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
The Applicant’s arguments and claim amendments received December 23, 2025 have been entered into the file. Currently, claim 1 is amended; claim 7 is cancelled; and claims 10-14 are withdrawn; resulting in claims 1-6 and 8-9 pending for examination.
Claim Interpretation
It is noted that amended claim 1 includes the limitation “and the vehicle frame is positioned between a lower end of the second nut and the flange of the first nut” in lines 11-12, however, the vehicle frame is not positively recited in the claim. As the claim is drawn to a vehicle battery pack case comprising a battery bolt, first nut, and second nut, limitations to the vehicle frame are not considered limiting to the vehicle pack case. For the purposes of examination, a combination of a bolt, first nut, and second nut that is capable of performing the intended use in relationship to a vehicle frame is considered to meet the limitations of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 5, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ozawa, et al. (US 6,789,993 B2).
Regarding claims 1 and 5, Ozawa teaches a fastener for members to be clamped with spacing in between including a bolt (40), a movable collar (20; first nut), and a nut (10; second nut) (Col. 1, Ln. 36-39; Col. 2, Ln. 22-32; Fig. 1). Ozawa teaches that the nut includes a left-handed internal thread (14) and the movable collar includes a left-handed external thread (21) capable of threading onto the left-handed internal thread of the nut (Col. 2, Ln. 22-34). Additionally, the bolt includes external threads (421) and the movable collar includes an internal thread (22) capable of threading onto the external threads of the bolt (Col. 1, Ln. 60-64). Ozawa teaches that the external threads of the bolt are right-handed, and therefore the internal threads of the movable collar, which threads onto the external threads of the bolt, are also right-handed, meaning the internal and external threads of the movable collar are opposite each other.
Ozawa further teaches that the movable collar of the first embodiment has a flange on an end surface of a body toward the bolt (lower end) (Col. 2, Ln. 65-66; Fig. 1). Given the positioning of the flange, a vehicle frame would be capable of being positioned between the lower end of the nut and the flange of the movable collar. Based on the orientation shown in Figure 1, the right end of the nut is the lower end.
While it is acknowledged that Ozawa does not teach the use of the fastener specifically for fastening a vehicle battery pack case to a vehicle frame, Ozawa teaches that the fastener may be used for the inner panel of an automobile (Col. 4, Ln. 52-57), which may include any component of an automobile including a battery pack case. In this case, the preamble recitation of a vehicle battery pack case is considered intended use of the structural components of the body of the claim, which include a bolt, first nut, and second nut. Thus, the preamble is not considered to provide structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art, and as the fastener of Ozawa is capable of performing the intended use in relationship to a vehicle frame, it is considered to meet the limitations of the claim (MPEP 2111.02(II)).
Regarding claim 2, Ozawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and further teaches that the lower end of the bolt (40) is supported on a member (M2) as shown in Figure 5.3. Based on the orientation shown in Figure 5, the left side of the bolt head is the lower end portion. As the fastener may be used for the inner panel of an automobile, the bolt is capable of being vertically supported on a vehicle frame, wherein the bolt is fastened to the movable collar (20) in an upward and downward direction.
Regarding claim 8, Ozawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and further teaches that the nut (10) includes an external diameter longer than an external diameter of the movable collar (20), as shown in Figure 1.
Regarding claim 9, Ozawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and further teaches that the nut (10) includes an external diameter longer than an external diameter of the bolt (40), as shown in Figure 1.
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 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 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa, et al. (US 6,789,993 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sung, et al. (KR 20190119403 A), cited on IDS.
Regarding claim 3, Ozawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Ozawa does not expressly teach that the movable collar (20; first nut) includes a groove formed on a bottom portion thereof, which may be used to fasten or remove the movable collar.
Sung teaches a two-way fastening bolt (10) in which a nut (30) and bolt (20) are formed on one side and other side, respectively (¶ [0037], Ln. 1-4; Fig. 2). As shown in Figure 2, the two-way fastening bolt (10) includes a bolt portion (100) with an external screw thread configured to fasten with a nut (30), and a nut portion (200) with an internal screw thread configured to fasten with a bolt (20). Sung teaches that the two-way fastening bolt includes a tool groove (230) formed on one side of the outer body in order to fasten or loosen the two-way fastening bolt using a flat-head screwdriver, cross-head screwdriver, or the like (¶ [0051], Ln. 1-3). Sung teaches that the tool groove makes it easier to fasten the two-way fastening bolt when the fastening space is narrow, by allowing the use of small screwdrivers or other tools (¶ [0058], Ln. 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the movable collar of Ozawa to include a tool groove on the bottom portion as taught by Sung. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include a groove on the movable collar in order to allow the movable collar to be easily fastened or removed using a tool such as a screwdriver. This modification would make fastening and removing the movable collar easier and allow for the fastening and removing in narrow work spaces.
Regarding claim 4, Ozawa in view of Sung teaches all of the limitations of claim 3 above and Ozawa further teaches that the nut (10) may be fixed in the member (M1), as shown in Figure 5. Therefore the nut is capable of being fixed in a vehicle frame when the groove is used in fastening or removing the movable collar (20).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa, et al. (US 6,789,993 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Xu, et al. (CN 209305333 U).
Regarding claim 6, Ozawa teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Ozawa does not expressly teach that the tightening torque between the movable collar (20; first nut) and the nut (10; second nut) is greater than a tightening torque between the bolt (40) and the movable collar.
Xu teaches a power battery pack installed in a vehicle body using a quick-change installation structure including a combination nut and a bolt (¶ [0019], Ln. 4-7). The installation end of the power battery pack is arranged below the installation mating surface of the vehicle body (¶ [0019], Ln. 5-7), and as shown in Figure 2, includes the bolts in the lateral side of the vehicle frame. Xu teaches that the combination nut (1) is composed of a welding nut (10) and a quick-change nut (20) (¶ [0019], Ln. 7-8). The quick-change nut includes a double-threaded tube with an internal thread matching the bolt formed on the inner wall of the double-threaded tube and an external thread formed on the outer wall of the double-threaded tube (¶ [0019], Ln. 9-11). The welding nut includes an internally threaded tube provided with an internal thread that matches the external thread of the double-threaded tube of the quick-change nut (¶ [0019], Ln. 12-16). The bolt is fastened with the internal thread of the double-threaded tube of the quick-change nut (¶ [0019], Ln. 21-23), and the quick-change nut is screwed together with the welding nut through the external thread of the double-threaded tube of the quick-change nut (¶ [0020], Ln. 2-3). Xu teaches that the tightening torque of the combination of the welding nut and the quick-change nut is greater than the tightening torque of the combination of the bolt and the quick-change nut, further teaching that this allows the quick-change nut to be quickly changed out when the quick-change nut reaches the end of its service life or is damaged (¶ [0020], Ln. 8-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the connection between the movable collar and the nut of Ozawa, such that the tightening torque between the movable collar and the nut is greater than the tightening torque between the bolt and the movable collar, based on the teachings of Xu. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the external thread (21) of the movable collar, capable of threading onto the internal thread (14) of the nut could be adjusted in relationship to the external thread (421) of the bolt, capable of threading onto the internal thread (22) of the movable collar, in order to increase the tightening torque between the movable collar and the nut. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to easily change out the movable collar at the end of its service life or if it becomes damaged.
Response to Arguments
Response-Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant’s arguments, filed December 23, 2025, with respect to amended claim 1 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang (CN 110752453 A) teaches a positioning assembly used in combination with a copper busbar in the installation of battery modules in new energy vehicles (¶ [0005], Ln. 1-3). Wang teaches that the positioning assembly includes a positioning sleeve (1), a threaded sleeve (2), and a nut (3) (¶ [0041], Ln. 1-2; Fig. 3). The threaded sleeve includes an internal thread that engages with a bolt (5) and an external thread that engages with the nut (¶ [0042], Ln. 1-6). The threaded sleeve is inserted into the positioning sleeve, such that the positioning sleeve acts as a flange on the threaded sleeve, extending outward (¶ [0042], Ln. 1-2; Fig. 1-2). A copper busbar (7) is clamped between the positioning sleeve and the nut (¶ [0042], Ln. 6-7).
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 SARAH J JACOBSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at (571) 272-1291.
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.
/SARAH J JACOBSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1785
/MARK RUTHKOSKY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1785