DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-8 are under examination.
Claims 3 and 5 have been cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bluemel (WO 2020000090 A1), in view of Matecki (US 11787278 B2), and further in view of Matecki (US 20190100090 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
432
534
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, in embodiment 300, Bluemel teaches a vehicular battery case comprising: two side frames being separately placed in a first direction (Fig. 16, item 322), extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and allowing a battery (Fig. 16, items 340 and 342) to be housed in between (Fig.16, item 326).
In embodiment 300 of Fig. 16, Bluemel does not teach a vehicular battery case wherein each of the two side frames includes an energy absorption part inside which a space is formed, and a side wall part inside which a space is formed, the side wall part being provided on a vicinity side being a side closer to the counterpart side frame than the energy absorption part, the energy absorption part includes a first plate-shaped part and a second plate-shaped part being separated from each other in a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction and extending in the first direction and the second direction, the side wall part includes: a third plate-shaped part extending in a direction crossing the first direction and in the second direction and being coupled with ends of the first plate-shaped part and the second plate-shaped part on the vicinity side; a fourth plate-shaped part extending in a direction crossing the first direction and in the second direction and being placed separately from the third plate-shaped part on the vicinity side of the third plate-shaped part; and a first rib-like part and a second rib-like part extending in the first direction and the second direction, and including ends on the vicinity side being coupled with the third plate-shaped part, and ends on an opposite side of the ends on the vicinity side being coupled with the fourth plate-shaped part, and, when viewed from the second direction, an extension of a center line of the first plate- shaped part in a thickness direction passes through an inside of the first rib-like part, and an extension of a center line of the second plate-shaped part in a thickness direction passes through an inside of the second rib-like part.
In embodiment 400 of Fig. 25 and 26, Bluemel teaches a vehicular battery case comprising: two side frames being separately placed in a first direction (Fig. 25, item 424), extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (Fig. 25, item 424), and allowing a battery to be housed in between (Fig. 25, item 424), wherein each of the two side frames includes an energy absorption part inside which a space is formed (Fig. 26, item A), and a side wall part inside which a space is formed (Fig. 26, item B), the side wall part being provided on a vicinity side being a side closer to the counterpart side frame than the energy absorption part (Fig. 26, item B), the energy absorption part includes a first plate-shaped part (Fig. 26, item C) and a second plate-shaped part (Fig. 26, item D) being separated from each other in a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction and extending in the first direction and the second direction, the side wall part includes: a third plate-shaped part extending in a direction crossing the first direction and in the second direction and being coupled with ends of the first plate-shaped part and the second plate- shaped part on the vicinity side (Fig. 26, item in green); a fourth plate-shaped part extending in a direction crossing the first direction and in the second direction and being placed separately from the third plate-shaped part on the vicinity side of the third plate-shaped part (Fig. 26, item E); and a first rib-like part (Fig. 26, item G) and a second rib-like part (Fig. 26, item H) extending in the first direction and the second direction, and including ends on the vicinity side being coupled with the third plate-shaped part, and ends on an opposite side of the ends on the vicinity side being coupled with the fourth plate-shaped part (Fig. 26, items G and H), and, when viewed from the second direction, an extension of a center line of the first plate- shaped part in a thickness direction passes through an inside of the first rib-like part (Fig. 26, items C and yellow), and an extension of a center line of the second plate-shaped part in a thickness direction passes
PNG
media_image2.png
631
560
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: ]through an inside of the
PNG
media_image4.png
362
388
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 5 of Instant Invention)]
PNG
media_image5.png
611
918
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]second rib-like part (Fig. 26, items D and H).
Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach that the two side frames in the first direction includes an energy absorption part. Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach that the energy absorption part includes a first plate-shaped part and a second plate-shaped part.
Embodiment 400 teaches that the two side frames in the second direction includes an energy absorption part. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the two side frames in the first direction to also include an energy absorption part, as taught by embodiment 400 of Bluemel (Fig. 25, item 424), in order to support the distribution or absorption of crash loads (pg. 19, para. 0068), as taught by embodiment 300 of Bluemel.
Modified Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach that each of the two side frames includes a side wall part and that the side wall part is provided on a vicinity side being a side closer to the counterpart side frame than the energy absorption part. Embodiment 300 does not teach that the side wall part includes a third plate-shaped part extending in a direction crossing the first direction and in the second direction and being coupled with ends of the first plate-shaped part and the second plate-shaped part on the vicinity side. Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach that the side wall includes a fourth plate-shaped part extending in a direction crossing the first direction and in the second direction and being placed separately from the third plate-shaped part on the vicinity side of the third plate-shaped part.
Embodiment 400 teaches a side wall part including a third plate-shaped part extending in the first and second direction and coupled with the first and second plate-shaped part on the vicinity side.
Embodiment 400 teaches that the side wall includes a fourth plate-shaped part. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified embodiment 300 to have modified the two side frames in the first direction to also include a side wall part, as taught by embodiment 400 of Bluemel (Fig. 25, item 424), in order to provide for a functional separation that may aid in mounting, assembly, and maintenance of batteries within a vehicle (pg. 5, para. 0042), as taught by embodiment 300 of Bluemel.
Modified Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach that the side wall part includes a first rib-like part and a second rib-like part extending in the first direction and the second direction, and including ends on the vicinity side being coupled with the third plate-shaped part, and ends on an opposite side of the ends on the vicinity side being coupled with the fourth plate-shaped part. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified embodiment 300 to include the rib-like parts to define a passage within the wall that may be used to convey cooling fluid for regulating the temperature of the batteries (pg.26, para. 0083), as taught by embodiment 400 of Bluemel.
Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach the extension of the centerline between the energy absorption part and the side wall part. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the structural components of the energy absorption part and side frame to incorporate the teachings of embodiment 300 of Bluemel to include the centerline extension of embodiment 400 of Bluemel in order to support the distribution or absorption of crash loads (pg. 19, para. 0068), as taught by embodiment 300 of Bluemel.
Modified Embodiment 300 and 400 of Bluemel do not teach that a thickness of the second rib-like part is less than a thickness of the first rib-like part.
Matecki (US 11787278 B2), in the same field of endeavor, battery frame assembly, teaches that a thickness of an exterior structural component is less than a thickness of an interior structural component (column 5, lines 51-53, [The varied thickness provides an inner tray section 20c with a greater thickness than exterior tray sections 20a, 20e] (the interior structures of the battery frame are thicker than the exterior).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the thickness of the second rib-like part (exterior structure) to have a lesser thickness than the first rib-like part (interior structure), as taught by Matecki, in order to support loads of the vehicle batteries, arranged over and supported by the battery tray (para. 34).
Modified embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach that the side wall part further includes a third rib-like part being provided in such a way as to connect the first rib-like part to the second rib-like part, and the third rib-like part is disposed in-between the third plate-shaped part and the fourth plate-shaped part.
Matecki (US 20190100090 A1) in the same field of endeavor, vehicular battery cases, teaches a third-rib like part provided in such a way as to connect a first rib-like part to a second rib-like part, and the third rib-like part is disposed in-between a third plate-shaped part and a fourth plate-shaped part (Fig. 12).
PNG
media_image7.png
632
1430
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have added a third rib-like part to Bluemel’s vehicular battery case, in between the third plate-shaped part and the fourth plate-shaped part, as taught by Matecki (US 20190100090 A1), in order to provide a tubular structure that may function as a side reinforcement member that is configured to absorb and prevent intrusion from lateral impact forces to the vehicle, as taught by Matecki (US 20190100090 A1) (para. 0053).
Regarding claim 2, modified embodiment 300 of Fig. 16, Bluemel teaches the vehicular battery case according to claim 1, further comprising a bottom plate member (Fig. 17, item 374) (pg. 23, para. 0075) one end of which in the first direction is joined (fig. 20, items 374 and 376) (pg. 23, para. 0076) to one of the two side frames (Fig. 18, items 324 and 374) and another end of which in the first direction is joined to another of the two side frames, and on one surface of which in the third direction a battery is
PNG
media_image8.png
624
636
media_image8.png
Greyscale
placeable (Fig. 18, items, 340, 342, and 374).
Modified Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach wherein a distance from a joint of the bottom plate member and the side wall part to the first rib-like part in the third direction is greater than a distance from a joint of the bottom plate member and the side wall part to the second rib-like part, and a thickness of the first rib-like part is greater than a thickness of the first plate-shaped part.
Embodiment 400 of Bluemel teaches a vehicular battery case according to Claim1 (Fig. 24, item 400), further comprising a bottom plate member (Fig. 24, item 480), one end of which in the first direction is joined to another of the two side frames (Fig. 24, item 424 and 480), and on one surface of which in the third direction a battery is placeable (Fig. 23, item 426). Embodiment 400 of Bluemel teaches wherein a distance from a joint of the bottom plate member and the side wall part to the first rib-like part in the third direction is greater than a distance from a joint of the bottom plate member and the side wall part to the second rib-like part (Fig. 26, items G, H, and 480).
Matecki (US 11787278 B2) teaches a thickness of the first rib-like part is greater than a thickness of the first plate-shaped part (para. 34, [The varied thickness provides an inner tray section 20c (corresponds to the interior structure/ first rib-like part) with a greater thickness than exterior tray sections 20a, 20e (corresponds to the exterior structure/ first plate-shaped part)].
Modified Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach differing thicknesses in the structural components. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the thickness of the interior structural components to have a greater thickness than the exterior structural components, as taught by Matecki (US 11787278 B2), in order to support loads of the vehicle batteries arranged over and supported by the battery tray (para. 34).
Regarding claim 4, modified embodiment 300 of Bluemel teaches the vehicular battery case according to Claim 1, wherein one end of the third rib-like part is coupled with a coupling part of the first rib-like part and the third plate-shaped part, and another end of the third rib-like part is coupled with a coupling part of the second rib-like part and the fourth plate-shaped part.
PNG
media_image9.png
732
1548
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, modified embodiment 300 of Bluemel teaches the vehicular battery case according to Claim 1, wherein the two side frames are extruded materials made of a metal material (pg. 21, para. 0072), and the side wall part (Fig. 17, item B) and the energy absorption part are integrated (Fig. 17, item A).
PNG
media_image10.png
360
1035
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
439
712
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, modified embodiment 300 of Bluemel teaches the vehicular battery case according to Claim 1, wherein a plurality of crosses each including a plate-shaped part extending in the first direction and the second direction are placed between the two side frames (Fig. 16, item 322), ends of the cross (Fig. 16, item 332) in the first direction facing the third plate-shaped parts (Fig. 16, item 318) of the two side frames or being in contact with the third plate- shaped parts, and, when viewed from the second direction, a center line of the first rib-like part in the thickness direction passes through an inside of the plate-shaped parts of the plurality of crosses (Fig.19, circled image below).
Regarding claim 8, modified embodiment 300 of Bluemel teaches the vehicular battery case according to Claim 7.
Embodiment 300 of Bluemel does not teach wherein a thickness of the plate-shaped part of the cross is greater than a thickness of the first rib- like part.
Matecki (US 11787278 B2) teaches wherein a thickness of the plate-shaped part of the cross is greater than the thickness of the first rib-like part (para. 34, [The varied thickness provides an inner tray section 20c (corresponds to the plate-shaped part of the cross, item 16) with a greater thickness than exterior tray sections 20a, 20e (corresponds to the first rib-like part of the instant, item 325)] (the interior structures of the battery frame are thicker than the exterior).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the thickness of the interior structural components to have a greater thickness than the exterior structural components, as taught by Matecki (US 11787278 B2), in order to support loads of the vehicle batteries arranged over and supported by the battery tray (para. 34).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 4 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERITA E GRANNUM whose telephone number is (571)270-1150. The examiner can normally be reached 10-5 EST / 7-2 PST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Allison Bourke can be reached on (303) 297-4684. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/V.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights