Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/960,795

STACKED TYPE POWER SUPPLY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 05, 2022
Examiner
MCNULTY, SEAMUS PATRICK
Art Unit
1752
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Yazaki Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
16 granted / 31 resolved
-13.4% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+41.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
91
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
63.5%
+23.5% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 31 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Response to Amendment Amendments have been entered. Amendments do overcome the 102, but do not overcome the 103 rejection, as set forth in Final office action mailed 10/01/2025. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/24/2025 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20130052515-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Park’, in view of (US-20190237722-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Gao’ Regarding Claim 1, Park teaches a stacked type power supply device (Park, “first housing and the second housing are stacked along an end portion of the second housing.”, see [0009]) comprising: a first battery stack in which a plurality of first battery cells are stacked on each other in a stacking direction (Park, rechargeable batteries, 10, Fig. 3) (see annotated figure below); a first case in which the first battery stack is accommodated (Park, first housing, 21, Fig. 3); a first connector electrically connected to the first battery stack and disposed to be exposed at a first opening provided in the first case (Park, member, 31. Fig. 3) ; a second battery stack in which a plurality of second battery cells are stacked on each other in the stacking direction (Park, Fig. 3, top stack); a second case in which the second battery stack is accommodated (Park, second housing, 22, Fig. 3) ; and a second connector electrically connected to the second battery stack and disposed to be exposed at a second opening provided in the second case (Park, member, 32, Fig. 3) wherein the second case is configured to be stacked on the first case in a vertical direction intersecting the stacking direction (see annotated figure below), the first connector and the second connector are configured to be fitted to each other through the first and second openings, and the first battery stack and the second battery stack are configured to be electrically connected to each other (Park, “first terminal connection hole and be electrically connected to the first connecting member by a nut threaded thereon.”, see [0013])(see also [0014])each of the first case and the second case includes a bottom wall and a top wall the first opening is in the top wall of the first case (see annotated figure below), PNG media_image1.png 768 630 media_image1.png Greyscale Park does not teach the second opening is in the bottom wall of the second case, the first battery stack is fixed to the bottom wall of the first case such that a first space is formed in front of the first battery stack in the stacking direction within the first case, the first connector is located at a upper part of the first space and is exposed by the first opening in the top wall of the first case, the second battery stack is fixed to the bottom wall of the second case such that a second space is formed in front of the second battery stack in the stacking direction within the second case, the second connector is located at a bottom part of the second space and is exposed by the second opening in the bottom wall of the second case, the first connector is connected to a first total positive electrode of the first battery stack and the second connector is connected to a second total negative electrode of the second battery stack, or the first connector is connected to a first total negative electrode of the first battery stack and the second connector is connected to a second total positive electrode of the second battery stack, the plurality of first battery cells are sequentially stacked on each other in a direction away from the first connector, and the plurality of second battery cells are sequentially stacked on each other in a direction away from the second connector. Gao teaches the second opening is in the bottom wall of the second case (Gao, male end, 31, Fig. 6) the first battery stack (Gao, battery pack, 63, Fig. 6) is fixed to the bottom wall of the first case such that a first space is formed in front of the first battery stack in the stacking direction within the first case (see annotated figure below), the first connector is located at a upper part of the first space and is exposed by the first opening in the top wall of the first case (see annotated figure below) PNG media_image2.png 512 670 media_image2.png Greyscale , the second battery stack is fixed to the bottom wall of the second case such that a second space is formed in front of the second battery stack in the stacking direction within the second case, the second connector is located at a bottom part of the second space and is exposed by the second opening in the bottom wall of the second case (Gao, see stack Fig.1) (The examiner notes that the repeat units are identical) , the first connector is connected to a first total positive electrode of the first battery stack and the second connector is connected to a second total negative electrode of the second battery stack, or the first connector is connected to a first total negative electrode of the first battery stack and the second connector is connected to a second total positive electrode of the second battery stack (Gao, “In this case, a positive pigtail and a negative pigtail of the leading wire of the battery module separately lead out to the two different hot swappable terminals.”, see [0035]), the plurality of first battery cells are sequentially stacked on each other in a direction away from the first connector, and the plurality of second battery cells are sequentially stacked on each other in a direction away from the second connector (see annotated figure below). PNG media_image3.png 506 550 media_image3.png Greyscale Gao teaches that this cell arrangement improves safety and improves the stability of connection between the modules (Gao, “This can improve stability of connection between the modules, and usage safety of the entire power cabinet “, see [0039]) Park and Gao are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery cases and arrangements. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the arrangement as taught in Park with the busbar and openings as taught in Gao in order to improve the safety and stability of connections between modules. Regarding Claim 4, Modified Park teaches the first opening (Gao, protection groove, 82, Fig. 4) (Gao, female end, 32, Fig. 4) opposes and is adjacent to the second opening (Gao, protection bracket, 81, Fig. 5) (Gao, male end, 31, Fig. 5) if the first case and the second case are stacked on each other (see Fig. 1). Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over(US-20130052515-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Park’ , in view of (US-20190237722-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Gao’, in view of (US-20150291019-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Hatta’ . Regarding Claim 3, Park teaches first and second openings (see annotated figure above). Modified Park does not teach an annular seal member disposed to surround a communication portion of the first and second openings. Hatta teaches annular seal member disposed to surround a communication portion (Hatta, “annular seal member interposed along the outer periphery of the battery pack lower frame 11 and the battery pack upper cover 12.”, see [0033]). Hatta teaches that the annular seal prevents water from the outside from going to the battery structure (Hatta, “a watertight structure is formed so as to prevent water intrusion from the outside.”, see [0033]). Park and Hatta are analogous as they are of the same field of battery pack. 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 communication portion of the first and second openings with an annular seal to prevent water intrusion from the outside and, in turn, prevent a short circuit. Response to Arguments Arguments filed on 11/24/2025 have been entered. Arguments are fully considered. “Applicant respectfully submits that the alleged openings are at the top of each of the housing 21, 22. Thus, the alleged second opening is not in the bottom wall of the alleged second housing 22. Further, Park’s Fig. 3 clearly shows that there are no openings in the bottom wall of either the housing 21,22.” However, this is not convincing. The examiner notes that if we consider the figure as annotated below, the opening as annotated can be considered to match the claim language (see annotated figure from Park below). However, for the sake of advancing prosecution, the examiner also points to (US-2019023772-A1) hereinafter referred to as Gao, which teaches an opening in the bottom wall (Gao female end, 32, Fig. 4) (Gao, male end, 31, Fig. 5). On pg. 6, the applicant argues: “Park and Hatta fails to disclose at least the feature of ‘the second connector is located at ta bottom part of the second space and is exposed by the second opening in the bottom wall of the second housing.” The applicant contends that Gao teaches this feature most fully and points to the second figure below. PNG media_image4.png 514 517 media_image4.png Greyscale On pg. 8, the applicant argues: “However, the opening is spaced away from the bottom wall by the annular frame, Thus, Gao cannot remedy the deficiency in Park. ” However, this is not convincing. The examiner notes that the instant application additionally has the opening spaced away from the frame as annotated below. Gao still teaches the features as the bottom wall is mapped to the bottom wall of the case as indicated below, which is analogous to the wall as claimed in the instant application. Therefore, the rejection is upheld. PNG media_image5.png 444 943 media_image5.png Greyscale Conclusion 20. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached on (571) 272-8760. 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. /S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752 /OLATUNJI A GODO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 05, 2022
Application Filed
May 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 24, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 24, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12586824
IMIDAZOLIDINYLIDE COMPOUND FOR USE AS A SHUT-DOWN ADDITIVE FOR LITHIUM ION BATTERIES AND ELECTROLYTE AND BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12560517
DEVICE FOR AND METHOD OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT ELECTRODE TAB IS BENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12531239
POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY, AND NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12512560
Inorganic Coating Layer Crosslinked Separator
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12494504
ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY AND MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+41.9%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 31 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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