, abundant, assorted, copious, multifarious, multitudinous, multifold The difficulties are manifold. Collins Thesaurus of the English Language – Complete and Unabridged 2nd Edition. 2002 © HarperCollins Publishers 1995, 2002 Translations Select a language: Spanish / Español Page 3 of 4manifold - definition of manifold by The Free Dictionary 8/4/2014http://www.thefreedictionary.com/p/manifold manifold [ˈmænɪfəʊld] A. ADJ (= numerous) → múltiple; (= varied) → diverso B. N (Aut) → colector m de escape Collins Spanish Dictionary - Complete and Unabridged 8th Edition 2005 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1971, 1988 © HarperCollins Publishers 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 2000, 2003, 2005 Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. a Mode PartnerSource URL: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/manifold Page 4 of 4manifold - definition of manifold by The Free Dictionary 8/4/2014http://www.thefreedictionary.com/p/manifold Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation