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 .
Remarks
Claims 1-20 are as previously presented. Claims 1-20 are currently examined.
Status of Objections and Rejections
The rejections as set forth within the previous office action is being maintained.
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 nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-8, 10-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podolefsky (US 2020/0266498).
As to claim 1, Podolefsky a battery pack (figures 2 and 3, [0035], discussed throughout) comprising: an outer housing including an open top (figures 2 and 3 #54, [0029], not including the wall, discussed throughout); an outer housing lid applicable to the open top to define a closed outer hold within the outer housing (figure 2 and 3 #66, [0037], discussed throughout); a power port carried on the outer housing (figures 2 and 3 #82, [0031]-[0082], discussed throughout); an inner housing within the outer hold of the outer housing (figure 3 #74, #72 #70, #110 and etcetera, it is the inside portion within the outer wall that surround the batteries, or figure 4, discussed throughout), the inner housing comprising an inner case and an inner housing lid applicable to the basin to define a closed inner hold within the inner housing (for figure 3, this would be #86 and for figure 4, there would be an opening to put the batteries within, discussed throughout); and a plurality of battery cells disposed entirely within the inner hold (figure 3 #51 are within the require location in both cases, discussed throughout), wherein the battery cells are electrically coupled to the power port to provide power to the power port (figures 2 and 3, discussed throughout).
Podolefsky is silent to wherein the inner case is a basin. However, it would have been obvious to have the define inner case options being a basin as a mere change in shape or a mere making integral baring any criticality or unexpected results (see MPEP 2144.04).
As to claim 2, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising a battery management system for controlling and reporting operating information about the battery cells (figures 1 and 2 and 3 #250 and #16, discussed throughout).
As to claim 3, Podolefsky is silent to wherein, the battery management system (BMS) is disposed within the inner housing. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to have the BMS within the inner house as a mere rearrangement of parts baring any criticality or unexpected results (see MPEP 2144.04).
As to claim 4, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising a control board for controlling operation of the battery pack, wherein: the control board is coupled to the battery management system to send and receive data therefrom; and the battery management system is coupled to an input-output port in the outer housing and is coupled to the plurality of battery cells (figures 1 and 2 and 3 #250 and #16, discussed throughout, the control board can be any of the discussed circuits, see [0054]-[0055] and throughout).
As to claim 6, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising a kit of at least first and second mounting brackets (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout), wherein each of the first and second mounting brackets has a first leaf having a first dimension and a second leaf having a second dimension (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout), the first and second leaves set at a right angle with respect to each other (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout); wherein on the second mounting bracket, the first and second dimensions are not equal (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout). Podolefsky is silent to wherein on the first mounting bracket the first and second dimensions are equal. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to change the dimension of the brackets as a mere change is shape or size baring any criticality or unexpected results.
As to claim 7, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising: a tray within the inner hold; and the plurality of battery cells are carried and secured in the tray (figures 2-4, wherein the wall next to the outer walls make up the inner case than figure 4 can be considered the tray, discussed throughout).
As to claim 8, Podolefsky a battery pack (figures 2 and 3, [0035], discussed throughout) comprising: an outer housing (figures 2 and 3 #54, [0029], not including the wall, discussed throughout), and an outer housing lid applicable to the outer housing to define a closed outer hold within the outer housing (figure 2 and 3 #66, [0037], discussed throughout); a power port carried on the outer housing (figures 2 and 3 #82, [0031]-[0032], discussed throughout); an inner housing within the outer hold of the outer housing (figure 3 #74, #72 #70, #110 and etcetera, it is the inside portion within the outer wall that surround the batteries, or figure 4, discussed throughout), the inner housing comprising a inner case and an inner housing lid applicable to the basin to define a closed inner hold within the inner housing (for figure 3, this would be #86 and for figure 4, there would be an opening to put the batteries within, discussed throughout); battery cells disposed within the inner hold (figure 3 #51 are within the require location in both cases, discussed throughout), wherein the battery cells are electrically coupled to the power port to provide power to the power port (figures 2 and 3, discussed throughout); and a battery management system for controlling and reporting operating information about the battery cells (figures 1 and 2 and 3 #250 and #16, discussed throughout, the control board can be any of the discussed circuits, see [0054]-[0055] and throughout).
Podolefsky is silent to wherein the inner case is a basin. However, it would have been obvious to have the define inner case options being a basin as a mere change in shape or a mere making integral baring any criticality or unexpected results (see MPEP 2144.04).
As to claim 10, Podolefsky is silent to wherein, the battery management system (BMS) is disposed within the inner housing. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to have the BMS within the inner house as a mere rearrangement of parts baring any criticality or unexpected results (see MPEP 2144.04).
As to claim 11, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising a kit of at least first and second mounting brackets (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout), wherein each of the first and second mounting brackets has a first leaf having a first dimension and a second leaf having a second dimension (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout), the first and second leaves set at a right angle with respect to each other (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout); wherein on the second mounting bracket, the first and second dimensions are not equal (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout). Podolefsky is silent to wherein on the first mounting bracket the first and second dimensions are equal. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to change the dimension of the brackets as a mere change is shape or size baring any criticality or unexpected results.
As to claim 12, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising: a tray within the inner hold; and the battery cells are carried and secured in the tray (figures 2-4, wherein the wall next to the outer walls make up the inner case than figure 4 can be considered the tray, discussed throughout).
As to claim 13, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising a control board for controlling operation of the battery pack, wherein: the control board is coupled to the battery management system to send and receive data therefrom; and the battery management system is coupled to an input-output port in the outer housing and is coupled to the battery cells (figures 1 and 2 and 3 #250 and #16, discussed throughout, the control board can be any of the discussed circuits, see [0054]-[0055] and throughout).
As to claim 14, Podolefsky a battery pack (figures 2 and 3, [0035], discussed throughout) comprising: an outer housing (figures 2 and 3 #54, [0029], not including the wall, discussed throughout), a power port (figures 2 and 3 #82, [0031]-[0032], discussed throughout); an inner housing disposed within the outer housing (figure 3 #74, #72 #70, #110 and etcetera, it is the inside portion within the outer wall that surround the batteries, or figure 4, discussed throughout); and battery cells disposed within the inner housing (figure 3 #51, discussed throughout), wherein the battery cells are electrically coupled through the inner housing to the power port in the outer housing to provide power to the power port (figures 2-4, discussed throughout). Podolefsky discloses wherein the battery pack has a power switch ([0053], discussed throughout) and a display (figure 1 discussed throughout). However, Podolefsky is silent to the location of the display and power switch on the outer battery housing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to have the power switch and the display on the outside of the battery housing as a mere rearrangement of parts barring any criticality or unexpected results (see MPEP 2144.04).
As to claim 16, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising a battery management system for controlling and reporting operating information about the battery cells (figure 1 #260, discussed throughout).
As to claim 17, Podolefsky is silent to wherein, the battery management system (BMS) is disposed within the inner housing. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to have the BMS within the inner house as a mere rearrangement of parts baring any criticality or unexpected results (see MPEP 2144.04).
As to claim 18, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising a control board for controlling operation of the battery pack, wherein: the control board is coupled to the battery management system to send and receive data therefrom; and the battery management system is coupled to an input-output port in the outer housing and is coupled to the battery cells (figures 1 and 2 and 3 #250 and #16, discussed throughout, the control board can be any of the discussed circuits, see [0054]-[0055] and throughout).
As to claim 19, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising a kit of at least first and second mounting brackets (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout), wherein each of the first and second mounting brackets has a first leaf having a first dimension and a second leaf having a second dimension (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout), the first and second leaves set at a right angle with respect to each other (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout); wherein on the second mounting bracket, the first and second dimensions are not equal (figure 2 #112a and #112b, discussed throughout). Podolefsky is silent to wherein on the first mounting bracket the first and second dimensions are equal. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to change the dimension of the brackets as a mere change is shape or size baring any criticality or unexpected results.
As to claim 20, Podolefsky discloses wherein, further comprising: a tray within the inner hold; and the plurality of battery cells are carried and secured in the tray (figures 2-4, wherein the wall next to the outer walls make up the inner case than figure 4 can be considered the tray, discussed throughout).
Claims 5, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Podolefsky as applied to claims 1, 8 and 14 above, and further in view of Wei (US 2018/0105063).
As to claims 5, 9 and 15, modified Podolefsky is silent to further comprising an asset tracker device, wherein the asset tracker device includes a GPS chip and an antenna for communicating with a communication network, and the asset tracker is coupled to the battery cells to receive power and operating information about the battery cells and then transmit said operating information. Wei discloses a battery pack ([0037]) with tracking unit with a GPS receiver and a transmitter to transmit data back to a microprocessor ([0059]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the GPS system from Wei within modified Podolefsky so that the battery system and data can be tracked and stored, furthermore it would have been obvious as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 243 I).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that Podolefsy fails to disclose an inner housing. The applicant does this by stating that the cited portions are panels, the cited portions are fit to the outer housing, the materials of the cited panels, and that the exploded cited diagram does not show the conners thus it is unclear if the conners are closed and therefore cannot be considered an inner housing.
The examiner does not find the arguments persuasive. The definition of housing is something that covers or protects (see attached Merriam Webster definition) (a) a case or enclosure. Thus, the cited portions are within the housing and therefore inner housing. The cited portions cover, protect and enclosure the components within. The materials cited within the prior art are not relevant as the instant claimed invention does not claim the materials. While the examiner is required to read the claim in view of the instant specification the examiner cannot read limitations into the claim. The examiner recommends claiming the materials. While the exploded diagram does not show the corners together as it is an exploded diagram it is clear that the conners would be touching, furthermore, the change in shape addressed these limitations. The applicant has not shown any criticality or unexpected results to overcome the change in shape. The fact the inner housing is connected to the outer housing does not change the inner housing; the examiner recommends the applicant further define the claims. Therefore, the examiner maintains the rejection.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights