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 § 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 – 7, 10, 12 – 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson et al. (WO 2020/091672) in view of KR 101987805 B1.
As for claim 1, Persson et al. disclose a system for aligning a removable battery for a vehicle, the system comprising: a battery enclosure (6); a battery receptacle (10) formed on the vehicle, the battery receptacle defined by: a first sidewall; a second sidewall; and a support structure (see Fig. 2a); a first horizontally-extending guide (67); a second horizontally-extending guide (67), (note that each guide has a width in the horizontal direction, and therefore is considered “horizontally-extending”); a first recess (40) configured to guide the battery enclosure with the first horizontally-extending guide; and a second recess (40) configured to guide the battery enclosure with the second horizontally-extending guide. Persson et al. do not disclose guides having lengths greater than heights.
In KR 101987805 B1, a system for aligning a battery enclosure and battery receptacle is disclosed. A first horizontally-extending guide has a first height and a first length, the first length being measured in a first horizontal direction and being greater than the first height; a second horizontally-extending guide has a second height and a second length, the second length being measured in a second horizontal direction and being greater than the second height, the first horizontal direction and the second horizontal direction forming an angle with each other. See Fig. 6(c). Said horizontally-extending guides are presented as an alternative to smaller pins and holes (as in Fig. 6(d)). Based on the disclosure of KR 101987805 B1, it would have been obvious to simply substitute guides having greater lengths than heights with predictable results. Applicant has provided no arguments or evidence that modify the shapes of the guides of Persson et al. would solve a stated problem or provide an unexpected result. As is shown in KR 101987805 B1, such a modification was already known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
As for claims 2 and 4, Persson et al. meet all the limitations of the claimed invention but do not disclose guides on the vehicle and recesses on the battery enclosure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to merely reverse the locations of the guides and recesses of Persson et al. with predictable results. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that guides projecting from the battery would be susceptible to damage when the battery was removed from the vehicle. Such a modification is also suggested by KR 101987805 B1 (see Fig. 6(a), 6(b), and 6(c)).
As for claims 3, 5, 12, 13, and 18, the guides shown in Fig. 6(c) of KR 101987805 B1 are “rail” shaped, and elongated so as to be parallel to perpendicular sidewalls of the receptacle.
As for claim 6, Persson et al. disclose recesses having angled sidewalls (it is noted that the claims do not define a particular angle, and said angle may be substantially 90 degrees, as suggested by Persson et al.).
As for claim 7, Persson et al. disclose a bumper (66) protruding from a first side of the battery enclosure.
As for claim 10, Persson et al. disclose an electric vehicle, comprising: a chassis including a first sidewall, a second sidewall, and a support structure that together define at least a portion of a battery receptacle (10). Persson et al. do not disclose a guide protruding away from the support structure. Hao discloses a guide (14) that protrudes away from the support structure in a vertical direction, the guide extending in a horizontal direction (see Figs. 7 and 8); and an upper end of the guide configured to adjust an orientation of a battery enclosure when the battery enclosure is lowered onto the support structure. As above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to merely reverse the locations of the guides and recesses of Persson et al. with predictable results. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that guides projecting from the battery would be susceptible to damage when the battery was removed from the vehicle. The guides shown in Fig. 6(c) of KR 101987805 B1 are “rail” shaped and interact with recesses having angled walls corresponding to the shape of the guide.
As for claim 14, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the guides of Persson et al. to be attached by an adjustable fastener in order to accommodate differently sized or shaped battery enclosures.
As for claim 15, Persson et al. disclose a hauling machine (Fig. 1).
As for claims 16 – 18, Persson et al. disclose a battery enclosure (6) for connecting a battery to an electric vehicle, the battery enclosure comprising: four or more sides defining an interior configured to receive a plurality of battery cells and a bottom side (Fig. 3). Persson et al. do not disclose a guide recess in the bottom side. As above, in KR 101987805 B1 a guide recess is disclosed which has a length greater than a width a and extends parallel to a side of the battery enclosure (see Figs. 6(a) and 6(c)). Forming the guide recesses on the bottom of the battery of Persson et al. would eliminate projecting elements on the battery, which would be prone to damage.
As for claim 20, Persson et al. disclose a bumper (66) protruding from a first side of the battery enclosure.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 11, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson et al. (WO 2020/091672) in view of KR 101987805 B1, as applied to claims 1, 10, and 18 above, and further in view of Niebuhr (US 2008/0006459 A1).
As for claims 8 and 9, Persson et al. and KR 101987805 B1 meet all the limitations of the claimed invention, but do not disclose an electrical connector movable by an actuator. Niebuhr discloses a first electrical connector (58) on the vehicle; a second electrical connector (12) supported on the battery enclosure; and an actuator configured to move the first electrical connector towards the second electrical connector when the battery enclosure is positioned in the battery receptacle (paragraph [0047]). Guides are inherently configured to place the second electrical connector within a connector window that is measured from a fully-retracted position of the first electrical connector and a fully-extended position of the first electrical connector. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Persson et al. to include the movable electrical connector of Niebuhr in order to automatically electrically connect the battery to the vehicle.
As for claims 11 and 19, Persson et al. and KR 101987805 B1 meet all the limitations of the claimed invention, but do not disclose an electrical connector formed in the first sidewall of the battery receptacle. Niebuhr discloses a movable electrical connector (58) in a sidewall (Fig. 7, paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Persson et al. to include the movable electrical connector of Niebuhr in order to automatically electrically connect the battery to the vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 – 20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection in view of KR 101987805 B1. Applicant’s argument that it would not be obvious to modify the shape of the guides and recesses of Persson et al. is refuted by the teachings of KR 101987805 B1, which show guides and recesses having the claimed shapes, and having the shapes shown by Persson et al., presented as known alternatives.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Katy M Ebner whose telephone number is (571)272-5830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 9 a.m. - 3 p.m.
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, J. Allen Shriver can be reached at (303)297-4337. 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.
/Katy M Ebner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights