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 § 102
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) 1-7, 9, 12, and 14-19, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0190526 to Yamada (“Yamada”).
Regarding claims 1-6, 9, 12, 14-17, and 19 a first application of Yamada maps Figure 6 to these claims. In particular regarding claims 1-3, 15, and 16, Yamada discloses a battery pack for a vehicle comprising at least two battery modules (20A and 20B) arranged adjacent to one another along the B-axis (longitudinal axis). Each battery module includes a plurality of cells stacked in a stacking direction (A-axis) corresponding to the recited width direction and the width direction of the vehicle. On a first stacking/width end is a first side member 64a and on the opposed stacking/width end is a second side member 64b. These side members are parallel to one another and separated from one another in the stacking/width direction and thus are considered to correspond to the recited first and second side walls of the housing respectively. Connected to these side members are a pair of brackets (70a and 70b), each of which is releasably connected to the side member via bolts, and each of which directly supports one stacking end of both battery modules.
Further regarding claim 4, each bracket rests on a top surface of its respective side member such that the top surface of the side member supports the bracket thereby corresponding to the recited support section.
Further regarding claims 5, 6, 14, and 17, The housing remains open in the vertical direction both top and bottom such that the battery modules may be inserted into the housing either with the brackets attached to the battery modules from the top until the bracket rests on the side members, or with the bracket bolted to the side members and providing to the battery modules vertically from the bottom followed by connection of the brackets to the battery modules.
Further regarding claims 9, 12, and 19, a bands 30a and 30b respectively extend down each lateral side of each battery pack from a first stacking end along the entire width of the battery pack to the other stacking end of the battery pack. One of the brackets (70a/70b) attaches to each of the width-wise ends of each band. Thus, the bands 30a and 30b are considered to correspond to the recited beams.
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 18, a second application of Yamada maps Figure 5 to these claims. In particular, the two battery modules (20A and 20B) are stacked vertically atop one another in the height direction. Here, first and second duct members (56a and 56b) are considered to correspond to the recited first and second sidewalls of the housing respectively such that axis B corresponds to the width direction, axis A to the longitudinal direction and axis C to the height direction. Two pair of brackets releasably connect to the first and second duct members via bolts, and are also each bolted to the pair of battery modules to support the battery modules. While the longest dimension of the bracket is in the height direction, it also has an extension in the longitudinal direction.
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.
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(s) 8 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada. First addressing claim 13, the first application of Yamada is used. In particular, Yamada is applied as described above with respect to claims 9 and 12. Further regarding claim 13, Yamada discloses that the brackets (70a and 70b) are fixed to the battery packs (20a and 20b), but do not explain precisely how that fixing is achieved. Nonetheless, because the other fixing of the bracket is done releasably by bolts, the Office finds that bolts would be nothing more than an obvious commonly known method of fixing the bracket to the battery packs (20a and 20b) as well.
Turning to claim 8, the second application of Yamada is used. In particular, Yamada is applied as described above with respect to claim 7. The quartet of brackets are shown to be connected to the ducts via bolts. Nonetheless, permanently fixing one pair of brackets to the duct, allowing bolts to pass through the duct and bracket to connect to the battery module to the vehicle, is considered to be nothing more than per se obvious integration of otherwise separable parts.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 11, and 20, 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. There is no beam-type structure running in the widthwise direction that rests on a top surface of a side support structure in Yamada. While the structures shown in Yamada are three dimensional objects that can be freely rotated in space such that bottom becomes top, etc., arguing that the beam/battery module of Figure 6 of Yamada rests on a top surface of the brackets (70a/b) simply because the vehicle could be turned upside down such that the bottom surface of the bracket becomes its top surface strains a reasonable interpretation of the claim term with respect to Yamada given that Yamada is directed to vehicles which have a designated top and bottom which much be arranged in that manner for the vehicle to be operating safely/properly.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WYATT P MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (571)270-7531. The examiner can normally be reached 9am to 5pm M-F.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/WYATT P MCCONNELL/ Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights