Ex Parte Drake et al - Page 9



              Appeal 2007-0489                                                                      
              Application 10/190,822                                                                
                    Claims 11 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over                   
              Clingerman in view of Zhang.  Claim 28 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C.                
              § 103(a) over Clingerman in view of Grot.  We reverse.  Claims 11, 12, and            
              28 depend upon claim 9.  The Zhang and Grot references were not cited to              
              address the differences in claim 9 discussed above.  The Examiner has not             
              presented other evidence to remedy the deficiency in the Clingerman                   
              reference discussed above.  Thus, for the reasons set forth above, we reverse         
              the rejection of claims 11, 12, and 28.                                               
              The Rejections over Wilkinson.                                                        
                    Claims 9, 10, 15-17, 26 and 29-34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §              
              102(b) over Wilkinson.                                                                
                    The Examiner contends Wilkinson describes a fuel cell system that               
              comprises a stack of fuel cells and inclusive therein are fuel cells that             
              function as sensors for the various constituent components of the fuel                
              stream.  The Examiner contends that Wilkinson’s fuel system anticipates the           
              fuel cell system of claim 9 (Answer 4-5).                                             
                    Appellants contend that the Examiner impermissibly has relied on a              
              single element (i.e., the fuel cell stack 210) in Wilkinson’s system to meet          
              two separate and distinct elements (i.e., the main fuel cell and the sensor           
              system) that are recited in claim 9 (Br. 10).                                         
                    The issue before us is whether the Examiner has shown that                      
              Wilkinson’s stack of fuel cells that includes fuel cells that function as a           
              sensor meets the limitations of claim 9 that require a sensor system coupled          
              to the fuel stream delivery system at one or more locations upstream of the           
                                                 9                                                  



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013