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.
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (US 2023/0291048 A1).
Regarding Claim 1:
Zhou discloses a battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) comprising a battery module (battery pack, 3), an exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2), and an inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52), the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) accommodating the battery module (battery pack, 3) therein (Figures 1 and 6, [0044, 0058]). Zhou further discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) has a watertight structure and a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, and that as such, the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) can tolerate a relatively large pressure without being damaged (Figure 1, [0050]). Zhou further discloses that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) is connected to the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) in a sealed manner along an inner surface of the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) (Figure 7, [0044]). Zhou further discloses a fastening plate assembly (5) comprising the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52), an outer fastening plate (51), and bolts (53), wherein the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the outer fastening plate (51) are connected to one another via the bolts (53) (Figure 6, [0058-0059]). Zhou further discloses that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the outer fastening plate (51) are formed of metal such that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is connected tightly such that water leakage is prevented, thus an inside of the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) is understood to have a watertight structure (Figure 1, [0059]). As can be seen from Figure 6 of Zhou, the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the outer fastening plate (51) are not in direct contact with one another, but rather there is an air layer (i.e., space) formed between them (Figure 6). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the air layer (space) of Zhou would indeed have a watertight structure formed between the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the exterior case (casing, 1). Zhou further discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) has a multilayer float structure including the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2), the air layer (space), and the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) (Figures 1 and 6, [0044, 0058-0059]). Zhou discloses that an inside of the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) constitutes a battery module housing part housing the battery module (battery pack, 3) therein along with the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) (Figure 7, [0044-0045]).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose a volume of the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2). However, as noted above, Zhou discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) has a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, such that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) can tolerate a relatively large pressure without being damaged (Figure 1, [0050]). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that if the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) of Zhou achieves a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, a volume of the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) must be such that it allows the battery pack to have an overall specific gravity of 1 or less.
The examiner notes that the claim recites a product, but also includes a limitation directed to a particular method for obtaining the structure of the claimed product. Specifically, Claim 1 recites that the inner wall is molded unitarily with the exterior case. Patentability of product-by-process claims is based on the product itself. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from the product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. MPEP 2113 citing In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695,698, 227 USPQ964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Zhou teaches that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) is connected to the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) in a sealed manner along an inner surface of the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) (Figure 7, [0044]). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the structure of the inner wall/exterior case of Zhou is substantially identical to the claimed structure. Furthermore, an object being integral or separable is a matter of design choice absent persuasive evidence the particular configuration of the claimed object is significant (MPEP 2144.04 V). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met.
Regarding Claim 2 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 1 as set forth above.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose a volumetric capacity of the battery module housing part. However, as noted above, Zhou discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) has a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, such that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) can tolerate a relatively large pressure without being damaged (Figure 1, [0050]). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that if the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) of Zhou achieves a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, a volumetric capacity of the battery module housing part must be such that it allows the battery pack to have an overall specific gravity of 1 or less.
Furthermore, as detailed above in the rejection of Claim 1, Zhou discloses that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the outer fastening plate (51) are formed of metal such that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is connected tightly such that water leakage is prevented, thus an inside of the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) is understood to have a watertight structure (Figure 1, [0059]). However, in the case that the connection of the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52), the outer fastening plate (51), and the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is broken such that water enters the air layer (space), the skilled artisan would appreciate that there is at least some point in time (i.e., the beginning of the leak when only a small amount of water has entered the air layer) in which the amount of water in the air layer (space) would be small enough that the overall specific gravity of the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) would still be less than 1. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met.
Regarding Claim 3 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 1 as set forth above. As detailed above in the rejection of Claim 1, Zhou discloses that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the outer fastening plate (51) are formed of metal such that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is connected tightly such that water leakage is prevented, thus an inside of the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) is understood to have a watertight structure (Figure 1, [0059]). From Figure 6 of Zhou, it can be seen that the air layer (space) is partitioned into a plurality of regions (regions formed between adjacent bolts (53)) (Figure 6). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 3 are met.
Regarding Claim 4 (Dependent Upon Claim 3):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 3 as set forth above. The skilled artisan would appreciate that the bolts (53) of Zhou, as detailed above, may be considered partition ribs. As such, Zhou discloses partition ribs (bolts, 53) each coupled to the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) and the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52), and partitioning the air layer (space) into the plurality of regions (regions formed between adjacent bolts (53)) (Figures 1 and 6, [0058-0059]).
The examiner notes that the claim recites a product, but also includes a limitation directed to a particular method for obtaining the structure of the claimed product. Specifically, Claim 4 recites that the one or more partition ribs are molded unitarily with the exterior case and the inner wall. Patentability of product-by-process claims is based on the product itself. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from the product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. MPEP 2113 citing In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695,698, 227 USPQ964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Zhou teaches that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52), the outer fastening plate (51), the partition ribs (bolts, 53), and the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) are connected to one another in a sealed (Figures 6 and 7, [0044, 0058-0059]). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that in Zhou, the partition ribs are connected to the inner wall/exterior case in a structure which is substantially identical to the claimed structure. Furthermore, an object being integral or separable is a matter of design choice absent persuasive evidence the particular configuration of the claimed object is significant (MPEP 2144.04 V). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 4 are met.
Regarding Claim 5 (Dependent Upon Claim 4):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 4 as set forth above. Zhou further discloses that the one or more partition ribs (bolts, 53) comprises a pair of partition ribs (see annotated Figure 6 below) provided at both sides of a corner part of the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) (Figure 6). Zhou further discloses that the plurality of regions (regions formed between adjacent bolts (53)) of the air layer (space) includes a corner air layer (see annotated Figure 6 below) (Figure 6).
As detailed above in the rejection of Claim 3, Zhou discloses that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the outer fastening plate (51) are formed of metal such that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is connected tightly such that water leakage is prevented, thus an inside of the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) is understood to have a watertight structure (Figure 1, [0059]). From Figure 6 of Zhou, it can be seen that the air layer (space) is partitioned into a plurality of regions (regions formed between adjacent bolts (53)) (Figure 6). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the watertight structure includes the region between the pair of partition ribs (see annotated Figure 6 below) (Figure 6). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 5 are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
662
514
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 6 (Zhou US 2023/0291048 A1)
Regarding Claim 6 (Dependent Upon Claim 5):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 5 as set forth above.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose a volumetric capacity of the battery module housing part. However, as noted above, Zhou discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) has a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, such that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) can tolerate a relatively large pressure without being damaged (Figure 1, [0050]). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that if the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) of Zhou achieves a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, a volumetric capacity of the battery module housing part must be such that it allows the battery pack to have an overall specific gravity of 1 or less.
Furthermore, as detailed above in the rejection of Claim 1, Zhou discloses that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the outer fastening plate (51) are formed of metal such that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is connected tightly such that water leakage is prevented, thus an inside of the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) is understood to have a watertight structure (Figure 1, [0059]). However, in the case that the connection of the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52), the outer fastening plate (51), and the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is broken such that water enters the air layer (space), the skilled artisan would appreciate that there is at least some point in time (i.e., the beginning of the leak when only a small amount of water has entered the air layer) in which the amount of water in the air layer (space) would be small enough that the overall specific gravity of the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) would still be less than 1. The skilled artisan would further appreciate that this would extend to the corner air layer (see annotated Figure 6 above) of the air layer (space) (Figure 6). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 6 are met.
Regarding Claim 7 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 1 as set forth above. Zhou further discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) includes an outer peripheral wall (see annotated Figure 7 below), and the air layer (space) faces the outer peripheral wall (see annotated Figure 7 below) (see Figure 7). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 7 are met.
PNG
media_image2.png
517
926
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 7 (Zhou US 2023/0291048 A1)
Regarding Claim 8 (Dependent Upon Claim 7):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 7 as set forth above. Zhou further discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) has a rectangular shape in a plan view (see Figure 7). Zhou further discloses that the air layer (space) is disposed on an inner surface of the outer peripheral wall (see annotated Figure 7 above) located at each side of the rectangular shape (see Figure 6). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 8 are met.
Regarding Claim 9 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 1 as set forth above. Zhou discloses that the inner wall (inner fastening plate, 52) and the outer fastening plate (51) are formed of metal such that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is connected tightly such that water leakage is prevented, thus exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is understood to have a watertight structure (Figure 1, [0059]).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose a volume of the exterior case. However, as noted above, Zhou discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) has a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, such that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) can tolerate a relatively large pressure without being damaged (Figure 1, [0050]). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that if the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) of Zhou achieves a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, a volume of the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) must be such that it allows the battery pack to have an overall specific gravity of 1 or less. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 9 are met.
Regarding Claim 10 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 1 as set forth above.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) is configured to float on water.
However, the instant specification teaches that when the battery pack has an overall specific gravity of 1 or less by increasing buoyancy than weight, the battery pack is configured to reliably float on water having a specific gravity of more than 1 [0033]. As detailed above in the rejection of Claim 1, Zhou discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) has a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, such that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) can tolerate a relatively large pressure without being damaged (Figure 1, [0050]). As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that if the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) of Zhou achieves a specific gravity of 0.98 g/cm3, a volume of the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) must be such that it allows the battery pack to have an overall specific gravity of 1 or less. As such, it would be expected that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) would be able to float on some amount of water. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 10 are met.
Regarding Claim 11 (Dependent Upon Claim 10):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 10 as set forth above.
As detailed above in the rejection of Claim 10, as the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) is expected to have an overall specific gravity of 1 or less, it would also be expected that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) would be able to float on some amount of water. In such a scenario, the skilled artisan would appreciate that there would necessarily be an exposed part configured to be exposed from a surface of water when the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) floats on the water. The skilled artisan would further appreciate that an upper portion (“upper” in the orientation as shown in Figure 7) of the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) would be expected to be the exposed part as that is where the air layer is located (see Figures 6 and 7).
Zhou further discloses that the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) further comprises an output terminal (power supply interface) having a waterproof structure and fixed to the upper portion (“upper” in the orientation as shown in Figure 7) of the battery pack (deep-sea battery apparatus) (Figures 5 and 7, [0055]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 11 are met.
Regarding Claim 12 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Zhou discloses the battery pack of Claim 1 as set forth above. Zhou further discloses that the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) comprises: a lower case (casing, 1) having an upper opening; and an upper case (upper cover, 2) closing the upper opening of the lower case (casing, 1) so as to allow the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) to have a watertight structure (Figures 1 and 7, [0059]). Zhou further discloses that the lower case (casing, 1) and the upper case (upper cover, 2) are connected tightly such that water leakage is prevented, thus the exterior case (casing, 1, and upper cover, 2) is understood to have a watertight structure (Figure 1, [0059]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 12 are met.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1498. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)-270-5256. 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.
/E.E.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1724
/MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights