DETAILED ACTION
In the reply filed 4/14/2026, claims 1-3, 8-12, and 16 are amended, with claims 1-20 pending.
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 .
Drawings
The replacement drawings filed 4/14/2026 are not acceptable because they introduce new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
The original disclosure states that the connector is a part of the first mounting component; see original claim 19. The mounting components are understood to correspond with elements 211-214. The new callouts in Figs. 2 and 3 point to the connector being on or integrated with the battery structure (240). As such, the replacement figures introduce new matter because the contradict the original disclosure.
For these reasons, the drawings received on 4/14/2026 have not been entered. Please see MPEP 608.02(h). Because the replacement drawings are not entered, the previously-applied objections to the drawings are maintained.
The drawings (4/19/2023) are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the connector (claims 2, 11, 19) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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.
Specification
The amendment to the specification filed 4/14/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure includes at least the following:
New matter has been identified in drawings filed 4/14/2026. Portions in the specification which specifically reference/relate to these drawings and elements shown only in these drawings accordingly contain new matter. See especially [0021, 0022, 0027, 0028, 0030, 0034].
As stated above, the original disclosure states that the connector is a part of the first mounting component; see original claim 19. The mounting components are understood to correspond with elements 211-214. The new callouts for the connector point to the connector being on or integrated with the battery structure (240). As such, the replacement figures introduce new matter because the contradict the original disclosure.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 10, and 16 have been amended to recite “a self-supporting battery structure”. Support for a self-supporting battery structure is not found in the original disclosure. Applicant’s remarks do not specifically describe where support is found for the new limitation(s). Those having ordinary skill in the art would not understand that the originally disclosed battery structure (240) is self-supported, since it is supported by a mounting device (210) (as shown in Applicant’s Fig. 2, for example). Accordingly, new matter is introduced in the claims.
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.
Claims 1-20 are 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.
Claims 1, 10, and 16 have been amended to recite “a self-supporting battery structure”. Those having ordinary skill in the art would not understand that the battery structure (240) is self-supported, since it is supported by a mounting device (210) (as shown in Applicant’s Fig. 2, for example). The self-supporting battery structure contradicts the original disclosure. The metes and bounds of the recitation are indeterminable because it is unclear what is meant by “self-supporting”.
Claim 2 recites: “wherein the battery housing does not mechanically connect to the mounting device”. The metes and bounds of “not mechanically connected” are not understood. The claim appears to contradict the disclosure, as the figures (see especially Figs. 1A,B) reveal the mounting device (110) in contact with and/or connected to the battery housing (120). Those having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably understand both direct and indirect connection/contact between components yields mechanical connection. It is further unclear how the battery housing could be sealed (as required by claims 5, 14), unless the mounting device is physically/mechanically mounted to the battery housing.
Claims 11 is indefinite for similar reasons as claim 2.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16-19 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by You (US 12,074,337).
Regarding claim 16, You teaches: a battery assembly, comprising:
a battery housing (11, 13) having a general top surface (see upward-facing surface A of the battery housing) and a first side structure (B) protruded from the general top surface;
a self-supporting battery structure (4, 31, 32) enclosed by the battery housing;
a battery (2) disposed in the battery housing and supported by the battery structure; and
a mounting device (5) mechanically coupled to the battery structure.
See Fig. 1 and the annotated version of Fig. 2, below:
PNG
media_image1.png
456
648
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 17, You further teaches: wherein the battery includes a plurality of battery cells (20), wherein the plurality of battery cells are supported by the battery structure. See Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 18, You further teaches: wherein the battery housing includes a second side structure (C) protruded from the general top surface, wherein the mounting device includes a first mounting component (5) proximate to the first side structure and coupled to the battery structure, wherein the mounting device includes a second mounting component (5) proximate to the first side structure and coupled to the battery structure. See the annotated version of Fig. 2, above, and Fig. 5.
Regarding claim 19, You further teaches: wherein the first mounting component includes a connector (5) mechanically coupled to the battery structure. See Fig. 2.
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) 1-15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You (US 12,074,337) in view of Chuang (US 9,040,185).
Regarding claim 1, You teaches: a battery assembly, comprising:
a battery housing (11, 13) is made from a first material;
a self-supporting battery structure (including elements 4, 31, 32) disposed in the battery housing and is made from a second material; and
a battery (2) comprising a plurality of battery cells (20) disposed on the battery structure; and
wherein the battery housing encloses the battery structure.
Relevant elements are best shown in Figs. 1-3.
You describes materials which form part of the battery structure in column 6, lines 55-58. However, You is silent regarding other materials used for the battery housing and other components of the battery structure. As such, You fails to teach: the second material being different from the first material, as claimed.
Chuang teaches a battery housing (17) is made from a first material (metal; see at least column 6, lines 7-10); a battery structure (12, 13) disposed in the battery housing and is made from a second material (plastic; see column 5, lines 6-9); the second material being different from the first material. Relevant elements are best shown in Fig. 1.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery housing and battery structure from You such that the second material is different from the first material, as suggested by Chuang; the motivation being: the use of metal material is well known in the art for strength, durability and safety. Further, the use of plastic material is well known in the art for low-cost manufacture, and durability.
Additionally/alternatively, those having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to provide the second material being different from the first material as an obvious design choice, yielding the same predictable results, as such a modification would require a mere change in materials. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Also, it is common knowledge to those of ordinary skill in the art to choose a material that has sufficient strength for the intended use of the material.
Regarding claim 2, the combination further teaches: a mounting device (see the flange through which holes 323 extend) mechanically coupled to the battery structure via a connector (5); and wherein the battery housing does not mechanically connect to the mounting device. See Fig. 1 from You.
Regarding claim 3, the combination further teaches: wherein the mounting device includes a portion disposed within the battery housing when the battery assembly is assembled. See Fig. 5 from You.
Regarding claim 4, the combination further teaches: the battery housing is configured to be removable from the battery structure. See at least Fig. 2 from You.
Regarding claim 5, the combination further teaches: the battery housing is sealed. See column 6, lines 3-9 from You.
Regarding claim 6, the combination further teaches: wherein the first material includes a thermal insulated material, a flame retardant material, or an electrical insulated material. Chuang teaches the first material is metal; see at least column 6, lines 7-10). Metal is known in the art as flame retardant.
Additionally/alternatively, those having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to provide the first material includes a thermal insulated material, a flame retardant material, or an electrical insulated material as an obvious design choice, yielding the same predictable results, as such a modification would require a mere change in materials. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Also, it is common knowledge to those of ordinary skill in the art to choose a material that has sufficient strength for the intended use of the material.
Regarding claim 7, the combination further teaches: wherein the battery housing has a general top surface (A), a first side structure (B) protruded from the general top surface, a second side structure (C) protruded from the general top surface. See the annotated version of Fig. 2 from You, below:
PNG
media_image1.png
456
648
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, the combination further teaches: wherein the plurality of battery cells are supported by the battery structure. See Fig. 1 from You.
Regarding claim 9, the combination further teaches: wherein the mounting device is configured to couple to a rail (12) of a vehicle. See Fig. 1 from You.
Regarding claim 10, You teaches: a battery assembly, comprising:
a battery housing (11, 13) is made from a first material;
a self-supporting battery structure (including elements 4, 31, 32) enclosed by the battery housing and is made from a second material; and
a battery (2) comprising a plurality of battery cells (20) disposed on the battery structure; and
wherein the battery includes a plurality of battery cells (20), wherein the plurality of battery cells are supported by the battery structure.
Relevant elements are best shown in Figs. 1-3.
You describes materials which form part of the battery structure in column 6, lines 55-58. However, You is silent regarding other materials used for the battery housing and other components of the battery structure. As such, You fails to teach: the second material being different from the first material, as claimed.
Chuang teaches a battery housing (17) is made from a first material (metal; see at least column 6, lines 7-10); a battery structure (12, 13) disposed in the battery housing and is made from a second material (plastic; see column 5, lines 6-9); the second material being different from the first material. Relevant elements are best shown in Fig. 1.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery housing and battery structure from You such that the second material is different from the first material, as suggested by Chuang; the motivation being: the use of metal material is well known in the art for strength, durability and safety. Further, the use of plastic material is well known in the art for low-cost manufacture, and durability.
Additionally/alternatively, those having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to provide the second material being different from the first material as an obvious design choice, yielding the same predictable results, as such a modification would require a mere change in materials. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Also, it is common knowledge to those of ordinary skill in the art to choose a material that has sufficient strength for the intended use of the material.
Regarding claim 11, the combination further teaches: a mounting device (see the flange through which holds 323 extend) mechanically coupled to the battery structure via a connector (5); and wherein the battery housing does not mechanically connect to the mounting device. See Fig. 1 from You.
Regarding claim 12, the combination further teaches: wherein the mounting device includes a portion disposed within the battery housing when the battery assembly is assembled. See Fig. 5 from You.
Regarding claim 13, the combination further teaches: the battery housing is configured to be removed from the battery structure. See at least Fig. 2 from You.
Regarding claim 14, the combination further teaches: the battery housing is sealed. See column 6, lines 3-9 from You.
Regarding claim 15, the combination further teaches: wherein the first material includes a thermal insulated material, a flame retardant material, or an electrical insulated material. Chuang teaches the first material is metal; see at least column 6, lines 7-10). Metal is known in the art as flame retardant.
Additionally/alternatively, those having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to provide the first material includes a thermal insulated material, a flame retardant material, or an electrical insulated material as an obvious design choice, yielding the same predictable results, as such a modification would require a mere change in materials. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Also, it is common knowledge to those of ordinary skill in the art to choose a material that has sufficient strength for the intended use of the material.
Regarding claim 20, You teaches: wherein the battery housing is made from a first material, wherein the battery structure is made from a second material.
You describes materials which form part of the battery structure in column 6, lines 55-58. However, You is silent regarding other materials used for the battery housing and other components of the battery structure. As such, You fails to teach: the second material being different from the first material, as claimed.
Chuang teaches a battery housing (17) is made from a first material (metal; see at least column 6, lines 7-10); a battery structure (12, 13) disposed in the battery housing and is made from a second material (plastic; see column 5, lines 6-9); the second material being different from the first material. Relevant elements are best shown in Fig. 1.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to provide the battery housing and battery structure from You such that the second material is different from the first material, as suggested by Chuang; the motivation being: the use of metal material is well known in the art for strength, durability and safety. Further, the use of plastic material is well known in the art for low-cost manufacture, and durability.
Additionally/alternatively, those having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to provide the second material being different from the first material as an obvious design choice, yielding the same predictable results, as such a modification would require a mere change in materials. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Also, it is common knowledge to those of ordinary skill in the art to choose a material that has sufficient strength for the intended use of the material.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/14/2026 have been fully considered.
Some of the previously applied rejections under 35 USC § 112 have been overcome by the amendments. These rejections have been accordingly withdrawn.
Further remarks have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Additional remarks are made with regard to the previously applied rejections under 35 USC § 102 and/or 103. Applicant's arguments were made with respect to the claims, as amended, and have been rejected/addressed as provided above. Please see the discussion above, which provides detailed explanation of how the prior art reads on the claims.
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 EMMA K FRICK whose telephone number is (571)270-5403. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M, T, 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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303) 297-4324. 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.
/EMMA K FRICK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights