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 § 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okiga (US 20210175555 A1).
As to claim 1, Okiga discloses:
An electric connection box 22 (Fig. 1-6) with a housing where an electronic component 20 (battery cells; par. 0029) is mounted, wherein
a plurality of adhering portions 32a, 32b adhering (via 50; par. 0031) to an object 12 are provided on an outside surface of the housing, and
each of the plurality of the adhering portions has a reduction portion reduced in area toward at least one end portion of the housing (see annotated Fig. 5 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
1339
2189
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okiga (US 20210175555 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hoagland (US 6367646 B1).
As to claim 2, Okiga discloses: a reduced end (outside end; reduced at least with respect to the larger cross-sectional area of the adhering portion; see annotated Fig. 5 above) of each reduction portion is provided so as to face each end portion of the housing.
Examiner Note: the claims do not require the reduction portion/reduced end to be tapered/angled or reduced with respect to an opposite end of the reduction portion. Further, the boundaries of the reduction portion are not defined and thus may be arbitrarily determined.
Okiga does not explicitly disclose:
wherein at least the one end portion of the housing is provided with a handle, and a reduced end of the reduction portion is provided so as to face the handle.
However, Hoagland discloses:
wherein at least the one end portion (both ends, Fig. 1-5) of the housing is provided with a handle 22;
in order to grip, lift, and manipulate the battery box (col. 3, lines 64-66).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Okiga as suggested by Hoagland, e.g., providing:
wherein at least the one end portion of the housing is provided with a handle, and a reduced end of the reduction portion is provided so as to face the handle;
in order to grip, lift, and manipulate the electric connection box.
Additionally, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined/modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination/modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
As to claim 3, the obvious modification of Okiga in view of Hoagland above does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the housing includes a box-shaped member having the outside surface as a bottom surface and having an open surface facing the bottom surface, and the handle is provided on the box-shaped member.
However, Hoagland clearly discloses these features in Fig. 1-8;
in order to provide a box-shaped battery box (see col 4, lines 21-38, Title, as opposed to tray shaped junction boxes 22 in Okiga).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Okiga as suggested by Hoagland, e.g., providing:
wherein the housing includes a box-shaped member having the outside surface as a bottom surface and having an open surface facing the bottom surface, and the handle is provided on the box-shaped member;
in order to provide box-shaped battery boxes/junction boxes;
and since there is no evidence that the change in shape is significant.
A change in shape, absent persuasive evidence that the change in shape is significant, is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Additionally, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined/modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination/modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
As to claim 4, the obvious modification of Okiga in view of Hoagland above discloses:
wherein the box-shaped member has a recess (e.g., internal recess/chamber forming the box-shape; Fig. 5 of Hoagland) in a long-side middle portion (extends through the middle of box, including gin the long-side direction), and a side wall of the recess is provided with a plurality of ribs 28 (for holding partitions between batteries; see col 4, lines 21-38).
As to claim 5, the obvious modification of Okiga in view of Hoagland above
wherein the handle is provided on each of both end portions of the box-shaped member (as in Fig. 2 of Hoagland), the adhering portion is provided on each of both end portions of the bottom surface (as in Fig. 5 of Okiga), and a reduced end of each adhering portion faces a nearest handle (as the reduced ends/adhering portions face opposite ends in Fig. 5 of Okiga).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has suggested that Okiga does not disclose a second reduction portion, but has not identified how. In response, Examiner has clarified the interpretation of the second reduction portion, and pointed out that there is no definition of the “reduction portion” or its boundaries, beyond “reduced in area toward at least one end portion of the housing”.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB R CRUM whose telephone number is (571)270-7665. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 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, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached at (571) 272-3740. 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.
/JACOB R CRUM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835
Prosecution Insights