Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/019,250

ELASTIC MEMBER, LIMITING MEMBER, LIMITING GUIDE DEVICE, AND ELECTRIC AUTOMOBILE COMPRISING SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
May 09, 2023
Examiner
EBNER, KATY MEYER
Art Unit
3613
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Shanghai Dianba New Energy Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
495 granted / 737 resolved
+15.2% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
756
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
48.4%
+8.4% vs TC avg
§102
26.6%
-13.4% vs TC avg
§112
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 737 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . 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 18 – 20 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. In claim 18, the term “the pre-compressed dimension is the compressed dimension” is contradictory. In claim 19, it is unclear if all of the limitations following “and/or” in line 11 are optional. Claim 20 recites: “K-F is greater than 0 and less than 2” but fails to recite the associated units. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 1, 10 – 12, and 14 – 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ishii (US 8,237,403). As for claim 1, Ishii discloses an elastic member (5b, column 7, lines 53 – 57), wherein, the elastic member is fixed an outer side wall of a quick-change battery box (1) of an electric automobile (100), the elastic member is used for elastically limiting the movement of the quick-change battery box in the quick-change support. As for claim 10, Ishii discloses a limiting member (15a), wherein, the limiting member is used to cooperate with the elastic member according to claim 1,the elastic member is disposed to one between the inner side wall of the quick-change support and the outer side wall of the quick-change battery box, and the limiting member is arranged to the other one between the inner side wall of the quick-change support and the outer side wall of the quick- change battery box. As for claim 11, Ishii discloses a positioning surface (15a) and a guide surface (recessed portions above and below the positioning surface labeled 15a), the positioning surface is used to abut against the elastic member, and the guiding surface extends and protrudes outward from the positioning surface. As for claim 12, Ishii discloses at least two guide surfaces surface (recessed portions above and below the positioning surface labeled 15a), two of the guide surfaces are respectively oppositely disposed to the two sides of a positioning surface, and extend along the vertical direction, and a sliding passage is formed between the guide surface and the positioning surface for the elastic member to slide into. As for claims 14 – 17, Ishii discloses a limiting guide device (Fig. 5), quick change support (Fig. 5), quick change battery box (Fig. 5) and electric vehicle (Fig. 2), each comprising one of the elastic members and one of the limiting members set forth above. 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. Claim(s) 2 – 9, 13, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii (US 8,237,403) alone. As for claim 2, Ishii discloses protruded portions (5b), but is silent with respect to the means by which the protruded portions are mounted to the outer side wall. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a mounting portion for the purpose of affixing and removing the terminals 5b to and from the battery box. As for claims 3 and 4, Ishii discloses an upper inclined surface and a lower inclined surface (see Fig. 1 and “tapered guiding portion”, column 6, line 30). While the figures do not clearly show left and right inclined surfaces, such surfaces are suggested by the term “tapered guiding portion”. Even if Ishii did not envision left and right inclined surfaces, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include left and right inclined portions to facilitate lateral alignment and well as vertical alignment of the battery box and quick change support. As for claims 5 and 6, Ishii et al. disclose a pair of protruded portions (5b), with a space therebetween for mounting to the outer side wall. As for claims 8 and 9, it would have been obvious to select a well-known fastener, such as a snap-fit portion of threaded member for fastening the elastic member to the outer side wall as a matter of obvious engineering choice. As for claim 13, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the connecting surface between the guide surfaces and positioning surfaces in a curved shape to maximize contact between the limiting member and elastic member. As for claims 18 and 20, Ishii discloses an elastic member which is compressed when the quick change battery box is loaded into the quick change support and a gap between the outer side wall of the battery box and the inner side wall of the quick change support. It has been held that, where the only difference between the claimed device and the prior art device is a recitation of the dimensions of the claimed device, and the claimed device would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not teach or suggest a distance between guide surfaces as a function of battery swapping stroke or the claimed locking elements arranged with respect to the elastic member. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Katy M Ebner whose telephone number is (571)272-5830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 10 a.m. - 3 p.m. 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, J. Allen Shriver can be reached at (303)297-4337. 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. /Katy M Ebner/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 09, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12570133
BATTERY PACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12539188
STABILIZER FOR MEDICAL CARTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12533936
Resilient Coupling Element for a Motor Vehicle Having At Least One Coupling Element
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12516649
INTERCHANGEABLE INTAKE MANIFOLD ASSEMBLIES WITH INTERCHANGEABLE FLARE HOUSINGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12515508
VEHICLE BODY BASE STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+19.2%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 737 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