Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 17/746,977

ENERGY STORAGE FRAME AND ENERGY STORAGE BATTERY CLUSTER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 18, 2022
Priority
Mar 25, 2022 — CN 202210299222.2
Examiner
JELSMA, JONATHAN G
Art Unit
1722
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Calb Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allowance Rate
628 granted / 906 resolved
+4.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
943
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
65.2%
+25.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
§112
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 906 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Summary This is the second Office Action based on Application 17/746,977 and is in response to Applicant Arguments/Remarks filed 08/08/2025. Claims 1-20 previously pending, of those claim 1 has been amended, all amendments have been entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been fully considered. Claim Objections Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6 is dependent upon claim 1. Claim 6 recites “”and the connecting plate is connected to the first column through a first connector”. Claim 1 has been amended to recite “the first connecting beam is connected to the first column with a first connection”. Based on the Applicant Arguments/Remarks the first connector and the “first connection” appear to be mapped to the same element in the specification. However the claim does not make it clear if the “first connector” of claim 6 is the same as the “first connection” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-5, 9-15, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by LEE (US 2020/0161612 A1). With respect to claim 1. LEE teaches an energy storage device which includes a battery rack for a plurality of battery modules (abstract). The modules may be inserted into the rack in a sliding manner (abstract). The battery rack 100 includes a plurality of modules 200 installed in the inner space of the rack (paragraph 0029). The rack includes a base frame 100, front frame 120, rear frame 130, upper frame 140, reinforcing frame 150, and a module guide 160 (paragraph 0030). The module guide 160 is in contact with the lower and side surface of the module (paragraph 039). The module guide 160 is coupled to the front frame, the rear frame the reinforcing frame to partition the inside space of the rack (paragraph 0039). The module guide 160 includes a side cover covering a lower portion of the side surface of the battery module, and a lower cover for covering a portion of one side of a lower surface of the battery module (paragraph 0041). The side cover then includes a plurality of fastening holes formed at a positions corresponding to the front frame 120, and positioned corresponding to the reinforcing frame (paragraph 0042). The module guide 160 may have a hook unit 163 which is formed on the lower cover 162 to fix the rear surface of the battery module 200 (paragraph 0045). When the battery module 200 is fixed in the rack, the front surface of the module 200 is fixed to the rack in a bolt type coupling manner, and the rear surface is fixed with a hook type coupling manner (paragraph 0047). The front and rear frames 120 and 130 are taken to be the claimed first and second beam. The front of the module is taken to be the claimed first connecting beam and connects to the front frame 120 by bolts (paragraph 0052). The bolts are taken to be the first connection in the insertion direction of the battery (see Figures 1-2). The guide 160 is taken to be the claimed second connecting beam and is connected to the rear frame (paragraph 0039). The third fastening hole 161c of the side cover is positioned in a spot corresponding to the rear frame 130 (paragraph 0042). As seen in Figure 3 then the fixing holes 161c connect to the rear frame in a direction perpendicular to the insertion direction. With respect to claim 2. LEE teaches rack includes an insertion end and a limit end. The limit end being the rear cover 230 for covering the rear surface of the battery module (paragraph 0049-0050). With respect to claims 3-4. LEE teaches the reinforcing frame 150 located between the front and rear frames (paragraphs 0030 and 0038) and the reinforcing frame 150 is taken to be the claimed middle column. The module guide 160, which is the claimed second connecting beam, is connected to the reinforcing frame 150 (paragraph 0039). With respect to claim 5. LEE teaches as seen in Figure 1 that the first, second, and middle column are disposed at equal intervals. With respect to claim 9-10. LEE teaches the second connecting beam is the guide 160 which is connected to the front frame, rear frame, and the reinforcing frame (paragraph 0039). The rear frame 130 is taken to be the claimed second column. The side of the guide 160 is taken to be the claimed side plate, and includes fastening 161b for fastening to the reinforcing frame 150, and a third fastening hole 161c for the rear frame (paragraph 0042). These may then be connected with bolts to secure them (paragraph 0043) and are taken to be the claimed second and third connectors. Where the portion protruding from the side plate of the guide 160 is taken to be the claimed top plate, and is on the top end (see Figure 3). The top and side plate are then an integrated structure (see Figure 3). With respect to claim 11-15, and 19-20. LEE teaches the batter modules which are inserted into the battery rack (paragraph 0029) and these modules are taken to be the claimed battery insert box. 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. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 6-8, and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE (US 2020/0161612 A1) in view of OKURA (JP 2017073270 A). Claim 6 is dependent upon claim 1 which is rejected above under 35 U.S.C. 102 in view of LEE. LEE teaches the first connecting beam which is the front of the module 200. The front of the module includes the front cover 220 which has the fastening holes for bolting the cover to the front frame (paragraph 0052). OKURA teaches a battery storage unit including a support members for guiding the detachable movement of a battery module (abstract). One of the support members includes a second support member 22 having a plate like base portion and an extending portion protruding parallel to each other on the upper and lower ends of the base portions (paragraph 0057). The support member 22 is attached to the support column (Figure 3). At the time the invention was filed one having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated combine the support member 22 of OKURA with the battery rack of LEE as this is a combination of known prior art elements in order to achieve predictable results, as both LEE and OKURA battery racks, and then the support member is taught to be functional to increase the housing body (paragraph 0057). OKURA teaches the connecting plate 22c which is located under the support plate 22a (Figure 3 and paragraph 0057). The plate 22c of OKURA does not explicitly teach the connection to the column. Claim 1 recites that the first connecting beam is connected to the first column with a first connection, and claim 6 recites the connecting plate of the first connecting beam is connected to the first column through a first connector. This is taken to be a different connector than that of the connection of claim 1. For example claim 1 recites that the first connection is along the first direction, whereas the connecting plate of claim 6 is connected to the support plate along the first direction. LEE teaches an alternative method of connection which includes a hook unit (paragraph 0045). At the time the invention was filed one having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the hooking connector of LEE for connecting of the base connector 22c of OKURA as this is a simple combination of known prior art elements in order to achieve predictable results, as LEE teaches a known connection method. With respect to claim 7. LEE further teaches the hook corresponds to a hook insert hole (paragraph 0015) and is taken to be the claimed lug. With respect to claim 8. OKURA teaches the support and connecting plate are integrated structures (see Figure 3). With respect to claim 16-18. LEE teaches the batter modules which are inserted into the battery rack (paragraph 0029) and these modules are taken to be the claimed battery insert box. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9 of Applicant Arguments/Remarks, filed 08/08/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-8 and 11-18 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of LEE (US 2020/0161612 A1). On pages 7-9 of Applicant Arguments/Remarks Applicant argues that YOUN does not teach the amended claim limitations of “the first connecting beam is connected to the first column with a first connection … the first connection is along a first direction … the first direction is parallel to an insertion direction of the battery insert box”. Applicant argues that YOUN would teach the connection of the guide plate through the tray fixing unit and the side frames, and the connection is along a Y direction instead of an insertion direction. This argument is persuasive, however new grounds of rejection are made in view of LEE. LEE teaches a battery rack in which battery modules are inserted (abstract). The battery modules include a first column, being the front frame 120, and a first connection beam being the front face of the module is taken to be the first connecting beam and connects to the front frame 120 by bolts, the bolts being the first connector connecting in the insertion direction (paragraph 0052 and Figures 1-3). 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 JONATHAN G JELSMA whose telephone number is (571)270-5127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM EST. 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571)272-3433. 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. /JONATHAN G JELSMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 18, 2022
Application Filed
May 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Aug 08, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 14, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Dec 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12626989
ELECTRICITY STORAGE MODULE
4y 2m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12626970
BATTERY DEVICE
3y 4m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12609375
BATTERY PACK AND VEHICLE COMPRISING SAME
3y 4m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12597672
BATTERY MODULE AND BATTERY PACK INCLUDING THE SAME
3y 3m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586853
BATTERY PACK
3y 4m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+14.9%)
3y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 906 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month