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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/03/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted 11/20/2023 and 12/17/2025 were received and have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first and second output end protection supports being positioned on the main frame must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Currently, Fig. 1 shows the first and second output end protection supports positioned adjacent to the main frame and on the bottom plate. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-13 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “directly connected to” in claim 1 is used by the claim to mean “positioned adjacent to,” while the accepted meaning is “in direct contact.” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. Claim 1 further limits the first and second output end protection supports to be movable relative to each other, which would make the first and second output end protection supports not always directly connected to each other. For purpose of examination, so long as the prior art shows the first and second output end protection supports are positioned adjacent to each other, it will read on claim 1.
Similarly, The term “disposed on the main frame” in claim 7 is used by the claim to mean “positioned adjacent to,” while the accepted meaning is “disposed on top of.” Claim 7 limits the first and second output end protection supports to be positioned on the main frame of the box body. However, Fig. 1, which is the only depiction of the frame, shows the first and second output end protection supports (within circle A) to align with the first and second battery assemblies (40 and 50), which are positioned within the frame, not on the frame. For purpose of examination, so long as the first and second output protection supports are positioned adjacent to the main frame, it will read on claim 7.
Claims 2-6 and 8-13 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 7, from which claim 8 depends, limits the first and second output protection supports to be positioned on the main frame. However, claim 8 then limits the first and second output protection supports to be arranged on a partition beam, and the partition beam is arranged inside the main frame. As the partition beam is positioned within the frame and is a separate component from the frame, it is not clear to the examiner how the first and second output protection supports can be situated on both. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Similarly, claim 12 is rejected, as it limits the first and second output end protection supports to have a same structure. However, claim 11, which claim 12 depends upon, limits two different structures for the first and second output end protection supports, one with a slot and the other with a slide block. Therefore, claim 12 cannot limit claim 11 further that the two output end protection supports to have a same structure.
Claim 9 is rejected due to its dependency on claim 8.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chi et al. (U.S. 20220285755, presented in IDS submitted 12/17/2025 as CN 114041230).
With respect to claim 1, Chi discloses a battery pack (10) (Fig. 2), comprising:
a box body (200 – pack case) (Fig. 3);
a first output end protection support (124 – front cover; left), wherein the first output end protection support (124) is arranged on the box body (200) (Fig. 6); and
a second output end protection support (124; right), wherein the second output end protection support (124 right) is arranged on the box body (200) (Fig. 6), the first output end protection support (124 left) is directly connected to the second output end protection support (124 right), and the first output end protection support (124 left) and the second output end protection support (124 right) are movably arranged relative to each other (Fig. 6; [0024]).
With respect to claim 2, Chi discloses a first battery assembly (100 – battery module; left) (Fig. 3), wherein the first battery assembly comprises a first output pole (150a – electrode terminals) (Fig. 10), and the first output pole (150a) is connected to the first output end protection support (124 left) (Fig. 6 and 10); and
a second battery assembly (100 right) (Fig. 3), wherein the second battery assembly (100 right) comprises a second output pole (150b) (Fig. 10), and the second output pole (150b) is connected to the second output end protection support (124 right) (Fig. 6 and 10).
With respect to claim 3, Chi discloses a conductive member (221 – terminal connection unit) (Fig. 10), wherein the conductive member (221) is connected to the first output pole (150a) and the second output pole (150b) (Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 4, Chi discloses the first output end protection support (124 left) is provided with a first connection portion (perforated hole; not shown) (Fig. 6, [0058]), and the second output end protection support (124 right) is provided with a second connection portion (perforated hole; not shown) (Fig. 6; [0058]), and the battery pack further comprising:
a first fastener (201 – mounting bolt; left), wherein the first fastener (201 left) passes through the conductive member (221) and the first output pole (150a) (Fig. 10), and is connected to the first connection portion (perforated hole) (Fig. 6 and 10; [0058]); and
a second fastener (201 – mounting bolt; right), wherein the second fastener (201 right) passes through the conductive member (221) and the second output pole (150b) (Fig. 10), and is connected to the second connection portion (perforated hole) (Fig. 6 and 10; [0058]).
With respect to claim 5, Chi discloses the first connection portion (perforated hole) is a first threaded hole (hence threads on bolts 201) (Fig. 10; [0058]), the second connection portion (perforated hole)is a second threaded hole (hence threads on bolts 201) (Fig. 10; [0058]), the first fastener (201) is a first bolt (Fig. 10), and the second fastener (201) is a second bolt (Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 6, Chi discloses the first output end protection support (124 left) and the second output end protection support (124 right) are movably arranged relative to each other in a set direction on a plane parallel to a bottom plate (210 – pack tray) of the box body (200) (Fig. 6), and the set direction is perpendicular to an arrangement direction of the first output end protection support (124 left) and the second output end protection support (124 right) (Fig. 6).
With respect to claim 7, Chi discloses a bottom plate (210) (Fig. 6); and
a main frame (220 – pack cover), wherein the main frame (220) is disposed on the bottom plate (210) to form a battery accommodating space (Fig. 3);
wherein the first output end protection support (124 left) and the second output end protection support (124 right) are both disposed along the main frame (220) (Fig. 6), and the first output end protection support (124 left) and the second output end protection support (124 right) are both movably arranged along the main frame (Fig. 6; [0024]).
With respect to claim 10, Chi discloses the first output end protection support (124 left) is slidable connected to the second output end protection support (124 right) (via 221) (Fig. 10).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chi et al. as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Zhao (CN 215342825, referenced in IDS submitted 11/20/2023, applicant provided translation used for reference).
With respect to claim 8, Chi discloses a frame (220), wherein the frame (220) is arranged around the bottom plate (210) to form the battery accommodating space (Fig. 3), but does not disclose the presence of a partition beam.
Zhao discloses a box body (10) comprising a frame (11) and a bottom plate which forms an accommodating (111) space for a battery and teaches a partition beam (121) arranged in the frame (11) to partition the accommodating space (111); wherein the a first output end protection support (222 left) positioned on the partition beam (121) and a second output end protection support (22 right) is also positioned on the partition beam 12 (Fig. 6), one end of each of the first and second output end protections supports (22 left and right) are positioned in a cavity (122) of the support beam (121) (Fig. 3) such that the first and second output supports (22 left and right) are limited to move in a direction perpendicular to an upper surface of the partition beam (121) (Fig. 3). Zhao further teaches that this arrangement allows for weight reduction while ensuring the frame is not damaged ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art when the application was effectively filed to position the output end protection supports disclosed by Chi on a support beam with a cavity as taught by Zhao in order to allow for eight reduction while ensuring the frame is not damaged.
With respect to claim 9, modified Chi discloses first and second output end protection supports positioned on a partition beam (see above rejection of claim 8), but does not disclose the first and second output end protection supports are located in an recessed portion.
Zhao discloses a partition beam supporting first and second output end protection supports (see above rejection of claim 8) and teaches the first and second output end protection supports (22 left and right) are positioned in a recessed portion (labeled) of the partition beam (Fig. 3 – above). Zhao further teaches this allows for the movement limitation in three directions ([0036]).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Recess)]
PNG
media_image1.png
328
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was effectively filed to ensure the first and second output end protection supports disclosed by modified Chi were in a recess as taught by Zhao in order to allow or the movement limitation in three directions.
Claim(s) 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chi et al. as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Volinski et al. (U.S. 20180337384, referenced in IDS submitted 11/20/2023).
With respect to claim 11, Chi discloses a first and second output end protections (124 left and right) (Fig. 6), but does not disclose the first output end protection support is provided with a slot, and the other is provided with a slide block, with which the two output end protection supports are connected.
Volinski discloses a manner with which to connect adjacent components in a battery module (Fig. 2) and teaches a first protection support (30a – cell assembly) provided with a slot (564)) and a second protection support (30 – cell assembly) with a slide block (46 – rail) (Fig. 6). Volinski further teaches that this allows the first and second protection supports to slide axially adjacent to connect (Fig. 6; [0049]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was effectively filed to use the connection method taught by Volinski to the first and second output end protection supports disclosed by Chi in order to allow for the supports to slide axially adjacent to connect.
With respect to claim 12, Chi discloses the first output end protection support (124 left) and the second output end protection support (124 right) have a same structure (Fig. 6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN E BERRESFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-0641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (572)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.
/J.E.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727