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 Objections
Claims 1-16 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claims 1-16, line 1, “control” should read “controlled”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 4-5 and 7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 4-5 recite the limitation “wherein the latching member tends to be moved or rotated to engage the first battery latch seat”. It is not clear what is encompassed by the term “tends to” in the recited limitation. Furthermore, the disclosure does not provide sufficient detail for one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the metes and bounds of what is required of the latching member to meet the claimed tendency. Claim 7 does not remedy the indefinite limitation of claim 5, and is therefore rejected for its dependency upon claim 5.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mitsuyasu et al. (DE 102019207103 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mitsuyasu discloses an electronically control battery box lock (paragraph 0004, figures 2 and 6) comprising: a base comprising a first base latch seat comprising an electronic controller (paragraph 0043-0044, 0059, DT 1, figures 2 and 5-6, first holder 12, controller 32); and a latching member being moveable or rotatable under the control of the electronic controller (paragraphs 0048, 0062, locking unit 24); a battery box detachably mounted on the base (paragraph 0043, battery unit 40), and comprising a first battery latch seat (paragraph 0044, end 40A); the latching member of the first base latch seat being movable or rotatable to engage with the first battery latch seat (paragraph 0048); when the latching member engages with the first battery latch seat, the battery box being inseparable from the base; the latching member being moveable or rotatable to disengage the first battery latch seat under the control of the electronic controller of the first base latch seat (paragraphs 0048-0050).
Regarding claim 2, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mitsuyasu further discloses wherein the base further comprises a second base latch seat (paragraph 0044, figures 2 and 6, second holder 14), the first base latch seat and the second base latch seat respectively located on two ends of the base (figures 2 and 6); the battery box further comprises a second battery latch seat (end 40B); the first battery latch seat and the second battery latch seat respectively located on two ends of the battery box (figure 2); the battery box detachably located between the first base latch seat and the second base latch seat of the base (paragraphs 0048-0050, figure 6); when the battery box is located between the first base latch seat and the second base latch seat of the base (figures 2 and 6), the second battery latch seat and the second base latch seat engage with each other; when the latching member of the first base latch seat is disengaged from the first battery latch seat, the second battery latch seat is capable of being tilted away from the base to disengage from the second base latch seat (paragraphs 0045, 0067, figure 6).
Regarding claim 3, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 2. Mitsuyasu further discloses a guidance structure mounted on the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat; when the second battery latch seat and the second base latch seat are tilted and coupled to each other, the first battery latch seat inserted into the first base latch seat along the guidance structure toward the base (paragraphs 0074, 0084, figures 7 and 9, guide surface 54B and surface 52A).
Regarding claim 4, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mitsuyasu further discloses wherein the latching member tends to be moved or rotated to engage the first battery latch seat (paragraphs 0016, 0048).
Regarding claim 5, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 3. Mitsuyasu further discloses wherein the latching member tends to be moved or rotated to engage the first battery latch seat (paragraphs 0016, 0048).
Regarding claim 6, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mitsuyasu further discloses wherein the electronic controller comprises a rotating member comprising an eccentric part protruding from the rotating member, the electronic controller moving or rotating the latching member in a direction away from the first battery latch seat to disengage the latching member from the first battery latch seat by rotating the rotating member (paragraphs 0079, 0080, 0085, figure 9, cam mechanism 66).
Regarding claim 7, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 5. Mitsuyasu further discloses wherein the electronic controller comprises a rotating member comprising an eccentric part protruding from the rotating member, the electronic controller moving or rotating the latching member in a direction away from the first battery latch seat to disengage the latching member from the first battery latch seat by rotating the rotating member (paragraphs 0079, 0080, 0085, figure 9, cam mechanism 66).
Regarding claim 12, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mitsuyasu further discloses wherein the first base latch seat comprises at least one separation member tending to push the first battery latch seat away from the base; when the latching member is disengaged from the first battery latch seat, the separation member pushing the first battery latch seat away from the base (paragraphs 0076, 0086, elastic member 60).
Regarding claim 13, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mitsuyasu further discloses a latching member sensor electrically connected to the electronic controller, and configured to sense whether the latching member moves or rotates to engage the first battery latch seat (paragraph 0062, figure 10, sensor 36B).
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.
Claims 8-9, 10-11, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsuyasu et al. (DE 102019207103 A1) in view of den Hertog (US 11572132 B2).
Regarding claim 8, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mitsuyasu is silent regarding a manual unlocking member mounted on one of the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat, and selectively engaging the other of the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat; when the latching member is disengaged from the first battery latch seat and the manual unlocking member is disengaged from said the other of the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat, the battery box being capable of disengaging the base.
den Hertog discloses a battery lock mounted within a cavity of a frame of a bicycle and configured to secure the battery assembly within the cavity (den Hertog Col. 1, lines 27-43). den Hertog further discloses that the battery comprises a handle mounted on a surface of the battery which connects to the lock, which may be pressed to disengage the battery assembly from the battery lock from a stationary latch, allowing the battery to be removed (den Hertog Col. 7, lines 7-55, figures 10-13, handle 1200). The reference teaches that the handle allows the user to remove and easily carry the battery assembly. Mitsuyasu and den Hertog are analogous because they both disclose locking mechanisms for battery boxes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lock disclosed by Mitsuyasu to include the handle disclosed by den Hertog. Doing so would allow the user to remove and easily carry the battery assembly.
Regarding claim 9, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 7. Mitsuyasu is silent regarding a manual unlocking member mounted on one of the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat, and selectively engaging the other of the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat; when the latching member is disengaged from the first battery latch seat and the manual unlocking member is disengaged from said the other of the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat, the battery box being capable of disengaging the base.
den Hertog discloses a battery lock mounted within a cavity of a frame of a bicycle and configured to secure the battery assembly within the cavity (den Hertog Col. 1, lines 27-43). den Hertog further discloses that the battery comprises a handle mounted on a surface of the battery which connects to the lock, which may be pressed to disengage the battery assembly from the battery lock from a stationary latch, allowing the battery to be removed (den Hertog Col. 7, lines 7-55, figures 10-13, handle 1200). The reference teaches that the handle allows the user to remove and easily carry the battery assembly. Mitsuyasu and den Hertog are analogous because they both disclose locking mechanisms for battery boxes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lock disclosed by Mitsuyasu to include the handle disclosed by den Hertog. Doing so would allow the user to remove and easily carry the battery assembly.
Regarding claim 10, modified Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 8. Mitsuyasu is silent regarding wherein the first base latch seat comprises at least one separation member tending to push the first battery latch seat away from the base; when the latching member is disengaged from the first battery latch seat, the separation member pushing the first battery latch seat away from the base, thereby engaging the manual unlocking member with said the other of the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat.
den Hertog discloses a battery lock mounted within a cavity of a frame of a bicycle and configured to secure the battery assembly within the cavity (den Hertog Col. 1, lines 27-43). den Hertog further discloses that the lock comprises a handle plunger which pushes on the handle mount and causes the handle mount to pivot away from the front face of the battery such that the handle mount engages the stationary latch (Col. 7, lines 20-38). The reference teaches that this allows the battery assembly to be partially disengaged without being ejected and falling to the ground. Mitsuyasu and den Hertog are analogous because they both disclose locking mechanisms for battery boxes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lock disclosed by Mitsuyasu to include the separation member configuration disclosed by den Hertog. Doing so would allow the battery assembly to be partially disengaged without being ejected and falling to the ground.
Regarding claim 11, modified Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 9. Mitsuyasu is silent regarding wherein the first base latch seat comprises at least one separation member tending to push the first battery latch seat away from the base; when the latching member is disengaged from the first battery latch seat, the separation member pushing the first battery latch seat away from the base, thereby engaging the manual unlocking member with said the other of the first base latch seat and the first battery latch seat.
den Hertog discloses a battery lock mounted within a cavity of a frame of a bicycle and configured to secure the battery assembly within the cavity (den Hertog Col. 1, lines 27-43). den Hertog further discloses that the lock comprises a handle plunger which pushes on the handle mount and causes the handle mount to pivot away from the front face of the battery such that the handle mount engages the stationary latch (Col. 7, lines 20-38). The reference teaches that this allows the battery assembly to be partially disengaged without being ejected and falling to the ground. Mitsuyasu and den Hertog are analogous because they both disclose locking mechanisms for battery boxes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lock disclosed by Mitsuyasu to include the separation member configuration disclosed by den Hertog. Doing so would allow the battery assembly to be partially disengaged without being ejected and falling to the ground.
Regarding claim 14, modified Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 11. Mitsuyasu further discloses a latching member sensor electrically connected to the electronic controller, and configured to sense whether the latching member moves or rotates to engage the first battery latch seat (paragraph 0062, figure 10, sensor 36B).
Regarding claim 16, modified Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 13. Mitsuyasu further discloses wherein the latching member sensor is electrically connected to the electronic controller; and a sensory unit respectively corresponding to the sensor unit (paragraph 0062, sensor 36A and switch 36B); the electronic controller comprises a rotating member; the electronic controller moving or rotating the latching member by rotating the rotating member; the electronic controller being capable of rotating the rotating member in two opposite directions (paragraphs 0079, 0080, 0085, figure 9, cam mechanism 66), the rotation of the rotating member in two opposite directions respectively pushing the sensory unit towards the sensor unit; each of the sensory unit sensed by the corresponding sensor unit after being pushed (paragraphs 0062, 0079, 0080, 0085, figure 9, cam mechanism 66). Mitsuyasu is silent regarding two sensor units and two sensory units. However, the mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.04). In this case, it would have been obvious to provide a second detector in the lock of Mitsuyasu. Doing so would provide the predictable results of detecting the position of the battery relative to the battery holder.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsuyasu et al.
Regarding claim 15, Mitsuyasu discloses the limitations of claim 13. Mitsuyasu further discloses wherein the latching member sensor is electrically connected to the electronic controller; and a sensory unit respectively corresponding to the sensor unit (paragraph 0062, sensor 36A and switch 36B); the electronic controller comprises a rotating member; the electronic controller moving or rotating the latching member by rotating the rotating member; the electronic controller being capable of rotating the rotating member in two opposite directions (paragraphs 0079, 0080, 0085, figure 9, cam mechanism 66), the rotation of the rotating member in two opposite directions respectively pushing the sensory unit towards the sensor unit; each of the sensory unit sensed by the corresponding sensor unit after being pushed (paragraphs 0062, 0079, 0080, 0085, figure 9, cam mechanism 66). Mitsuyasu is silent regarding two sensor units and two sensory units. However, the mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.04). In this case, it would have been obvious to provide a second detector in the lock of Mitsuyasu. Doing so would provide the predictable results of detecting the position of the battery relative to the battery holder.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN T LUSTGRAAF whose telephone number is (571)272-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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.
/B.T.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
