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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species Ic, claim 11, in the reply filed on 03/11/2026 is acknowledged.
In view of applicant’s arguments, claims 2 (Species A); 10 (Species B); and 13-15 (Species D) are rejoined.
Currently, claims 1-10, 13-16, and 19 are pending with claims 12, 17, and 18 being withdrawn.
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 19 is 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.
Regarding claim 19, it is not clear to examiner whether the instantly claimed protector is an additional protector to that required in instant claim 1, or if this is referring to the same protector as required in instant claim 1. If it is the same protector, there would be a question as to whether the protector of claim 19 further limits the limitation requirements of instant claim 1. For the purpose of examination, examiner will consider the protector to be an additional protector and examiner also requests applicant indicate where support for the additional protector is found in the instant specification.
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)(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) 1-3, 9-11, 13, 14, 16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bauer (US 2010/0119927).
Regarding claim 1, Bauer teaches a battery case for at least a battery module to be used in an vehicle (0007), shown in figure 1, included below, wherein a housing 4 includes a protector 2 which comprises a top belt 2e and a bottom belt 2d and a core 3 arranged between and interconnecting to the top and bottom belt (figure 1, 0011-0018). The housing 4, is considered to be the instantly claimed battery case and the protector elements 2e, 2d, and 3 are considered to be interconnected with the housing 4, as shown below.
PNG
media_image1.png
386
384
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Figure 1 is considered to show the protector 2 to be operably removable.
Regarding claim 3, the housing 4 of figure 1 is considered to be the instantly claimed frame of the battery case. Protector elements 2e, 2d, and 3 are considered to be interconnected with the housing 4, as shown in figure 1.
Regarding claim 9, Bauer teaches the core member 3 to be foam (0019).
Regarding claim 10, Bauer teaches the core member 3 to be foam (0019). This is considered to be an isolating material as is taught by the instant specification (instant specification pg 9, lines 20-21).
Regarding claim 11, Bauer teaches the core 3 to be rubber (0019) which is considered to be a thermoplastic material.
Regarding claim 13, Bauer shows in figure 1 the bottom belt 2d to have a primarily flat structure.
Regarding claim 14, Bauer teaches the bottom belt 2d to have corrugations as shown in figure 1.
Regarding claim 16, Bauer shows the bottom belt 2d to provide an outer layer of an underfloor (figure 1).
Regarding claim 19, Bauer teaches the protector having two cover layers (0011-0019) which is considered to constitute the instantly claimed protector.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8 and 15 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 closest prior art is considered to be Bauer (US 2010/0119927) as discussed above.
Bauer neither teaches nor renders obvious the battery case comprising a plurality of longitudinal and transverse beams arranged grid-like thereby providing a plurality of slots for a plurality of battery modules, as claimed in instant claims 4-8, or the protector being arranged below a lower sled wall, as claimed in instant claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH A SLIFKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/SARAH A. SLIFKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759 May 4, 2026
Prosecution Insights