Ex Parte Skala

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 4, 2014

11669922 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 4, 2014)

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