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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/06/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 07/11/2025, has been entered. Claims 10 and 16-18 are amended. Claims 10-18 are now pending in this application. Claim 19 is new. Claims 10-19 are now pending in this application.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1, 17, and 19 recite the limitation “selectively swiveled” which is not found in the specification but interpreted in view of the Fig. 5 and page 11 lines 11-14 of the specification, wherein the battery receptacle has independent freedom of motion. However, the examiner notes how this could imply the presence of other battery modules, wherein “selectively swiveled” could be describing freedom of motion in relation to the other battery receptacles along the same hinge pin (rod). For clarity of the record, the examiner notes that “selectively swiveled” is interpreted broadly as “capable of being swiveled” because the presence of other battery modules along the same hinge pin is explicitly not claimed. Therefore, the term “selectively” Other battery receptacles are not claimed what is not claimed is anything regarding other battery modules along the same hinge
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites “a half of a hinge” and it is unclear whether a new hinge half is being claimed or if this is the same hinge half as claimed in claim 10. Claim 16 is interpreted as the same hinge half based off the original presentation.
Claim 17 recites “a battery box”, “a rotation”; however, it is unclear as to whether these are new limitations being claimed or if these are referring to the same limitations claimed in claim 10. Claim 17 is interpreted as the same limitations seen in claim 10 based off the original presentation.
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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
Claims 10-12 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hochdaninger (DE8816910U1) (refer to enclosed translation for citations), in view of Hu (CN110654405A) (refer to translation in Office Action mailed 11/26/2024) and Johnson (US20100133030A1).
Regarding claim 10,
Claims 10-12 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu (CN110654405A) (refer to translation in Office Action mailed 11/26/2024) in view of Johnson (US20100133030A1) and Hochdaninger (DE8816910U1).
Regarding claim 10,
Hu teaches a battery receptacle for a rail vehicle (Fig. 1, battery tray 3; [0002]; “rail transit”), the battery receptacle assembly comprising a connector device (Fig. 1, elements 6, 51, 5; [0036]; wherein the connector comprises a drawer-like system allowing the battery to slide in and out for easy access and repair as described in [0044]), and a battery box (Fig. 1, 1; [0045]), a volume shape is determined by a base surface (Fig. 3, base bottom surface of 3) and by associated side surfaces (Fig. 3, side surfaces of 3).
Hu fails to teach the battery receptacle having a volume shape which differs from a cuboid shape, the volume shape is determined by a base surface and by associated side surfaces, and the connector device configured to rotatably connect said battery receptacle to an associated battery box of the rail vehicle, for rotation about a hinge pin disposed along a vertical axis enabling said battery receptacle to be selectively swiveled into the battery box and swiveled out of the battery box; and said connector device including a hinge pin holder connected to said battery receptacle and configured to directly engage the vertically extending hinge pin, the hinge pin connecting said battery receptacle to the associated battery box via said hinge pin holder, and said hinge pin holder including a first hinge half directly connected to a side surface of said associated side surfaces of said battery receptacle, said first hinge half including a surface parallel to said vertical axis configured to directly engage said vertically extending hinge pin when said battery receptacle is received in the battery box .
Johnson a battery receptacle (Fig. 4, 130; [0018], “130…hold individual modules”) having a volume shape which differs from a cuboid shape (see Fig. 4, triangular geometry, wherein the shape of 300 is not cuboid), the volume shape is determined by a base surface (Johnson Fig. 3, triangular surface along 100) and by associated side surfaces (Johnson Fig. 3, side surfaces on the left and right of the base surface). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the volumetric shape of the battery receptacle (Searles, Fig. 3, 54) to be triangular, as Johnson [0022] teaches that triangular battery shapes have better packing efficiency for specific device shapes, and wherein the inherent structural efficiency of triangular trusses also allows elimination of excess material. Johnson fails to teach and the connector device configured to rotatably connect said battery receptacle to an associated battery box of the rail vehicle, for rotation about a hinge pin disposed along a vertical axis enabling said battery receptacle to be selectively swiveled into the battery box and swiveled out of the battery box; and said connector device including a hinge pin holder connected to said battery receptacle and configured to directly engage the vertically extending hinge pin, the hinge pin connecting said battery receptacle to the associated battery box via said hinge pin holder.
Searles teaches the battery receptacle for rotation about a hinge pin (Fig. 3, 102; [0072]) disposed along a vertical axis (Fig. 3; wherein at least a portion of 102 is disposed along the vertical axis), and said connector device (Fig. 4, 115; [0079]) including a hinge pin holder (Fig. 21, 126/154; [0107]); connected to said battery receptacle (Fig. 3, 54; wherein all elements of 54 are directly or indirectly connected) and configured to directly engage [0107] the vertically extending (see Fig. 3, 102) hinge pin [0107] and said hinge pin holder (Fig. 21, 126/154; [0107]) including a first hinge half (Fig. 21, 126).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to attach the battery receptacle 3 of Hu using the pivoting arm (126/154 of Searles), such that 54 is fitted horizontally and fixed into the battery box 1 of Hu, as Searles teaches the swiveling into the holder as an advantageous alternative to sliding into a frame, which realizes a more space efficient design per [0009, 0012-0013]
Accordingly, Hu in view of Searles teaches enabling said battery receptacle (Searles, Fig. 3, 54) to be selectively swiveled into the battery box (Hu, Fig. 1, 1) and swiveled out of the battery box (Hu, Fig. 1, 1); the first hinge half (Searles, Fig. 21, 126) directly connected to a side surface (Hu, Fig. 3, side surfaces of tray 3) of said associated side surfaces of said battery receptacle(see above), said first hinge half (Searles, Fig. 21, 126) including a surface (Fig. 23, side edge surface of 126) parallel to said vertical axis (Hu, Fig. 3, wherein at least the side edge portion of 126 as applied to Hu is parallel to the vertical axis) configured to directly engage (see Fig. 23, leftmost 102 directly engaged with 126) said vertically extending hinge pin when said battery receptacle is received in the battery box (see modification above, Hu in view of Searles, wherein the hinge half directly engages the battery receptacle to swivel the box in and out).
Regarding claim 11,
Hu in view of Searles but fails to teach wherein said base surface has a shape selected from the group consisting of generally triangular, triangular, generally trapeze-shaped trapezoid, and wherein said associated side surfaces are substantially perpendicular to said base surface. Johnson teaches the volume shape is determined by a base surface (Johnson Fig. 3, triangular surface along 100) and by associated side surfaces (Johnson Fig. 3, side surfaces on the left and right of the base surface), wherein said base surface has a triangular shape (Johnson Fig. 3, triangular surface along 100), and wherein said associated side surfaces are substantially perpendicular to said base surface (Johnson Fig. 3, wherein the side surfaces extending in the left/right direction are substantially perpendicular to the base surface mapped above, which extends in the up/down direction). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the volumetric shape of the battery receptacle (Searles, Fig. 3, 54) to be triangular, as Johnson [0022] teaches that triangular battery shapes have better packing efficiency for specific device shapes, and wherein the inherent structural efficiency of triangular trusses also allows elimination of excess material.
Regarding claim 12,
Hu in view of Searles teaches further comprising battery cells (Searles; Fig. 3, 52; [0063]; wherein a battery pack is a collection of individual battery cells) disposed in said battery receptacle (Searles; 54) and electrically connected to one another (Searles; Fig. 3; 52; [0069]; wherein a battery pack is a collection of individual battery cells electrically connected to each other).
Regarding claim 16,
Hu in view of Searles teaches wherein said hinge pin holder comprises half of a hinge (Fig. 21, upper half 126 engaging hinge pin 102).
Regarding claim 17,
Hu in view of Searles teaches a rail vehicle (Hu; [0002]), comprising: a battery receptacle assembly according to claim 10 (see rejection of claim 10 above); and a battery box (Hu Fig. 1, battery box 1; [0035, 0044]); the hinge pin (Searles; Fig. 3, 102; [0072]) disposed in said battery box (Hu, 1) along the vertical axis (wherein the combination results in 52 placed horizontally within 1 such that 102 is along the vertical axis; see rejection of claim 10 above) and engaged with the first hinge half of the hinge pin holder (Fig. 21; 126; [0108]); said battery receptacle (Searles, 54) being rotatably connected (Searles; [0025]) via the connector device (Searles; battery moving portion 115; [0075]) to said battery box (Hu, 1) of the rail vehicle (Hu, [0002]), wherein for rotation about a vertical axis (wherein the combination results in rotation of Searles 54 along the vertical axis in Hu); allows said battery receptacle to be selectively (Searles; [0075]) swiveled into said battery box (Hu, 1) and swiveled out of said battery box (Hu, 1; see rejection of claim 10 above, wherein the combination – including the rotatable/swivel connection mechanism of Searles within the modified Hu invention – results in the battery receptacle being “selectively swiveled” into said battery box and out of said battery box), and a shape of said battery box (Hu, 1) being similar to the shape of the battery receptacle (Searles, wherein the complex shape of 54 is similar to that of 1 such that it may fit within 1 of Hu), such that the battery receptacle is accommodated completely in the battery box without any volume being left unused (Hu, wherein battery box 1 has a similar shape to 54, and, alternatively, wherein it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to minimize any unused volume for the sake of space efficiency).
Regarding claim 18,
Hu in view of Searles teaches wherein said hinge pin holder (Searles; Fig. 21, 126/154) further comprises: a loose hinge half 154; said first hinge half 126 engaging said loose hinge half 154 after [0077] an engaging of said hinge pin 146 in said first hinge half 126.
Regarding claim 19,
Hu in view of Searles teaches a rail vehicle (see Hu, [0002]) comprising: a battery receptacle assembly (Searles; Fig. 3, 54/115/110; [0075]) having a volume shape which differs from a cuboid shape (Searles; Fig. 3, wherein the shape of 54/115/110 is different than a cuboid shape) ; the volume shape being determined by a base surface (Hu, base surface of tray 3) and associated side surfaces (Hu, side surfaces of tray 3), a battery box (Hu, Fig. 1, 1; [0045]) a hinge pin (Searles; Fig. 3, 102; [0072]) disposed in said battery box (Hu, 1) along the vertical axis (wherein the combination results in rotation of Searles 54 along the vertical axis in Hu; see rejection of claim 10 above); said battery receptacle including a hinge half (Fig. 21; portion of 126 engaging 102 in Fig. 3) directly connected to a side surface (Hu, side surface of tray 3, see rejection of claim 10 above) of said associated side surfaces (side surfaces of tray 3), said hinge half 126 including a surface (Fig. 23, side edge surface of 126) parallel to the vertical axis (axis of rotation about 102) configured to directly engage the vertically extending hinge pin (Fig. 3, 102), to connect (wherein all components are directly or indirectly connected) said battery receptacle (Searles, Fig. 3, 54) to said battery box (Hu, 1) via said hinge pin (Fig. 3, 102), said hinge half (Fig. 3, portion of 126 around 102) configured for rotation [0077] about the hinge pin [0077]disposed along the vertical axis (see above), enabling said battery receptacle to be selectively swiveled into the battery box and swiveled out of the battery box (wherein the combination results in the battery receptable of Searles 54 able to be selectively swiveled [0077] out of the battery box of Hu; see rejection of claim 10 above).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu (CN110654405A), Searles (US-20200220133-A1), Johnson (US20100133030A1), and Hass (EP1561659A1) (refer to enclosed translations for citations).
Regarding claim 13,
Hu in view of Searles fails to teach a lifting assembly connected to said battery receptacle and configured for a vertical movement of said battery receptacle, wherein said lifting assembly is configured to move said battery receptacle together with said battery cells by way of lifting equipment.
Hass teaches a battery receptacle (Fig 1, battery box 2a) further comprising a lifting assembly (Fig. 1, swivel arm 3; [0013]) connected to said battery receptacle (wherein 3 is indirectly connected to 2a via 5; see Fig. 3) and configured for a vertical movement of said battery receptacle (see Fig. 3 and 5, displaying vertical movement of the battery box 2a; [0018]), wherein said lifting assembly is configured to move said battery receptacle together with said battery cells by way of lifting equipment (see figure 3 and 5, wherein lifting assembly 3 is configured to move said battery receptacle 2a together with said battery cells 2 by way of lifting equipment 5 [0018]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the lifting assembly of Hass into the battery of modified Hu such that a lifting assembly connected to said battery receptacle and configured for a vertical movement of said battery receptacle, wherein said lifting assembly is configured to move said battery receptacle together with said battery cells by way of lifting equipment in order to enable the ergonomic access and repair of heavy battery equipment, as taught by Hass [0009].
Regarding claim 14,
Hu in view of Searles and Hass teaches the battery receptacle assembly according to claim 13 (see rejection of claim 13 above), wherein said lifting assembly (Hass; Fig. 1, swivel arm 3; [0013]) includes a crane eye (Hass; Fig. 3, eye 3d; [0014]) configured to enable said battery receptacle (Searles, 54) to be moved together with said battery cells located therein (Searles, 52, wherein a battery pack holds a plurality of cells) by the lifting equipment (Hass Fig. 3, eye 3d configured to enable said battery receptable 2a to be moved with battery cells 2 located therein by the lifting equipment 3; [0014]; wherein the combination realizes movement of 54 of Searles).
Regarding claim 15,
Hu in view of Searles and Hass teaches the crane eye (Hass Fig. 3, wherein eye 3d) is arranged vertically above a center of gravity (Fig. 3; see rejection of claim 14 above) of said battery receptacle (Searles, 54) filled with said battery cells (Searles, 52, wherein a battery pack holds a plurality of cells).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/08/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that a hinge half directly connected to a side surface is not taught by the prior art. However, this is not persuasive, as described in the updated rejection of claim 1 above, Hu’s battery tray 3 is modified by the lever arm of Searles, wherein the lever arm attaches directly to battery tray 3 such that 226 is directly bolted to tray 3 of Hu.
Applicant argues that the prior art fails to teach a surface parallel to the vertical axis of the hinge pin, however, this is not persuasive, as the axis of rotation of Searles 128 is parallel with the hinge pin (see Fig. 20), such that the sidewalls of battery tray 3 are also parallel to 146 in view of the combination outlined above.
Applicant argues that the bolt 102 is separated from the connecting arm 126. However, this is not persuasive, as bolt 102 directly passed through 126 (see Fig. 23 and Fig. 24). While 126 is not labeled in Fig. 25, provided by applicant in “Remarks”, pg. 12, the bolt 102 is seen penetrating through 127 and thus through 126 (see [0077] of Searles).
Applicant argues that separation between 102 and 126 is intentional. However, this is not persuasive, as applicant is referring to rightmost 102 (of Fig. 23/24) rather than to hinge pin relied up in the rejection above, the leftmost 102 connected directly to 126.
Applicant argues that all other claims should be allowable based off an allowable independent claim 10. However, this is not persuasive, as the rejections on all claims have been sustained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL WYROUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-4806. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10am-5pm.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE can be reached on (571) 270-7078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL CHRISTIAN ST WYROUGH/ Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights