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
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 11/10/2025.
Claims 1, 3-9, 12 have been amended; support for claim 1 is found figures
Claim 15 has been cancelled.
Claims 16-21 have been added support can be found in figures
Claims 1-14 and 16-21 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The reference US 201032096 has not been considered because it is an invalid number.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Konishi et al (WO 2013/027599 A1, previously provided machine translation) in view of Rosskamp et al. (US 2013/0164600).
As to claim 1, Konishi et al. disclose backpack power supply assembly [0034], which is configured to supply electric energy to an electric tool [0038], comprising;
a housing (10-body and 15 body case);
a backpack apparatus configured for an operator to wear and connected to the housing (43 back pack strap [0034-35]);
and
a plurality of battery packs removably connected to or disconnected from the housing through plugging or unplugging (11-14, 4 batteries [0019]), wherein:
the plurality of battery packs comprises at least a first battery pack, a second battery pack, and a third battery pack, (4 battery pack are in vertical direction) .
Konishi et al. discloses the four battery packs in a single vertical orientation but not in an orientation of 4 in a 2 by 2 orientation as is instantly claimed by the following limitations:
projections of the first battery pack in and the second battery pack on a first plane perpendicular to a plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack at least partially overlap, and
projections of the first battery pack and the third battery pack on a second plane perpendicular to a longitudinal extending direction of the housing at least partially overlap.
However , the two column design would be within the one of ordinary skill because it has been held that if a claimed invention reads on the prior art except with regard to the position of a component of a device, the invention is unpatentable if switching the position of the component would have not modified the operation of the device. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In this case, having a two column design would allow for a shorter back pack and wider back pack.
As shown in Rosskamp et al. the battery cell packs 6 are oriented in two column side by side in a backpack type battery pack [0032].
As to claim 2, Konishi et al. discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least two of the plurality of battery packs have a same plugging/unplugging direction (in a left to right direction-[0019], therefore 1 column of batteries would be in the same direction).
As to claim 3. Modified Konishi et al. discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least two of the plurality of battery packs have a same plugging direction (in a left to right direction-[0019], therefore 1 column of batteries would be in the same direction).
As to claims 5 and 6, Modified Konishi et al. discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, wherein on the first plane perpendicular to the plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack, a ratio of an overlapping region of a projection of the first battery pack and a projection of the second battery pack to a projection region of the first battery pack or the second battery pack is greater than or equal to 50%, and wherein on the second plane perpendicular to the longitudinal extending direction of the housing, a ratio of an overlapping region of a projection of the first battery pack and a projection of the third battery pack to a projection region of the first battery pack or the third battery pack is greater than or equal to 50% (as shown in figure 10, the battery cell packs overlap in the vertical direction and in the horizontal direction).
PNG
media_image1.png
557
602
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 7, Modified Konishi et al. discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack is perpendicular to the longitudinal extending direction of the housing (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
609
459
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As to claim 8, Modified Konishi disclose the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack is parallel to the longitudinal extending direction of the housing. However, reorienting the plugging direction in the vertical direction is within the skill of art. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. (see MPEP § 2144.04).
As to claim 9, Modified Konishi et al. discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, and Konishi et al. further comprising: a flippable cover (2 - lid) configured on the housing, wherein a battery cavity configured to accommodate the plurality of battery packs is formed by the housing and the flippable cover, and the flippable cover moves relative to the housing to open or close the battery cavity [0014] (figure 2).
As to claim 10, Modified Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 9, wherein a side of the flippable cover is pivotally connected to the housing, and the flippable cover rotates relative to the housing to open or close the battery cavity [0014] (figure 2).
As to claim 11, Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 10 with a flippable cover but does not discloses the flippable cover comprises at least a first flippable cover and a second flippable cover, and the first flippable cover and the second flippable cover have a same rotation axis. However it would be within one of ordinary skill in the art to have a second flippable lid because it has been held that the ”mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art”. In this case having a second cover can allow for half the batteries to be exposed at a time. (see MPEP § 2144.04).
As to claim 13, Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 10, wherein a rotation axis of the flippable cover is perpendicular to a longitudinal extension axis of the housing (figure 2, [0014]).
As to claim 14, Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 10, wherein a rotation angle of the flippable cover is slightly over 90 degrees relative to the housing (figure 2) but does not disclose a range of 35 degrees to 90 degrees. However, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985)
As to claim 17, Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, wherein the housing includes a back surface that rests against the operator's back, and the plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack is parallel to the back surface. (figure 1 and 2, figures 1 and 2 show the back pack belt 43, the plugging direction is left or right in figure 1) thus is parallel to the back surface).
As to claim 18, Modified Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, wherein a length direction of the first battery pack or the second battery pack is perpendicular to the longitudinal extending direction of the housing, and a width direction of the first battery pack or the second battery pack is parallel to the longitudinal extending direction of the housing (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
561
865
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As to claim 19, Modified Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, wherein the plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack is perpendicular to the longitudinal extending direction of the housing.
PNG
media_image4.png
609
459
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As to claim 20 Konishi discloses a backpack power supply assembly (1) [0034], which is configured to supply electric energy to an electric tool [0038], comprising:
a housing (10 body 15 body case);
a backpack apparatus configured for an operator to wear and connected to the housing; and (43. Back pack strap and [0034-0035])
a plurality of battery packs removably connected to or disconnected from the housing through plugging or unplugging (11-14, 4 batteries [0019]), wherein:
the plurality of battery packs comprises at least a first battery pack, a second battery pack, a third battery pack and a fourth battery pack (4 battery pack are in vertical direction),
Konishi et al. discloses the four battery packs in a single vertical orientation but not in an orientation of 4 in a 2 by 2 orientation as is instantly claimed by the following limitations:
the first battery pack and the third battery pack are arranged in a column along a longitudinal direction of the housing, and projections of the first battery pack and the second battery pack on a plane perpendicular to a plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack at least partially overlap, and
the second battery pack and the fourth battery pack are arranged in the column along the longitudinal direction of the housing, and projections of the third battery pack and the fourth battery pack on the plane perpendicular to the plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack at least partially overlap.
However , the two column design would be within the one of ordinary skill because it has been held that if a claimed invention reads on the prior art except with regard to the position of a component of a device, the invention is unpatentable if switching the position of the component would have not modified the operation of the device. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In this case, having a two column design would allow for a shorter back pack.
As shown in Rosskamp et al. the battery cell packs 6 are oriented in two column side by side in a backpack type battery pack [0032].
Claim(s) 4 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Konishi et al (WO 2013/027599 A1, machine translation) in view of Rosskamp et al. (US 2013/0164600) as applied to claim 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Furui et al. (US 2013/027772 A1).
As to claim 4, Modified Konishi et al. discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein at least two of the plurality of battery packs have opposite plugging directions.
Furui et al. discloses a battery back and teaches two configurations for the plugging directions, Figure 1 discloses all in the same direction and figure 9 discloses in opposite directions.
However it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP2143B). In this case it would be obvious to have one column of batteries in one direction and the second column of batteries in a second direction because this plugging of the batteries would not interfere with each other.
As to claim 12, Modified Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 11, wherein which has a first battery cavity configured to accommodate the plurality of battery packs is formed by the housing and the first flippable cover, and a second battery cavity configured to accommodate the plurality of battery packs is formed by the housing and the second flippable cover but does not disclose
a battery pack accommodated in the first battery cavity and a battery pack accommodated in the second battery cavity have opposite plugging directions.
Furui et al. discloses a battery back and teaches two configurations for the plugging directions, Figure 1 discloses all in the same direction and figure 9 discloses in opposite directions.
However it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP2143B). In this case it would be obvious to have one column of batteries in one direction and the second column of batteries in a second direction because this plugging of the batteries would not interfere with each other.
As to claim 16, Modified Konishi discloses the backpack power supply assembly according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the first battery pack and the second battery pack have a different plugging/unplugging direction.
Furui et al. discloses a battery back and teaches two configurations for the plugging directions, Figure 1 discloses all in the same direction and figure 9 discloses in opposite directions.
However it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP2143B). In this case it would be obvious to have one column of batteries in one direction and the second column of batteries in a second direction because this plugging of the batteries would not interfere with each other.
As to claim 21, Konishi discloses a backpack power supply assembly, which is configured to supply electric energy to an electric tool [0034, 0038], comprising:
a housing (10, 15);
a backpack apparatus configured for an operator to wear and connected to the housing; (43, back pack strap [0034-0035]) and
a plurality of battery packs removably connected to or disconnected from the housing through plugging or unplugging, (11-14, 4 batteries [0019]), wherein:
the plurality of battery packs comprises at least a first battery pack and a second battery pack, (11-14, 4 batteries [0019]),
Konishi et al. discloses the four battery packs in a single vertical orientation but not in an orientation of 4 in a 2 by 2 orientation as is instantly claimed by the following limitations:
projections of the first battery pack and the second battery pack on a first plane perpendicular to a plugging/unplugging direction of the first battery pack at least partially overlap, and
projections of the first battery pack and the second battery pack on a second plane perpendicular to a longitudinal extending direction of the housing are arranged at intervals.
However , the two column design would be within the one of ordinary skill because it has been held that if a claimed invention reads on the prior art except with regard to the position of a component of a device, the invention is unpatentable if switching the position of the component would have not modified the operation of the device. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In this case, having a two column design would allow for a shorter back pack.
As shown in Rosskamp et al. the battery cell packs 6 are oriented in two column side by side in a backpack type battery pack [0032].
However modified Konishi does not disclose intervals.
Furui et al. discloses a battery back and depicts having intervals (figure 9) because this would allow plugging the batteries in on different sides and since there are only two batter packs the off set would allow for air circulation in the housing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because in light of the amendment a the new ground of rejection is given in view of Rosskamp.
In light of the amendment to claims 3 and 4, the 112b rejection is withdrawn.
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 MARIA J LAIOS whose telephone number is (571)272-9808. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-6pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/Maria Laios/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727