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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suk et al. (KR 20190142898 A) in view of Hideaki et al. (JP 2008124347 A) (see attached machine translations).
Regarding claim 1, Suk teaches A battery carrying tray (30, Suk fig. 3) comprising:
an outer peripheral frame (310, Suk fig. 3); and
a plurality of inserts having (320, Suk fig. 3) a plurality of slots (322, Suk fig. 5) into which battery leads are inserted and supported (Suk [0021]),
the plurality of inserts being detachably coupled to the outer peripheral frame (inserts slidably coupled to outer frame, Suk [0017] and fig. 5); however
Suk fails to teach: a tapered portion is provided on a bottom surface of the outer peripheral frame and shaped to become thinner outward from a center of the bottom surface of the outer peripheral frame.
Hideaki is analogous in the art of supportive trays (Hideaki title) having a rectangular outer frame (Hideaki [0001]) and teaches such tray (tray 1, Hideaki [0015]) comprising a tapered portion (concave portions 17, Hideaki fig. 1) that is provided on a bottom surface of the outer peripheral frame (at inclined surfaces 18, Hideaki fig. 2) and shaped to become thinner outward from a center of the bottom surface of the outer peripheral frame (distance from surface 18 to surface 12 – located at outermost corners in Y1, Y2 directions per Hideaki fig. 1 – is smaller/thinner than distance from surface 16 to surface 12, which represents the full thickness of frames 10/12, per Hideaki fig. 2). Hideaki teaches such upwardly tapered shape of the lower surface of the support tray is beneficial to remove shock or vibration so that a workpiece (i.e., in the tray) can smoothly be transferred when moving between two roller conveyors without adding large collision shock to the tray (Hideaki abstract and fig. 5).
It would have been obvious, at the time of filing, for a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the outer frame of the tray of Suk with the inclined surfaces to yield tapered thickness outwardly at the bottom of the tray as taught by Hideaki with the motivation of beneficially mitigating shock and vibration when the tray carried and supported battery cells therein along a conveyor belt during manufacturing, shipping, or otherwise transporting.
Thus, the instant claim 1 is rendered obvious.
Regarding claim 2, modified Suk teaches The battery carrying tray of claim 1, wherein the tapered portion is configured as a first tapered portion having an inclination direction (18 at corner of 10, Hideaki fig. 2) parallel to a conveyance direction of an external roller conveyor (10 parallel to conveyance roller 6a, Hideaki fig. 6(a)).
Regarding claim 3, modified Suk teaches The battery carrying tray of claim 2, wherein the tapered portion further comprises a second tapered portion having an inclination direction perpendicular to the first tapered portion (18 at corner of 11, Hideaki figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 4, modified Suk teaches The battery carrying tray of claim 1, wherein a plurality of heat dissipation ports is provided in sidewalls of the outer peripheral frame and configured to allow the inside and outside of the sidewalls to communicate with each other (open circular through-holes at upper edges of 310, Suk figs. 3 and 6).
Although Suk does not explicitly teach that these through-holes are for “heat dissipation”, these through-holes are equivalently positioned and opened to communicate from the inside to the outside of the peripheral frame sidewalls to those shown in instant figures 3 and 9B (as filed 12/14/2023) and thus inherently perform the claimed function. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure … a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established (MPEP 2112.01).
Regarding claim 5, modified Suk teaches The battery carrying tray of claim 4, wherein the heat dissipation port is formed at an uppermost end of each of the sidewalls and communicates with a space disposed above a battery accommodated in the battery carrying tray (open circular through-holes at upper edges of 310 are above battery slots 322 in 320, Suk figs. 3 and 6).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wakabayashi et al. (US 20220123428 A1) teaches outer case 30 is provided with a plurality of outer smoke vent holes 37 through which the exhaust gas having passed through inner smoke vent holes 27 passes ([0038] and Fig. 1).
"How to prevent conveyor belt damage?" (SKE Industries, <https://www.skecon.com/knowledge/how-to-prevent-conveyor-belt-damage.html>) teaches the most common cause of conveyor belt damage is the transfer of sharp conveyed materials (1st paragraph).
Takasaki et al. (US 20160218333 A1) teaches battery modules 22 in frame 20 held by fixation member 24; intake duct 172 and frame exhaust fan 190 above the battery modules (Fig. 21).
Chu et al. (US 20210104801 A1) teaches lower case 2 of battery pack (Fig. 1) having upwardly inclined/tapered lower surface at outermost edges (Figs. 4-5).
Yoshida et al. (US 20230246278 A1) teaches battery cells 100 held in case member 200, where 200 tapers toward the edge of the X direction to become thinner in the Z direction (Figs. 2-4).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jessie Walls-Murray whose telephone number is (571)272-1664. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, typically 10-4.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/JESSIE WALLS-MURRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights