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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on (3/5/24 7/19/24 6/11/25) are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
1. Claims 1-4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heichal et al. (US PG PUB NO 2012/0009804) in view of Howard et al. (US 11,084,386).
[CLAIM 1] Regarding claim 1, Heichal discloses an apparatus for electrically and mechanically coupling removeable battery modules (104-108) to a vehicle (102), comprising: an interface plate (Heichal, paragraph [0026] discloses an exemplary plate for heat exchange to assist the battery) configured to be mechanically coupled to the vehicle (102), the interface plate comprising: an interface plate electrical output (Heichal, in order to control battery temperature, a control would need to be employed see Heichal paragraph [0110]) that electrically couples the interface plate to the vehicle (102); and an interface plate electrical input electrically coupled to the interface plate electrical output (Heichal, paragraph [0116] discloses an exemplary inner/outer interface 1022 to connect the battery and vehicle); a gasket (Heichal paragraph {0045] discloses “a sealing mechanism” useful for any desired connections within the battery housing) attached to an exposed surface of the interface plate (Heichal paragraph {0045] discloses “a sealing mechanism” and can be used to seal the interface plate) and battery trays that releasably receive the removeable battery modules (Heichal discloses upper and lower battery enclosures to secure the modules) each battery tray releasably mechanically coupled to the interface plate (Each component of Heichal can be coupled or removed for service or replacement) and comprising: at least one battery module connector (Heichal, at least paragraph [0042]) releasably electrically coupled to a respective at least one battery module (Heichal, FIG 1); a battery tray electrical output that electrically couples the respective at least one more battery module connector to the interface plate electrical input.
-However, it fails to disclose an outer tray wall extending along a perimeter of the battery tray, the outer tray wall defining, at least in part, at least one battery tray section that is configured to receive at least one of the removeable battery modules, the outer tray wall including a flange (Howard, FIG 1, structure at 320 shows an exemplary flange which can be employed in any layer of the battery housing) that is configured to compress the gasket to form a seal.
-Nevertheless, Howard illustrates an exemplary battery enclosure with a base, surrounding frame, inner tray and lid (Howard, FIG 1)
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Heichal to have layered battery enclosure as taught by Howard with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
PNG
media_image1.png
800
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
759
698
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
753
880
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 2] Regarding claim 2, Heichal/Howard disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein for each battery tray: the flange is configured to compress the gasket at a contact region, in the contact region, the flange and the gasket have complementary shapes and/or complementary structures (Howard, column 9 lines 5-15 discloses a sealing member which operates with perimeter flanges to prevent debris intrusion).
[CLAIM 3] Regarding claim 3, Heichal/Howard disclose the apparatus of claim 2, wherein in the contact region for each battery tray, the flange and the gasket extend parallel to each other (Howard illustrates in-line connections to form a battery enclosure).
[CLAIM 4] Regarding claim 4, Heichal/Howard disclose the apparatus of claim 3, wherein in the contact region for each battery tray, the flange and the gasket have a respective planar surface (Howard, FIG 1 illustrates a planar set of surfaces).
[CLAIM 9] Regarding claim 9, Heichal/Howard disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the interface plate and each battery tray include complementary threaded fasteners that releasably mechanically couple the battery tray and the interface plate (Howard, Column 8, Lines 55-60 discloses fasteners which ae conventional in the art of battery sealing).
2. Claims 5-8 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heichal et al. (US PG PUB NO 2012/0009804) in view of Howard et al. (US 11,084,386) and in view of Kashiwagi (US PG PUB NO 2023/0391177).
[CLAIM 5] Regarding claim 5, Heichal/Howard disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
-However, they fail to disclose wherein the outer tray wall of each battery tray includes corrugations.
-Nevertheless, Kashiwagi discloses corrugated structure see paragraph [0140] which discloses corrugated shape.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the combination as taught by Kashiwagi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
PNG
media_image4.png
760
675
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 6] Regarding claim 6, Heichal/Howard/Kashiwagi disclose the apparatus of claim 5.
-However, they fail to disclose wherein an inner surface of the outer tray wall includes the corrugations.
-Nevertheless, Kashiwagi discloses corrugated structure see paragraph [0140] which discloses corrugated shape suitable for the enclosure of Heichal.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the combination as taught by Kashiwagi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
[CLAIM 7] Regarding claim 7, Heichal/Howard/Kashiwagi disclose the apparatus of claim 5, wherein an outer surface of the outer tray wall includes the corrugations wherein an inner surface of the outer tray wall includes the corrugations (Kashiwagi discloses corrugated structure see paragraph [0140] which discloses corrugated shape suitable for the enclosure of Heichal).
[CLAIM 8] Regarding claim 8, Heichal/Howard disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
-However, they fail to disclose wherein an inner surface of the outer tray wall includes the corrugations.
-Nevertheless, Kashiwagi discloses corrugated structure see paragraph [0140] which discloses corrugated shape suitable for any battery enclosure structure if desired.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the combination as taught by Kashiwagi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
-Regarding the remaining limitations: wherein each battery tray includes at least one inner tray wall that defines, at least in part, the at least one battery tray section, the at least one inner try wall including corrugations (Kashiwagi can corrugate inner and outer walls).
[CLAIM 12] Regarding claim 12, Heichal discloses an apparatus for electrically and mechanically coupling removeable battery modules (Heichal,104-108) to a vehicle (102), comprising: an interface plate (Heichal, paragraph [0026] discloses an exemplary plate for heat exchange to assist the battery) configured to be mechanically coupled to the vehicle (102) the interface plate comprising: an interface plate electrical output (Heichal, in order to control battery temperature, a control would need to be employed see paragraph [0110] which requires input/output information from sensors and control of temperature parameters) that electrically couples the interface plate to the vehicle (102); and an interface plate electrical input electrically coupled to the interface plate electrical output (Heichal, in order to control battery temperature, a control would need to be employed see paragraph [0110] which requires input/output information from wiring and control of temperature).
-However, it fails to disclose battery trays beyond a base and cover.
--Nevertheless, Howard illustrates an exemplary battery enclosure with a base, frame inner tray and cover (Howard FIG 1).
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Heichal to have layered battery enclosure as taught by Howard with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
-Regarding the remaining limitations: an enclosure that releasably receive the removeable battery modules, each battery tray releasably mechanically coupled to the interface plate (Heichal, paragraph [0026] discloses an exemplary plate for heat exchange to assist the battery) and comprising: at least one battery module connector releasably electrically coupled to a respective at least one battery module (Heichal, FIG 5 is exemplary and requires electric interface with the vehicle motors); a battery tray electrical output that electrically couples the respective at least one more battery module connector to the interface plate electrical input (Heichal, FIGS 5-8); and an outer tray wall extending along a perimeter of the battery tray (Heichal illustrates an exemplary battery enclosure 104 having a plurality of panels (At least upper and lower)) the outer tray wall defining, at least in part, at least one battery tray section that is configured to receive at least one of the removeable battery modules (Heichal, paragraph [0086]).
-However, they fail to disclose wherein an inner surface of the outer tray wall includes corrugations.
-Nevertheless, an additional reference to Kashiwagi discloses a corrugated battery enclosure structure see paragraph [0140] which discloses corrugated shape and can be employed as desired for any battery enclosure portions.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the combination (Heichal/Howard) as taught by Kashiwagi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
PNG
media_image5.png
745
699
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 13] Regarding claim 13, Heichal/Howard/kashiwagi disclose the apparatus of claim 12, wherein an inner surface of the outer tray wall includes the corrugations.
-However, they fail to disclose wherein an inner surface of the outer tray wall includes corrugations.
-Nevertheless, Kashiwagi discloses corrugated structure see paragraph [0140] which discloses corrugated shape and can be employed as desired for any battery enclosure portions.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the combination as taught by Kashiwagi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
[CLAIM 14] Regarding claim 14, Heichal/Howard/kashiwagi disclose the apparatus of claim 12, wherein an outer surface of the outer tray wall includes the corrugations.
-However, they fail to disclose wherein an inner surface of the outer tray wall includes the corrugations.
-Nevertheless, Kashiwagi discloses an exemplary corrugated structure see paragraph [0140] which discloses corrugated shape and can be employed as desired for any battery enclosure portions including in and outer walls.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the combination as taught by Kashiwagi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
[CLAIM 15] Regarding claim 15, Heichal/Howard/kashiwagi disclose the apparatus of claim 12, wherein each battery tray includes at least one inner tray wall that defines, at least in part, the at least one battery tray section, the at least one inner try wall including corrugations.
-However, they fail to disclose wherein an inner surface of the outer tray wall includes the corrugations.
-Nevertheless, Kashiwagi discloses corrugated structure see paragraph [0140] which discloses corrugated shape and can be employed as desired for any battery enclosure portions.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the combination as taught by Kashiwagi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase crash-worthiness.
3. Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heichal et al. (US PG PUB NO 2012/0009804) in view of Howard et al. (US 11,084,386) in view of Kashiwagi (US PG PUB NO 2023/0391177) and in view of Kuang et al. (US 8,786,191).
[CLAIM 16] Regarding claim 16, Heichal/Howard/kashiwagi disclose the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the interface plate includes a flange that comprises position-indicating marks (Any desired marks for alignment can be used for assembly).
-However, they fail to disclose the positioning-indicating marks comprising light-emitting diodes (LEDs), light reflecting material (Kuang, Column 23, lines 15-20 disclose exemplary LED and control systems that can be incorporated with the battery of Heichal if desired).
-Nevertheless, Kuang discloses LED use with a battery and a control network in at least claim 15.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the combination to have LED features as taught by Kuang with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide assembly and service assistance for battery repair/replacement).
PNG
media_image6.png
757
677
media_image6.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 17] Regarding claim 17, Heichal/Howard/kashiwagi/Kuang disclose the apparatus of claim 16, further comprising a microprocessor in electrical communication with the position-indicating marks to control the LEDs (See Kuang, claim 15 which discloses a control network which is exemplary and can be modified as desired to control LED’s in cooperation with the electronics of Heichal/Howard).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 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.
Heichal et al. (US PG PUB NO 2012/0009804) in view of Howard et al. (US 11,084,386) represent the most similar prior art battery enclosures but each fails independently or in combination to teach each limitation in dependent claims 10-11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be found on the attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to whose telephone number is (571)270-3411. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM PST.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached on (571)270-5985. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES J TRIGGS/Examiner, Art Unit 3614B
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614