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 .
This is the first action on the merits for application 18/701,067. Responsive to the preliminary amendment filed 4/12/2024, Claims 8-14 are currently pending in this application.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. PCT/EP2022/078337, filed on 10/12/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/12/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: lines 5-6, “in the vehicle vertical direction” should be changed to - -in a vehicle vertical direction- - for claim consistency. 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 (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 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) 8-10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DUPPER (US 2020/0373531 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, DUPPER discloses an energy store floor system for an electrically drivable motor vehicle (Figs. 1 and 3), comprising: a floor structure (generally indicated at 4) having respective lateral side sills (best shown in Fig. 3), to an underside of which is fastened a store housing (14) of an energy store for an electric drive of the motor vehicle, and having respective profile elements (generally shown at arrow-point for reference numeral 6 in Fig. 1) which are arranged along longitudinal sides of the store housing and are fastened on the underside of a respectively assigned lateral side sill (Figs. 1 and 3), wherein the profile elements are connected to the respectively assigned lateral side sill via respective connecting devices (20) which are detachable in case of an accident-induced relative movement of the respective side sill with respect to the assigned profile element in a vehicle transverse direction from outside inward (Fig. 3 and paragraph [0058], “screw connections…breakaway during a side impact”).
Regarding Claim 9, DUPPER discloses the respective connecting device is formed by way of an opening in the profile element and a bolt which penetrates the opening and is held on the corresponding side sill (Figs. 1 and 3; paragraph [0058], “screw connection”).
Regarding Claim 10, DUPPER discloses the profile element is held on the side sill by a holding force which is exerted on the profile element by way of the respective bolt of the connecting device (Figs. 1 and 3; paragraph [0058], “screw connection”), after the accident- induced exceeding of which holding force the side sill is movable relative to the assigned profile element in the vehicle transverse direction from the outside inward (Fig. 3 and paragraph [0058], “screw connections…breakaway during a side impact”).
Regarding Claim 13, DUPPER discloses wherein in the course of the accident-induced relative movement of the respective side sill with respect to the assigned profile element in the vehicle transverse direction from the outside inward, the opening and the corresponding bolt of the corresponding connecting device are brought out of engagement by way of a relative movement in the vehicle vertical direction (Fig. 3 and paragraph [0058], “screw connections…breakaway during a side impact”).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 11, 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DUPPER (US 2020/0373531 A1) in view of KIYA (US 2009/0226806 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, DUPPER discloses the energy store floor system according to Claim 9, described in detail above, but does not disclose the opening of the respective connecting device in the profile element widens in cross section from the outside inward in the vehicle transverse direction.
KIYA discloses a battery mounting device to mitigate impact forces (Figs. 1-3 and 7-8) wherein an opening (32/34) of respective connecting devices in a profile element widens in cross section from an outside of a battery housing inward (Figs. 3 and 7-8; paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the energy store floor system of DUPPER the opening of the respective connecting device in the profile element widens in cross section from the outside inward in the vehicle transverse direction, as disclosed by KIYA, since the simple substitution of one known connecting device disconnecting means for an equivalent other yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 12, DUPPER discloses the energy store floor system according to Claim 9, described in detail above, but does not disclose the opening of the respective connecting device in the profile element has a keyhole-shaped configuration in cross section.
KIYA discloses a battery mounting device to mitigate impact forces (Figs. 1-3 and 7-8) wherein an opening (32/34) of respective connecting devices in a profile element has a keyhole-shaped configuration in cross section (Figs. 3 and 7-8; paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the energy store floor system of DUPPER the opening of the respective connecting device in the profile element has a keyhole-shaped configuration in cross section, as disclosed by KIYA, since the simple substitution of one known connecting device disconnecting means for an equivalent other yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 14, DUPPER discloses the energy store floor system according to Claim 9, described in detail above, but does not disclose the opening of the respective connecting device in the profile element is configured to be greater in cross section in an inner cross section than a portion of the bolt.
KIYA discloses a battery mounting device to mitigate impact forces (Figs. 1-3 and 7-8) wherein an opening (32/34) of respective connecting devices in a profile element is configured to be greater in cross section in an inner cross section than a portion of the bolt (Figs. 3 and 7-8; paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the energy store floor system of DUPPER the opening of the respective connecting device in the profile element is configured to be greater in cross section in an inner cross section than a portion of the bolt, as disclosed by KIYA, since the simple substitution of one known connecting device disconnecting means for an equivalent other yields predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
KANEKO et al. (US 2022/0032758 A1) discloses a vehicle body structure wherein a battery is detachable from side sills during an impact load (see Claim 1).
RAWLINSON et al. (US 2018/0334022 A1) discloses a system for absorbing side impact energy in a battery equipped vehicle (see ABSTRACT).
LI (US 2017/0217297 A1) discloses a battery protection structure (see ABSTRACT).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN YOUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-4781. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 pm (CST).
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, Jacob S Scott can be reached at (571)270-3415. 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.
EDWIN YOUNG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655
/Edwin A Young/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655