Appeal No. 2004-2053
Application 09/773,704
Compare the Answer, page 10, with the Brief and the Reply Brief
in their entirety. Rather, the appellants rely on the same
arguments applicable to claim 1 above to establish patentability.
See the Brief, page 16. Thus, for the same reasons set forth
above, we are not convinced by the appellants’ arguments.
With respect to claim 19, the appellants do not dispute the
examiner’s findings set forth below:
Singh et al disclose a fuel cell system providing
means for oxidizing heated reformed fuel gas in fuel
cell during transient load conditions (section 0009).
It is disclosed that the electrical storage device is
capable of electro- chemically oxidizing a quantity of
reformer gas contained within an anode chamber of the
fuel cell during transient load conditions by charging
from a preset state of charge towards full capacity
(abstract).
. . . [I]t is apparent that the routed power is to
operate the means for oxidizing during transient load
conditions that prevent transient increases in the
combustion anode gas during changes in electrical load
demand.
Compare the Answer, page 11, with the Brief and the Reply Brief
in their entirety. Thus, we concur with the examiner that “it
would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the
invention was made to route power to an oxidizer in fuel cell
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007