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
The amendments files on January 27, 2026 in response to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on November 4, 2025 have been received and entered. Claim 1 have been amended and claims 16-20 have been added. Claims 1-20 ae pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Claims 1 rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 20170365888 A1) in view of Takato et al. (JP 6053618 B2, see machine translation for citation).
The applicant argues (see Remarks page 2-4) that Kwon does not disclose the claimed front plate portion and rear plate portion. Takato is cited for disclosing these features. Specifically, Takato is cited for disclosing a support structure 10 having side frame 11, 22 and a cross panel (base plate) 20. Flange portions 11e, 12e are considered to correspond to the claimed front plate portion and rear plate portion. These flange portions extend under the cross panel 20. Floor panels 13 rest on the cross panel 20 and connecting portion 11b, 12b having connecting recesses 11d, or connecting projection 12d engage a projection 14a or recess 14b on the floor panels.
Claim 1 now recites that the base plate extends under the front cover portion of the front frame. This feature is seen below and discussed on page 12 of the Specification which discloses "the lower surface of the front cover portion 131 and the lower surface of the support structure 132a may be in contact with and coupled onto the base plate 120 simultaneously." As noted in the Office Action, flange portions of Takato extend under the cross panel 20 to support the cross panel from below. Takato does not disclose the base plate extending under the front cover portion of the front frame so that the combination of Kwon and Takato does not result in the subject matter of claim 1.
In response to applicant arguments, as it was recorded on the Interview Summary mailed on January 12, 2026, the above amendment overcome the applied rejection because Takato's structure employed to modify Kwon's frame (30) serves to support a floor panel by its connecting portions (11b and 12b, therefore the base plate (110) of Kwon will not extend under the front cover portion of the front frame.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 2-4, filed on January 27, 2026, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Because of the direct or indirect dependency of claims 2-15 on claim 1, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of these claims have been withdrawn.
Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nierhoff et al. (DE 102017103654 A1, see machine translation for citation).
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.
Claim 1, 4, 9-12 and 17-19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nierhoff et al. (DE 102017103654 A1, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 1, Nierhoff teaches a battery housing (1) having several module receptacles (2), each of which can accommodate a battery module (3) and having an underride guard (7) (base plate) [0032, 0034 and Fig. 1-2]. From Fig. 1 can be observed that the battery modules (3) are placed over the underride guard (7) (base plate). From Fig. 2, the front-rear and left-right directions can be established in the way shown below (see annotated figure).
PNG
media_image1.png
458
1101
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Nierhoff annotated Figures 1 and 2.
Side walls (4’) are taught to bound the module recordings (2) and are designed as the outer wall of the battery housing (1) [0032, 0033 and Fig. 1]. From the previous description, the side walls (4’) both in the front and rear side of the battery housing (1) can be analogous to the front and rear frames respectively. Both of these front and rear side walls (4’) (front and rear frames) comprise a top portion which is analogous to the claimed front and rear cover portion and a bottom portion analogous to the claimed front and rear plate portions (see annotated Figure 1 above), where both of the described features are integrally formed. From their respective position on the front or rear side, it is reasonably to say that the front side wall (4’) (front frame) bottom portion (front plate portion) “extends rearward from one side of the front cover portion” and that the rear side wall (4’) (rear frame) bottom portion (rear plate portion) “extends forward from one side of the front cover portion”. Also it is correct to say that both the rear side walls (4’) (front and rear frames) top portions (front and rear cover portions) covers a front and a rear of the underride guard (7) (base plate). From the above discussion, because side walls (4’) are placed on the left and right sides of the battery housing (1), the features where “a first side frame covering a left side of the base plate; and a second side frame covering a right side of the base plate” is met. From Figure 1 above can be observed that the underride guard (7) (base plate) “extends under the front cover portion of the front frame”.
Regarding claim 4, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Nierhoff further teaches that the side walls (4’) (front and rear frames) comprise a fastening element (18) protruding from its respective surfaces. In the case of the front side walls (4’) the fastening element (18) (first protrusion) has an upper portion and will protrude from a front surface of the front cover portion. In the case of the rear side wall (4’) the fastening element (18) (second protrusion) has an upper portion and will protrude rearwardly from a rear surface of the rear cover portion.
Regarding claim 9, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Nierhoff further teaches an electric vehicle comprising its taught battery housing (1) [0001]. Given that electric vehicles comprise many electronic devices, this limitation is met.
Regarding claim 10, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Nierhoff further teaches an electric vehicle comprising its taught battery housing (1) [0001].
Regarding claim 11, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, this limitation is met.
Regarding claim 12, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Nierhoff further teaches the employment of supports (10’) which extend downward from the front side wall (4’) (front frame) bottom portion (front plate portion), the support contacting an upper surface of the underride guard (7) (base plate) [0034 and Fig. 1].
Regarding claim 17, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Nierhoff further teaches that its battery housing (1) comprises a cooling device (12) arranged in the cooling area (13) [0038]. From Fig. 1 can be observed that the cooling device (12) is spaced above the underride guard (7) (base plate) and spaced from the rear surface of the front side wall (4’) upper portion (front cover portion) by a distance, which may be selected as the first distance.
Regarding claim 18, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 17. Nierhoff further teaches that in a fourth embodiment its battery housing may comprise a force dissipation element (11) (support) [0046]. From Fig. 5 can be observed that the force dissipation element (11) (support) extends from a bottom surface of the side wall (4’) (front frame) bottom portion (front plate portion) and is spaced from the rear surface of the side wall (4’) (front frame) front cover portion by a distance, which may be selected as the second distance. This “second distance” is smaller than the “first distance” described for claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 17. From Fig. 1 can be observed that the wall (4’) (front frame) bottom portion (front plate portion) contacts part of the cooling area (13) front with its rear edge.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nierhoff et al. (DE 102017103654 A1, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Hilfrich et al. (DE 102017103653 A1, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 2, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “wherein the front frame further comprises at least one reinforcing rib located to face a space between the plurality of battery modules and extending from the front plate portion to the front cover portion, and wherein the rear frame further comprises at least one reinforcing rib located to face a space between the plurality of battery modules and extending from the rear plate portion to the rear cover portion”.
Hilfrich teaches a battery housing (1) for a vehicle battery, in which interior (3) can have one or more module receptacles for receiving battery modules of the vehicle battery [0027 and 0028]. The vehicle battery housing (1) (battery pack) has a second floor structure element (5') (base plate) which serves as underrun protection [0028]. Side walls (2) are arranged on the sides of the interior (3) and laterally delimit the interior. Based on Fig. 5, the side walls (2) can be positioned on both ends of the vehicle battery housing (1) (battery pack), therefore side walls (2) can be interpreted as the front and rear frames. As shown on Fig. 2, the upper portion of the side walls (2) (front and rear frame analogous) can be considered analogous to the front and rear cover portion and the lower portion of the side walls (2) (front and rear frame analogous) can be considered analogous to the front and rear base plate.
On a fourth embodiment the employment of an edge reinforcement element (13) (rib) joined to a side wall (2) (front or rear frame analogous) and the first bottom structure element (5) [0006 and 0037]. From Fig. 7 the feature “located to face a space between the plurality of battery modules" and extending from the front plate portion to the front cover portion” and “extending from the rear plate portion to the rear cover portion” can be considered met because it is extending from a lower to an upper direction. From the above description, edge reinforcement element (13) (rib) is applicable to both the “front and rear fames”. It is taught that the employment of such edge reinforcement element (13) (rib) improve the crash performance of the battery housing (1) [0037].
Hilfrich is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery pack comprising: a plurality of battery modules,
a base plate on which the plurality of battery modules are located, a front and rear frames with its front and rear cover portions and its front and rear base plates respectively.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery housing of Nierhoff to include the features “wherein the front frame further comprises at least one reinforcing rib located to face a space between the plurality of battery modules and extending from the front plate portion to the front cover portion, and wherein the rear frame further comprises at least one reinforcing rib located to face a space between the plurality of battery modules and extending from the rear plate portion to the rear cover portion”, because Hilfrich teaches the referred features an that employing such edge reinforcement element (rib) improve the crash performance of the battery housing.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nierhoff et al. (DE 102017103654 A1, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Ren et al. (CN 110190211 A, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 3, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “wherein a first step structure of which height is reduced step by step in an end direction is formed on opposite ends of the front cover portion in a left-right direction, and wherein a second step structure of which height is reduced step by step in an outer direction is formed on a front end of each of the first side frame and the second side frame so as to be respectively coupled with the first step structures of the front cover portion”.
Ren teaches an electric vehicle battery tray (100) for holding a power battery pack, comprising a plurality of battery cells [0002, 0020 and 0055]. The battery tray (100) comprises side beams (20) (side frames analogous) having a step structure (second step structure analogous) toward the inside of the tray, which extends to the front end of such side beams (20) (side frames analogous). The battery tray (100) further comprises a plurality of partitions (30) having a step structure (first step structure analogous) “which height is reduced step by step in an end direction is formed on opposite ends” of the partitions (30) “in a left-right direction” [0085, Fig. 1A and 2A]. The partitions (30) can be analogous to the front frame as recited on claim 1. From the above descriptions, some skilled person could arrive to the recited features of claim 3 by making minimum design changes. It is taught that the employment of the partitions (30) (front frame analogous) and by default its step features (first step structure analogous) and its connection to the side beams (20) (side frames analogous) with its respective step features (second step structure analogous), reinforce the battery tray (100) [0086].
Ren is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery pack comprising: a plurality of battery modules a base plate on which the plurality of battery modules are located and analogous of the front, rear and side frames.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery housing of Nierhoff to include the features “wherein a first step structure of which height is reduced step by step in an end direction is formed on opposite ends of the front cover portion in a left-right direction, and wherein a second step structure of which height is reduced step by step in an outer direction is formed on a front end of each of the first side frame and the second side frame so as to be respectively coupled with the first step structures of the front cover portion”, because Ren teaches that the employment of such steps features reinforce the battery tray.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nierhoff et al. (DE 102017103654 A1, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Miyasaka et al. (JP H07242125 A, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 5, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “wherein the front cover portion of the front frame comprises a plurality of horizontal ribs each having a plate shape protruding forward from a front surface and extending in a left- right direction and arranged in an up-down direction, and wherein, among the plurality of horizontal ribs, a horizontal rib located on a lower portion is configured to have a relatively smaller forward protruding length than a horizontal rib located on an upper portion”.
Miyasaka teaches a battery frame mounting structure for an electric vehicle, comprising a plurality of batteries (17) [0001 and 0013]. Its battery frame consist of side frames (12), a front frame (13) and a rear frame (14) [0013]. The structure of the front frame (13) comprise an inner peripheral flange (front cover analogous) from which a plurality of fitting grooves (24) (horizontal ribs) having a plate shape are “arranged in an up-down direction, where a horizontal rib located on a lower portion is configured to have a relatively smaller forward protruding length than a horizontal rib located on an upper portion” [0016 and Fig. 2]. The inventors teach that the fitting grooves (24) (horizontal ribs) correspond to side member (3) of floor members (2) [0016 and Fig. 3]. From this description and figure to sections of fitting grooves (24) (horizontal ribs) can be found on this frame assembly and the feature “extending in a left- right direction” can be considered met. It is taught that the employment of such fitting grooves (24) (horizontal ribs) can contribute on the improvement of the hermeticity and binding strength between the floor members and the battery frame [0032-0033].
Miyasaka is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery pack comprising a plurality of battery modules and having side frames, a front frame and a rear frame.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery housing of Nierhoff to include the feature “wherein the front cover portion of the front frame comprises a plurality of horizontal ribs each having a plate shape protruding forward from a front surface and extending in a left- right direction and arranged in an up-down direction, and wherein, among the plurality of horizontal ribs, a horizontal rib located on a lower portion is configured to have a relatively smaller forward protruding length than a horizontal rib located on an upper portion”, because Miyasaka teaches that with the employment of such fitting grooves (horizontal ribs) can contribute on the improvement of the hermeticity and binding strength between the floor members and the battery frame.
Claims 6-8 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nierhoff et al. (DE 102017103654 A1, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Kwon et al. (US 20170365888 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “a battery management system (BMS), wherein the front cover portion or the rear cover portion comprises an accommodation space accommodating at least a part of the BMS”.
Kwon teaches a battery pack (1000) comprising a plurality of battery modules (20) [0047, 0062, Fig. 2 and 5]. The battery modules (20) are mounted on one surface of the plate (110) (base plate) [0062 and Fig. 3]. The battery pack (1000) further comprises a multifunctional second structure (30), which may support and enclose the side surface of the secondary battery modules (20) and the upper and lower sides may be a penetrated frame shape [0048 and 0091]. From the second structure (30) description and from Fig. 2, the features “a front frame comprising a front cover portion covering a front of the base plate and a rear frame having a rear cover portion covering a rear of the base plate” can be considered met. Kwon also teaches side structures (120) provided on both sides of the plate (110) (base plate) in a symmetrical shape to each other [0054 and Fig. 3]. From the general description of the side structures (120) it met the limitation “a first side frame covering a left side of the base plate and a second side frame covering a right side of the base plate”.
Kwon further teaches that its second structure (30) may include the printed circuit board (330) performing the BMS and the sensing module [0090 and 0093]. According to this general description and because the second structure (30) represents the front and rear frame, can be reasonably interpreted that the feature “wherein the front cover portion or the rear cover portion comprises an accommodation space accommodating at least a part of the BMS” is met. By employing this taught feature the battery management system (BMS) may measure and control the power of the secondary battery module (20) and simultaneously be protected [0089 and 0093].
Kwon is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery pack comprising a plurality of battery modules, a base plate on which the plurality of battery modules are located and structures analogous to the claimed front, rear and side frames.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery housing of Nierhoff to include the feature “a battery management system (BMS), wherein the front cover portion or the rear cover portion comprises an accommodation space accommodating at least a part of the BMS”, because Kwon teaches that with this feature the battery management system (BMS) may measure and control the power of the secondary battery module and simultaneously be protected.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Nierhoff further teaches that its battery housing (1) comprises a cooling device (12) arranged in the cooling area (13) [0038]. Alternatively, the cooling area (13) formed can serve for the passage of a cooling fluid [0038].
Nierhoff does not teach where the cooler comprises “at least one injection hole configured to allow the refrigerant to be injected into the refrigerant passage, and at least one discharge hole configured to allow the refrigerant to be discharged from the refrigerant passage” (claim 7) and “wherein the first side frame comprises at least one first connection hole communicatively connected to the at least one injection hole, and a first refrigerant passage communicatively connected to the at least one first connection hole and extending in a front-rear direction along a body of the first side frame, and wherein the second side frame comprises at least one second connection hole communicatively connected to the at least one discharge hole, and a second refrigerant passage communicatively connected to the at least one second connection hole and extending in the front-rear direction along a body of the second side frame” (claim 8).
Kwon further teaches that its side structures (120) (first and second side frames) may be provided with an inflow channel (131a), into which a coolant is introduced, on one side thereof, and an outflow channel (131b), from which the coolant is discharged, on the other side thereof [0056]. The coolant is introduced through the inflow channel (131a) on one side of the side structure (120) and may flow in the cooling channel (132) formed in the plate (110). The cooling channel (132) transfers a cold air, which is obtained by heat exchange between ambient air and the coolant, to a surface on which the secondary battery module (20) is mounted. Therefore, heat generated from the secondary battery module (20) is cooled by coolant flowing along the cooling channel (132) through the heat exchange [0057]. The coolant passing through the cooling channel 132 of the plate 110 may be discharged from the discharge channel (131b) [0058]. All these features are shown on Fig. 3 and 4.
Kwon is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a battery pack comprising a plurality of battery modules, a base plate on which the plurality of battery modules are located and structures analogous to the claimed front, rear and side frames.
If Nierhoff side walls (4’) placed on the left and right sides of the battery housing (1), which are the first and second side frames, are modified to comprise the features described above, the limitations of claims 7 and 8 would be met.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery housing (1) of Nierhoff to include the features ““at least one injection hole configured to allow the refrigerant to be injected into the refrigerant passage, and at least one discharge hole configured to allow the refrigerant to be discharged from the refrigerant passage” (claim 7) and the limitations of claim 8, because Kwon teaches that in this way heat generated from the secondary battery modules is cooled by coolant flowing along the cooling channel through the heat exchange.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Nierhoff and Kwon teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 7. Nierhoff further teaches that its battery housing (1) comprises internal side walls (4) (intermediate frames) which separates two adjacent module mounts (2) from each other [0033]. From the above description the feature “wherein the intermediate frame extends between the plurality of battery modules” (claim 14) is met. Given that the internal side walls (4) (intermediate frames) are in contact with the modified side walls (4’) placed on the left and right sides of the battery housing (1), which are the first and second side frames and coolers, the limitation of claim 13 is met.
Regarding claims 15, Nierhoff and Kwon teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 7. Because the side walls (4’) (front and rear frames) are in contact with side walls (4’) placed on the left and right sides of the battery housing (1), which are the first and second side frames and coolers, the limitation of claim 15 can be reasonably met.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nierhoff et al. (DE 102017103654 A1, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Takato et al. (JP 6053618 B2, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 16, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “wherein the front plate portion is spaced above a bottom edge of the front cover portion”.
Takato teaches a support structure used for mounting relatively heavy objects such
as battery modules and battery packs on a vehicle [0001]. Its support structure (10) is formed by connecting the insides of the left and right side frames (11 and 12) with a floor panel (13) and a cross panel (20) (base plate analogous together) [0013]. From this description the left and right side frames (11 and 12) can be analogous to the front and rear frames. The left and right side frames (11 and 12) (front and rear frame analogous) have a connecting portion (b) and a flange portion (e) [0013]. The flange portions (11b and 12b) are analogous to the “front and rear plate portion” recited for claim 1 and it is integrally formed with its respective the “front and rear cover portion” (see Fig. 2a and 3a). It is taught that these flange portions (front and rear plate portion analogous) support the ends of the cross panel from below, further improving the collapse strength of the side frame and transmitting and supporting the weight of the loaded object to the side frames (front and rear frame analogous) on both sides [0008].
Takato is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a support structure used for mounting relatively heavy objects such as battery modules and battery packs, from where structures analogous to the front and rear frames, and its plate portions can be identified.
If the side walls (4’) located on the front of the battery housing (1) (front frames) of Nierhoff are modified to have a structure similar to the one taught by Takato, the claimed feature would be met.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify side walls (4’) located on the front of the battery housing (1) (front frames) of Nierhoff to include the feature “wherein the front plate portion is spaced above a bottom edge of the front cover portion”, because Takato teaches that that these flange portions (front and rear plate portion analogous) support the ends of the cross panel from below, further improving the collapse strength of the side frame and transmitting and supporting the weight of the loaded object to the side frames (front and rear frame analogous) on both sides.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nierhoff et al. (DE 102017103654 A1, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 12 above, further in view of Northern Weldarc LTD (Why Are I Beams Used in Steel Construction, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 20, Nierhoff teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 12, except “wherein the support has an I-shaped cross section”.
Northern Weldarc teaches that in structural steel constructions, I beams are some of the preferred elements [p. 1; par. 1]. Among other advantages it is taught that they are able to handle a uniform load across the beam and its design makes it capable of bending under high stress instead of buckling, which helps to ensure the structural integrity of the construction [p. 2; par. 2 and p. 3; par. 2].
Northern Weldarc is analogous art to the current invention because despite it does not teaches a battery pack, it teaches support features applicable to a variety of constructions.
If the supports (10’) of Nierhoff are modified to have an I shape, the claimed limitation would be met.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the supports (10’) of Nierhoff to include the feature “wherein the support has an I-shaped cross section”, because Northern Weldarc teaches that they are able to handle a uniform load across the beam and its design makes it capable of bending under high stress instead of buckling, which helps to ensure the structural integrity of the construction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GILBERTO RAMOS RIVERA whose telephone number is (571) 272-2740. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 pm.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/G.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights