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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending herein.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/21/2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species A (Fig.1-2) in the reply filed on 7/02/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 2, 4, 8-14, and 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claims 6, 7, 16, and 19 are further withdrawn as depending from a non-elected claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/02/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “energy storage” (Claim 1 – energy storage device is given numeral 2 however these are claimed as separate elements), “metal hollow profile elements” (Claim 1), and “distinct fastening positions” (Claim 1, see below 35 USC 112 rejection) and “a motor vehicle” (Claim 15), must all be shown and labeled or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation: “An energy storage device, comprising an energy storage with a housing and at least one storage module accommodated therein as well as a frame to which the housing is fastened” is unclear and should be rewritten as:
“An energy storage device, wherein the device comprises:
a housing;
at least one storage module wherein the at least one storage module is accommodated within the housing; and
a frame to which the housing is fastened”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation: “wherein each hollow profile element” is unclear and should be rewritten as “wherein each metal hollow profile element”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation: “the chamber portion” (line 8 & 10) is unclear and should be rewritten as “the at least one chamber portion”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation: “a lower” is unclear and should be rewritten as “a lower wall”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation: “the chamber portion delimited” is unclear and should be rewritten. Appropriate correction is required
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “weakening device” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation: “fastened by means of screw elements” which is unclear and therefore renders the claims indefinite. The limitation has not been interpreted under 35 USC 112(f) as the disclosure only provides for a screw, therefore the limitation should most likely be rewritten as “fastened by at least one screw”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation: “in the event a force with a horizontal force component is applied” which is unclear and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Specifically, it is unclear where the “force” is from or to what the force is “applied”. The limitation appears to be missing to where the force is applied. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation: “distinct fastening positions” which is unclear and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 3, 5, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 3, the claim recites the limitation: “preferably…in particular” which is unclear and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 3, 5, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 3, the claim recites the limitation: “wherein the chamber wall has a lower and an upper wall as well as a front wall connecting the two” which is unclear since it is not clear from the limitation which “two” elements are connected, and therefore renders the claims indefinite. The limitation should ost Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 5, the claim recites the limitation: “one or more each opening only passes through one wall or multiple walls” which is both unclear (i.e., translation error possible) and also of unclear antecedent basis (i.e., unclear which openings and which walls are being referenced) and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 18, the claim recites the limitation: “a chamber wall” which is of unclear antecedent basis and therefore renders the claims indefinite. The limitation should most likely be rewritten as “the chamber wall”. However, appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 20, the claim recites the limitation: “the one or more opening” which is of unclear antecedent basis and therefore renders the claims indefinite. The limitation should most likely be rewritten as “the one or more weakening device openings”, and for purposes of prosecution herein Claim 20 will be assumed to depend from Claim 18 where this limitation originally occurred. However, appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 15, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sagerer (US 12,311,747 B2).
[Claim 1] Regarding Claim 1, Sagerer discloses: An energy storage device (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 1), comprising
an energy storage with a housing (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 2) and at least one storage module accommodated therein (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 3),
as well as a frame (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 4+5) to which the housing is fastened by means of screw elements (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, unlabeled) screwed at distinct fastening positions (See, e.g. Fig.1-5),
wherein the frame has at least two longitudinal beams which are formed by metal hollow profile elements (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 4+5), wherein each hollow profile element has a main portion and at least one chamber portion which projects laterally from the housing and into which the screw elements are screwed (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 4+5+8),
wherein the chamber portion is provided with one or more weakening devices (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 9) to facilitate collapse of the chamber portion in the event that a force with a horizontal force component is applied (See, e.g. Fig.1-5).
[Claim 3] Regarding Claim 3, Sagerer discloses: wherein the chamber portion delimited by a chamber wall preferably has a square, in particular a trapezoidal, cross-section, wherein the chamber wall has a lower and an upper wall as well as a front wall connecting the two (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 8+10+12).
[Claim 5] Regarding Claim 5, Sagerer discloses: wherein one or more each opening only passes through one wall or multiple walls of the chamber portion. (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 8+10+12)
[Claim 15] Regarding Claim 15, Sagerer discloses: A motor vehicle (See, e.g. Fig.1-5), comprising at least one energy storage device according to claim 1 (See, e.g. Fig.1-5).
[Claim 18] Regarding Claim 18, Sagerer discloses: wherein the one or more weakening device is formed by an opening (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 8+9) passing through a chamber wall defining the chamber portion (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 8+9+10+12+13).
[Claim 20] Regarding Claim 20, Sagerer discloses: wherein the one or more opening is a bore or a slot (See, e.g. Fig.1-5, 8+9+10+12+13).
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 JAMES M DOLAK whose telephone number is (571)270-7757. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-530 EST Monday-Friday.
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 on 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 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 M DOLAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights