Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/643,052

BATTERY PACK, POWER TOOL SYSTEM, AND CHARGING SYSTEM

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Apr 23, 2024
Examiner
DIAO, M BAYE
Art Unit
2859
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Nanjing Chervon Industry Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
1247 granted / 1424 resolved
+19.6% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1464
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
§103
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1424 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 . Response to Amendment Acknowledgement is made of amendment filed on 01/21/2026 in which claims 1 and 13 are currently amended, claims 5 and 17 have been canceled while claim 21 has been newly added. By this amendment, claims 1-4,6-16,18-21 are now pending in the application for prosecution. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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 factual inquiries 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. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gardner et al., (Gardner) USPAT 5,391,972 in view of Jung et al., (Jung) KR 20170012669 A(machine Translation). Regarding claim 21: Gardner at least discloses and shows in Figs. 16-18: A battery pack(14) for a power tool(col. 13, lines 30-34), comprising: a housing(126) comprising a first material(a suitable substantially rigid plastic material)(see col. 7, lines 31-34); a cell assembly(210) disposed in the housing(126) and comprising a plurality of cell units(124), wherein each of the plurality of cell units(124) comprises a positive electrode(218) and a negative electrode(222)(see Figs. 17-18 and col. 9, lines 15-25 and 26-31), and the plurality of cell units(124) are stacked sequentially along an up-and-down direction(see Figs. 3,11,13 and 16)(note-"stick pack" configuration of battery pack (FIGS. 3, 11 and 13) is advantageous for packs of a smaller total number of cells and for tool environments, for example, where the simple elongated cylindrical form of FIG. 3 is desirable; or where the more compact but essentially flat form of Fig. 13 is appropriate; see col. 8, lines 36-43); and a cell support(232) comprising a second material, which is configured to support at least the cell assembly(preferably the boot 232 is of natural rubber, or as an alternative, a flexible plastic)(see col. 9, lines 57-61); wherein the cell support(232) is at least disposed at front and rear ends of the cell assembly(210) to encapsulate both ends(note-the cell subassembly 210 is enshrouded in a tight fitting "boot" 232; see col. 9, lines 57-59), at least part of the cell support(232) encapsulates(enshrouds) the positive electrode(218) of each of the plurality of cell units(124) and the negative electrode(222) of each of the plurality of the cell units(124)( see col. 9, lines 57-59), and the first material is different from the second material(note- that rigid plastic material is different from natural rubber or flexible plastic). Gardner does not teach the limitations of: the each of the plurality of cell units has a flat pouch-like structure Jung discloses factual evidence of, each of the plurality of cell units(100) has a flat pouch-like structure(see [0003],[0025],[0026]). Gardner and Jung are battery pack analogous art. It would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Jung with Gardner by having the each of the plurality of cell units has a flat pouch-like structure, as recited, to make the battery pack heat-sealed and to further provide methods which can reliably protect the battery pack including a battery cell for the external vibration or impact, as per the teachings of Jung ([0004]). Accordingly claim 21 would have been obvious. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-4,6-16,18-20 are allowed. Reasons for allowance were already given in office action paper No./mail date 20251020. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M'BAYE DIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-6127. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 10:00AM-6:30PM and OFF most of the time Friday when working IFP. 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, TAELOR KIM can be reached at 571-270-7166. 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. M'BAYE DIAO Primary Examiner Art Unit 2859 /M BAYE DIAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 February 19, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 23, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 21, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600265
POWER SUPPLY DEVICE, ELECTRIC VEHICLE PROVIDED WITH POWER SUPPLY DEVICE, AND POWER STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601790
Battery Parameter Estimation Apparatus and Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600258
MANAGEMENT OF CHARGING REQUESTS TO AVOID SECURITY ISSUES AND SERVICING DELAYS ACROSS CHARGING STATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594854
BATTERY CONTROL SYSTEM, BATTERY CONTROL METHOD AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589665
PEER-TO-PEER DC FAST CHARGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+3.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1424 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