Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/449,274

BATTERY PACK

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 14, 2023
Examiner
MCNULTY, SEAMUS PATRICK
Art Unit
1752
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
16 granted / 31 resolved
-13.4% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+41.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
91
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
63.5%
+23.5% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 31 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20150179995-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Nakamura’ , in view of (US-11764424-B2) hereinafter referred to ‘Naruke’ Regarding Claim 1, Nakamura teaches a battery pack (Nakamura, “A battery pack comprises: a battery holding member provided to have battery holding holes and configured to bind a plurality of batteries”, see Abstract) comprising: a tray including a bottom wall (Nakamura, bar holding member, 50, Fig. 2); a cell module that is disposed on the tray and includes at least one battery cell (Nakamura, Btn and Btp, Fig. 2) ; a high voltage connection portion that is provided on a bottom surface of the cell module and that is electrically connected to the at least one battery cell (Nakamura, wiring, 82, Fig. 13) ; a high voltage busbar connected to the high voltage connection portion (Nakamura, linkage bus bar, 52, Fig. 2); and a sheet disposed between the bottom wall of the tray and the bottom surface of the cell module (Nakamura, sponge sheet, 60, Fig. 2) , wherein a first opening portion is defined in the water absorbing sheet at a position facing the high voltage connection portion (Nakamura, holes, 60h, Fig. 4). Nakamura does not teach that the sheet is specifically a water absorbing sheet. Naruke teaches a water absorbing sheet (Naruke, water absorber, 25, Fig. 3). Naruke teaches that this prevents the battery from getting wet (Naruke, “The water absorber 25, which is disposed in the vicinity of the cooling medium passage 21, absorbs water that is condensed on the cooling medium passage 21, thereby preventing the water from wetting the battery module 17”, see par. 45). Nakamura and Naruke are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery modules. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery sheet as taught in Nakamura to make it the absorbent sheet, as taught in Naruke, in order to reduce the moisture build up around the cell and prevent short circuit. Regarding Claim 2, Modified Nakamura teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein the first opening portion surrounds the high voltage connection portion via a gap (see annotated figure below). PNG media_image1.png 276 370 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 3, Modified Nakamura teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein: the tray includes an engaging member that projects upward from the bottom wall; and a second opening portion that engages with the engaging member is defined on the water absorbing sheet (see annotated figure below). PNG media_image2.png 376 754 media_image2.png Greyscale Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20150179995-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Nakamura’ , in view of (US-11764424-B2) hereinafter referred to ‘Naruke’, in further view of (US-20150287963-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Chiba’ Regarding Claim 4, Modified Nakamura teaches the bottom wall and that is disposed in a portion around the high voltage connection portion (Second opening, see annotated figure above). Nakamura does not teach the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein: the tray includes a positioning rib that protrudes upward from the bottom wall and that is; and the positioning rib is inserted into the first opening portion of the water absorbing sheet. Chiba teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein: the tray includes a positioning rib that protrudes upward from the bottom wall (Chiba, supporting portion, 36, Fig. 7) and that is disposed in a portion around the high voltage connection portion (The examiner notes ; and the positioning rib is inserted into the first opening portion of the water absorbing sheet (Chiba, groove bottom surface, 241, Fig. 7)(see annotated figure below). PNG media_image3.png 635 558 media_image3.png Greyscale Chiba teaches that this portion allows for the support of the battery cells around the cavity (Chiba, “Each supporting portion 36 supports a substantially central portion of the bottom surface 34 of the electrical cell 10 in the arrangement direction from below.”, see [0057]). Modified Nakamura and Chiba are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery packs. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bottom of the case as taught in Nakamura to have the supporting portions or ribs as taught in Chiba, in order to support the cells in the presence of the opening or cavity. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20150179995-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Nakamura’ , in view of (US-11764424-B2) hereinafter referred to ‘Naruke’, in further view of (US-20150287963-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Chiba’, as evidenced by (US-6548432-B1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Hisada’ Regarding Claim 5, Modified Nakamura teaches the battery pack according to claim 1, wherein the water absorbing sheet is a non-woven fabric (Nakamura, “The sponge 60 a may be made of, for example, soft polyurethane foam. The sponge 60 may alternatively be made of another material such as polyethylene or rubber sponge, instead of soft polyurethane foam.”, see [0043]) (the examiner notes that polyethylene can be used for non-woven fabrics as evidenced by Hisada, [Hisada,“A polyethylene nonwoven fabric is produced by the meltblowing process using a resin composition comprising a polyethylene (A)”, see Abstract]) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 5pm. 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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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. /S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752 /NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 14, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12586824
IMIDAZOLIDINYLIDE COMPOUND FOR USE AS A SHUT-DOWN ADDITIVE FOR LITHIUM ION BATTERIES AND ELECTROLYTE AND BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12560517
DEVICE FOR AND METHOD OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT ELECTRODE TAB IS BENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12531239
POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY, AND NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12512560
Inorganic Coating Layer Crosslinked Separator
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12494504
ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY AND MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+41.9%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 31 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month