Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/042,742

BATTERY CONVEYING SYSTEM, BATTERY SWAPPING STATION, AND BATTERY SWAPPING METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 23, 2023
Examiner
HESS, DOUGLAS A
Art Unit
3651
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Nio Technology (Anhui) Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
1118 granted / 1259 resolved
+36.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
1274
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§102
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
§112
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1259 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains more than the limit of 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Drawings Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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 § 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(s) 1, 2, 4, and 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 111301360 Ye QingFeng et al. (further referred to as CN360). See the attached (5) annotated drawing sheets of CN360 depicting the rejected claim features. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN360 (from above 102 rejection). CN360 teach the claimed features as outlined in the previously mentioned (5) annotated drawings. CN360 fails to teach the comb features of the first and second support members which interact with each other to transfer a battery. Instead, the CN360 first support structure has a wide gap between their two supports in which the second support structure is narrow enough to between for the transfer of a battery. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice as to the specific shape of a particular element and the mere claiming of a known shape (interacting alternating combs) over the shapes taught by CN360 does not provide patentable departure since the device of CN360 performs all of the claimed functional features as the applicants’ device. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 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 DOUGLAS A HESS whose telephone number is (571)272-6915. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8-6. 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, Gene Crawford can be reached at 571-272-6911. 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. /DOUGLAS A HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651 DAH January 21, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 23, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600573
BELT SLIP MEASUREMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600511
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MOVING OBJECTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595131
CHAIN CONSTRUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595134
TOPOGRAPHICAL MONITORING OF CONVEYOR BELT SURFACE AND ROOT CAUSE DETERMINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595136
MEDICATION CONTAINER SINGULATOR SYSTEM AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
89%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+10.7%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1259 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