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 § 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 2, 5, and 6 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. Specifically the end of claim 2, where the claim states that the “fluid actuator is under control of the controller”. The Examiner fails to see where that is explicitly described in the applicant’s specification. The Examiner requests the Applicant point out in their specification where this is taught, otherwise the Examiner suggests removing this limitation from the claim language.
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, 3, 4, and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duffy-Protentis (11,618,542) and Huff et al. (2020/0156500).
Regarding independent claims 1, 8, and 15, Duffy-Protentis teaches a power system for a work machine and method, the power system (Figs. 1 and 2) comprising:
a connection arrangement (between 144 and 136; Col. 8, lines 1-14) connected to a frame of the work machine (watercraft, 104; inside battery housing 204), the connection arrangement configured to be moved (i.e. inserted and removed), relative to the frame, between a mated state and an unmated state to facilitate replacement of one or more electrical power sources (battery packs, 124) of the work machine configured to enable travel of the work machine, caused by movement of a traction device of the work machine, from a first location to a second location (Col. 7, lines 1-7), wherein in the mated state, the connection arrangement facilitates an operative engagement of each of:
a first terminal set (136 or 324 of Fig. 3B) with a second terminal set (part of 144; Col. 8, lines 6-14) to provide passage to an electrical connection therethrough and route electrical power supply from the one or more electrical power sources (battery packs) to one or more electrical devices of the work machine through the connection arrangement (Col. 7, lines 31-34), the electrical power supply enabling controlled movement of the one or more electrical devices (mechanical systems aka impeller; Col. 7, lines 1-7) relative to the frame, and
a first connector set (332 of Fig. 3B) with a second connector set (part of 144; Col. 8, lines 15-16) to provide passage to one or more communication links therethrough and route data transmission through the connection arrangement (to the computing device 116; Col. 5, lines 23-31); and
a system for determining a state of the electrical connection between the first terminal set and the second terminal set, the system including:
a controller (116; Col. 5, lines 14-16) configured to:
detect the data transmission through the one or more communication links (Col. 7, line 66 – Col. 8, line 2);
determine the state of the electrical connection between the first terminal set and the second terminal set at the connection arrangement as connected when the data transmission is active (Col. 8, lines 24-40; Col. 12, lines 32-47; Col. 13, lines 1-6); and
determine the state of the electrical connection between the first terminal set and the second terminal set at the connection arrangement as disconnected when the data transmission is inactive (Col. 8, lines 1-23, specifically lines 20-23).
Duffy-Protentis teaches the work machine being a water vehicle and fails to explicitly teach the vehicle being a land-operated vehicle. Huff teaches a similar vehicle (Figs. 1 and 3) having a replaceable battery (104) to that of Duffy-Protentis. Huff teaches the vehicle (100) comprising a removable battery (104) from which power is used to cause movement of a traction device (202, 204, and wheels) of the work machine along a ground surface from a first location on the ground surface to a second location on the ground surface ([0022], [0028]); and the battery enabling operation of one or more actuators to control movement of an implement (114), removably attached to the frame, relative to the frame. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the removable battery powered vehicle in Duffy-Protentis’ invention be an electric mining machine, like the one described in Huff, since the circuit configurations are very similar and both comprise removable batteries to power movable vehicles and one of ordinary skill in the art would think that the electric mining machine would be an obvious substitute vehicle in Duffy-Protentis’ invention.
Regarding claims 9 and 16, Duffy-Protentis teaches when the first connector set (332) is operatively engaged with the second connector set (part of 144) by the connection arrangement, the one or more communication links are configured to be passed between the one or more electrical power sources and the one or more electrical devices through the connection arrangement and the data transmission therebetween is configured to be routed through the connection arrangement (Col.. 5, lines 23-31; Col. 12, line 57-Col. 13, line 6).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Duffy-Protentis teaches the controller includes a first controller (Col. 5, lines 12-16; 328 of Fig. 3B) configured to be associated with the one or more electrical power sources (battery packs), wherein to detect the data transmission through the one or more communication links, the first controller is configured to:
monitor receipt of data to a first receiver (332/328) associated with the one or more electrical power sources (Col. 12, lines 57-65)
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Duffy-Protentis teaches the controller includes a second controller (116 of watercraft) configured to be associated with the one or more electrical devices (inside the watercraft; Col. 7, lines 1-7), wherein to detect the data transmission through the one or more communication links, the second controller is configured to:
monitor receipt of data to a second receiver (inside 116) associated with the one or more electrical devices of the work machine. (Col. 5, lines 23-52)
Regarding claims 12 and 19, Duffy-Protentis teaches one or more electrical-contactors (140 and 320) carried by a moveable first piece (battery pack) of the first terminal set or by a moveable second piece (battery housing) of the second terminal set, the controller configured to:
move the one or more electrical-contactors to an open position when the data transmission is inactive (i.e. unresponsive to signals) to break the operative engagement between the first terminal set and the second terminal set and to set a voltage transfer value between the first terminal set and the second terminal set to zero (0) volt at the connection arrangement (Col. 8, lines 18-23), and
move the one or more electrical-contactors from the open position to a closed position when the data transmission is active (upon receiving connected indication; Col. 13, lines 1-6), wherein:
transitioning the one or more electrical-contactors from the open position to the closed position electrically connects and bridges the operative engagement between the first terminal set and the second terminal set (Col. 8, lines 37-40), and
upon transitioning the one or more electrical-contactors from the open position to the closed position, an initial transmission through the one or more communication links comprises a data transmission that is active (sending the lock signal) prior to the electrical connection providing power via the one or more electrical contactors (Col. 8, lines 37-40).
Regarding claims 7, 14, and 20, Duffy-Protentis teaches the connection arrangement includes:
a first piece (battery pack) carrying the first terminal set and the first connector set, and
a second piece (battery housing) complementary to the first piece and carrying the second terminal set and the second connector set, the first piece switchable between a connected condition and a disconnected condition with respect to the second piece (Col. 7, lines 31-34; Col. 8, lines 1-46), wherein
the connected condition of the first piece with the second piece relates to the mated state of the connection arrangement (when battery packs are inserted/installed in battery housing) and corresponds to:
the operative engagement of the first terminal set with the second terminal set and the operative engagement of the first connector set with the second connector set (to facilitate energy transfer and communication between 136/324/332 and 144), and
the disconnected condition of the first piece with the second piece relates to the unmated state of the connection arrangement (when battery packs are removed from the battery housing) and corresponds to:
a disengagement between the first terminal set and the second terminal set to restrict the electrical power supply through the electrical connection, and a disengagement between the first connector set and the second connector set to restrict the data transmission through the one or more communication links (Col. 10, lines 25-28).
Regarding claim 13, Duffy-Protentis teaches data transmissible through the one or more communication links (via 332) corresponds to one or more of digital data, analog signal data, optical data, and fluid based signal data capable of facilitating a handshake type function with various devices of the work machine, or a combination of these. (Col. 5, lines 12-31, 42-52)
Claim(s) 2, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duffy-Protentis (11,618,542) and Huff et al. (2020/0156500) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kinzer (2021/0317972). Duffy-Protentis and Huff teach the power system as described above.
Regarding claim 2, Duffy-Protentis teaches the power system as described above with respect to claims 1 and 9. Duffy-Protentis also teaches the connection arrangement including:
a first piece (the battery pack) carrying the first terminal set and the first connector set, and
a second piece (the battery housing) carrying the second terminal set and the second connector set,
an electrical-contactor (140 and/or 320) carried by the first piece or the second piece and switchable, by the controller, between:
an open position prohibiting passage of electrical power from the one or more electrical power sources to the one or more electrical devices, and
a closed position permitting passage of electrical power from the one or more electrical power sources to the one or more electrical devices. (for contactor, 140: Col. 7, lines 35-50 and Col. 8, lines 16-23, 37-40; for contactor, 320: Col. 12, lines 59-62; Col. 13, lines 2-6)
Duffy-Protentis fails to explicitly teach the use of a fluid actuator. Kinzer teaches a similar connection arrangement (including a plug 30 and a recess 16) to that of Duffy-Protentis, wherein a fluid actuator connected to the frame and configured to move, under control of the controller, at least one of the first piece or the second piece, relative to the frame, to transition the connection arrangement between the mated state and the unmated state ([0026]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a fluid actuator into Duffy-Protentis’ connection arrangement to more securely mate the first and second pieces together.
Regarding claim 5, Duffy-Protentis teaches the controller configured to:
move the electrical-contactor (140 and/or 320) to the open position when the data transmission is inactive (i.e. unresponsive to signals) to break the operative engagement between the first terminal set and the second terminal set and to set a voltage transfer value between the first terminal set and the second terminal set to zero (0) volt at the connection arrangement (Col. 8, lines 18-23), and
based on determining, by the controller, that data transmission is active, move the electrical-contactor to the closed position (Col. 13, lines 1-6), wherein:
transitioning the electrical-contactor from the open position to the closed position:
electrically connects and bridges the operative engagement between the first terminal set and the second terminal set (Col. 8, lines 37-40), and
upon transitioning the electrical-contactor from the open position to the closed position, an initial transmission through the one or more communication links comprises a data transmission that is active (sending the lock signal) prior to the electrical connection providing power via the electrical-contactor (Col. 8, lines 37-40).
Huff also teaches when the battery pack is connected, enables operation of one or more actuators (motors) to control movement of an implement (114) removably attached to the frame.
Regarding claims 6, Duffy-Protentis teaches the controller being further configured to, based on determining that the data transmission is active (Col. 13, lines 1-6):
Retrieve a set of instructions from a memory operably connected to the controller (Col. 14, lines 18-24), and
Execute the set of instructions, wherein executing the set of instructions causes the controller to determine the state of electrical connection between the first terminal set and the second terminal set (by closing contactor, 320; Col. 13, lines 1-6).
one or more communication links are configured to halt the data transmission (signals being unresponsive) prior to halting of the electrical power supply via the electrical connection (Col. 8, lines 20-23).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed March 31, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Huff et al. (2020/0156500).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DRU M PARRIES whose telephone number is (571)272-8542. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Thursday from 9:00am to 6:00pm. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Rexford Barnie, can be reached on 571-272-7492. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
DMP
4/10/2026
/DANIEL KESSIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights