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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-12 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/25/2025.
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.
Claim 3 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. Claim 3 recites the connection prevention position is a position facing the first connector however it is unclear how a position can face an area. In particular, the connection prevention position requires the location of multiple components of the fixing tool including the projection, the connection prevention portion and the operation portion. For purposes of examination any part of the fixing tool facing the first connector when in the connection prevention position will be considered to read on the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Onishi et. al. (US20200295327A1).
Regarding claim 1, Onishi discloses a battery housing structure, comprising:
a housing portion configured to house a battery unit(i.e. first retainer 210, ¶[0173], Fig, 21) including a first connector(i.e. connection terminals 13, Fig. 6, ¶[0173]);
a second connector configured to be connected to the first connector(i.e. external terminals 110, Fig. 8); and
a fixing tool (i.e. lever 230) configured to fix the battery unit to the housing portion and including a connection prevention portion (i.e. first protrusion 232) configured to prevent connection between the first connector and the second connector when located at a connection prevention position( see Fig. 22 in the disconnected position), wherein
the battery unit includes a concave portion facing an inner wall of the housing portion(Fig. 22, see load receiving surfaces 303a as part of concave portion), wherein
the fixing tool is a swing lever including a projection at one end(i.e. second projection 233) and the connection prevention portion at the other end, and configured to swing about a shaft (fulcrum P, Fig. 22 and Fig. 27) provided between the one end and the other end (¶[0166]), wherein
the swing lever is configured to swing between: a first position where the projection is engaged with the concave portion and the battery unit is fixed to the housing portion(Fig. 20, see lever nearly full engaged with arrow pointing to final position); and a second position where the projection is not engaged with the concave portion and the connection prevention portion is located at the connection prevention position, in accordance with an amount of insertion of the battery unit into the housing portion(Fig. 22).
Regarding claim 3, Onishi discloses a battery housing structure according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the connection prevention position is a position facing the first connector(Fig. 22 where the lever 230 is preventing connection and first protrusion 232 is facing the first connection).
Regarding claim 8, Onishi discloses a battery housing structure according to claim 1, and further discloses further comprising:
a guide mechanism including:
a guided portion provided on a surface including the concave portion of the battery unit (Fig. 19, see face of battery device 203); and
a guiding portion (i.e. connection terminal holder 211 Fig. 20) provided on the inner wall of the housing portion to guide the guided portion in an insertion direction of the battery unit into the housing portion(see battery unit in Fig. 20 and 21 guided between by connection terminal holder), wherein
the guide mechanism includes a restricting portion(arms 31 of connection terminal holder see also Fig. 3 with arms labeled where the motion is restricted side to side as the battery moves down into the locked position) configured to restrict misalignment of the battery unit with respect to the housing portion in a direction orthogonal to a swing surface of the swing lever.
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.
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onishi et. al. (US20200295327A1) as applied to claim1 above, and further in view of Jakob (US20240128576A1, effective filing date 03/03/2021).
Regarding claim 4, Onishi discloses a battery housing structure according to claim 1, but does not disclose the swing lever includes a first swing lever and a second swing lever.
Jakob, related to rechargeable batteries, teaches a two part swing lever with a first swing lever (i.e. third lever element 21, Fig. 6) with a projection and one end(i.e. first end 29a) and a first action portion (i.e. second end 29b) configured to swing about a first shaft(i.e. third rotary joint 24).
Jakob further discloses a second swing lever(i.e. second lever element 20) including a second action portion(i.e. second end 20b) interlocked with the first action portion at the shaft (i.e. fourth rotary joint 25) and including a projection(second hook 27a) which moves into a concave portion (recess 10a).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized using the swing lever design of Jakob would have made it easier to handle the locking apparatus for releasably connecting the rechargeable battery to the power tool (¶[0012]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to have used the swing lever design on Jakob in the apparatus of Onishi to more easily handle the locking apparatus potion.
Regarding claim 6, Onishi discloses a battery housing structure according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the swing lever includes an operation portion for releasing engagement between the projection and the concave portion by a lever operation, wherein the projection engaged with the concave portion is disengaged from the concave portion when the operation portion approaches a surface on which the concave portion of the battery unit housed in the housing portion is formed.
Jakob discloses a swing lever(including a third lever element 21 and second lever element 20) including a projection(second hook 27a) which moves into a concave portion (recess 10a) when both the third lever element 21 and second lever element 20 approach the rechargeable battery housing 14 (Fig. 6).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized using the swing lever and hook design of Jakob would have made it easier to handle the locking apparatus for releasably connecting the rechargeable battery to the power tool (¶[0012]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to have used the swing lever design on Jakob in the apparatus of Onishi to more easily handle the locking apparatus potion.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onishi et. al. (US20200295327A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Honda et. al. (US20130004818A1).
Regarding claim 5, Onishi discloses a battery housing structure according to claim 1, but does not disclose a first urging portion configured to cause the projection to protrude from the inner wall toward the housing portion to press the projection against the concave portion.
Honda, related to battery holders, teaches an operating member aka lever 70, which can be placed in two positions to secure a battery (¶0005-0006). The lever contains a biasing member 52 which may comprise a compression spring 54 which enacts a urging force on the battery holder and operating member to hold the positions including the second engaged position(¶[0035]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized adding the biasing member as an urging portion to the swing lever of Onishi would limit rotation movement of the operating member/swing lever leading to a more secure position (¶[0040]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to have added the biasing member of Honda to the swing lever of Onishi to limit rotation movement.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onishi et. al. (US20200295327A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Buchholz et. al. (6357533).
Regarding claim 7, Onishi discloses a battery housing structure according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the housing portion includes a second urging portion configured to urge the battery unit housed in the housing portion toward an inlet side of the housing portion with an urging force larger than a weight of the battery unit.
Buchholz, related to batteries, teaches a compression spring 38 which acts with a restoring force greater than the weight of the battery pack to reliably displace the battery for removal (col. 5, lines 36-43, Fig. 11).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized adding the spring as an urging portion to the housing of Onishi would reliably displace the battery as needed.
Therefore it would have been obvious to have added the spring of Buchholz to the housing of Onishi to reliably displace the battery as needed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 9 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art including the cited reference Onishi teaches some of the limitations however no reason could be seen to modify Onishi to the structure required in claim 2. In particular the structure of the connector holding portion with a notch to engage with the connection prevention portion distinguishes the invention from the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREN J. ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (703)756-1243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am-6 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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/K.J.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 13 January 2026