DETAILED ACTION
This is on the merits of Application No. 18/772570, filed on 07/15/2024. Claims 1-15 are pending. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 01/31/2025, 04/23/2025, 04/30/2026, and 06/01/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I claims 1-15 in the reply filed on 07/08/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 13 states “the first connector… the second connector” and should state --the at least one first connector-- and --the at least one second connector--. 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 1-15 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.
Claim 1 states “a left bracket portion and a right bracket portion for supporting the power supply assembly”. However, this does not appear to be the case, as Fig. 8 shows that the brackets merely surround the power supply assembly while the unnumbered platform below the brackets is what supports the power supply assembly.
Claim 1 states “a maximum inner width W1 of the left bracket portion and the right bracket portion in a left and right direction is less than or equal to 700 mm”. As written, this is stating that each bracket portion has an inner width less than or equal to 700 mm. However, it appears what is meant is that the inner width between the left bracket portion and the right bracket portion in a left and right direction is less than or equal to 700 mm. If this is what is meant, it is suggested applicant amend the claim to state as such.
Claim 12 states “wherein the connector comprises at least one first connector and at least one second connector, and the at least one first connector and the at least one second connector have different shapes.” It is unclear how a single connector can comprise multiple connectors of different shapes. The term “connector” is understood to be the part that joins/connects to the battery. Claim 11 establishes the connector “for mounting the at least one detachable battery pack”. How can there be multiple connectors for mounting the at least one detachable battery pack, as required in claim 11? Reviewing the specification par. [0098] and drawings, Fig. 10A appears to show what applicant is attempting to claim. The power supply assembly comprises first connector 22a and second connector 22b with the second connector 22b having an external dimension different than the first connector. However, the “connector” of 22b would actually be multiple connectors of the same dimension, as that is what is attaching to each battery. It appears applicant is using the term “connector” when “compartment” or “holder” seems more appropriate. In this instance, however, it would be unclear how there can be “at least one first connector” and “at least one second connector”. Overall, the terminology used and odd pluralities make the claim unclear as to what exactly is trying to be claimed.
Claims 2-11 and 13-15 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 4 states that the total energy of the power supply assembly is greater than or equal to 8 kWh. However, claim 1 already establishes that a single row of the power supply assembly is greater than or equal to 8 kWh. As the same power requirement is set, claim 1 is narrower than claim 4. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2020/0315095 to Liu et al.
Liu discloses:
(Claim 1) A manned mower (Figs. 1-2), comprising: a traveling wheel set comprising first traveling wheels (142) and second traveling wheels (141); a vehicle frame (11) connecting the first traveling wheels and the second traveling wheels; a support portion (12) mounted on the vehicle frame and used for supporting an operator; a traveling electric motor (143) used for driving the traveling wheel set; and a power supply assembly (16) used for supplying power to at least the traveling electric motor and comprising at least one detachable battery pack (161); wherein the vehicle frame comprises a left bracket portion and a right bracket portion for supporting the power supply assembly (see Fig. 10 bracket portions surrounding 162), the power supply assembly is disposed between the left bracket portion and the right bracket portion.
(Claim 3) wherein at least a part of the power supply assembly is disposed behind the support portion (see Fig. 10).
(Claim 5) wherein the single row of the power supply assembly comprises one battery pack (see Fig. 10, a single row comprises two battery packs, which includes one battery back, see also alternative embodiment Fig. 14 in which only one battery is used).
(Claim 6) wherein the single row of the power supply assembly comprises a plurality of battery packs (see Fig. 10, a single row comprises two battery packs).
(Claim 7) wherein the power supply assembly comprises a plurality of single rows, and at least one of the plurality of single rows is disposed along a first direction basically parallel to the left and right direction (see Fig. 10).
Liu does not explicitly disclose:
(Claim 1) a maximum inner width W1 of the left bracket portion and the right bracket portion in a left and right direction is less than or equal to 700 mm.
a total energy of a single row of the power supply assembly along the left and right direction is greater than or equal to 8 kW-h.
(Claim 2) wherein the total energy of a single row of the power supply assembly along the left and right direction is greater than or equal to 9 kW-h.
(Claim 4) wherein total energy of the power supply assembly is greater than or equal to 8 kW-h.
(Claim 8) wherein energy of the at least one detachable battery pack is greater than or equal to 2 kW-h.
(Claim 10) wherein a height H of the power supply assembly in an up and down direction is greater than or equal to 330 mm, and a width of the power supply assembly in the left and right direction is greater than or equal to 600 mm and less than or equal to 700 mm.
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, with a reasonable expectation of success, the structure of Liu to have a maximum inner width between the left and right bracket be less than or equal to 700 mm, a height of the power supply in an up down direction greater than or equal to 300mm and a width greater than or equal to 600 mm and less than or equal to 700mm, a total energy of a single row greater than or equal to 8/9 kW-h, and energy of the at least one detachable battery pack is greater than or equal to 2 kW-h, as one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with the parameters, especially when the specifics are not disclosed, so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2019/0178219 to Koenen.
Liu discloses:
(Claim 9) wherein a battery pack of the at least one detachable battery pack comprises a plurality of cells, and the plurality of cells are a lithium based (see Abstract).
Liu does not explicitly disclose:
(Claim 9) the plurality of cells comprise a lithium iron phosphate cell.
Koenen teaches:
Using a lithium-ion battery with lithium iron phosphate cells (see par. [0023]) in a mower.
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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have the lithium-ion battery of Liu use lithium iron phosphate cells, as taught by Koenen, as an obvious design choice to the type of lithium battery wanted. Liu does not specify the type of lithium-ion battery used. One of ordinary skill would be able to apply the teachings of Koenen and use a lithium iron phosphate battery and produce predictable results.
Claims 11 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu and in further view of WO 2021/071655 to Wang et al (cited in applicant’s IDS).
Liu discloses:
(Claim 11) wherein the power supply assembly further comprises a connector for mounting the at least one detachable battery pack to connect the at least one detachable battery pack to the vehicle frame (see Abstract).
(Claim 14) wherein the connector comprises at least a first coupling portion (Fig. 11 element 162e) electrically connected to a battery pack of the at least one detachable battery pack and a third coupling portion (162c) for limiting the battery pack mounted on the connector, and the first coupling portion and the third coupling portion are opposite to each other.
(Claim 15) wherein the first coupling portion comprises a locking assembly (Fig. 11 element 162c) and a compartment terminal assembly (162e), the battery pack comprises a terminal assembly adaptable to the compartment terminal assembly (see par. [0107]).
Liu does not explicitly disclose:
(Claim 11) the at least one detachable battery pack and the connector are used as a whole capable of being removed from the manned mower and mounted to another manned mower to supply power to the another manned mower.
(Claim 15) a rated value of a current outputted by the battery pack through the connector is greater than or equal to 120 A.
Wang teaches:
(Claim 11) the at least one detachable battery pack (Figs. 5-6, element 161) and the connector are used as a whole capable of being removed from the manned mower and mounted to another manned mower to supply power to the another manned mower (see Fig. 5, battery compartment 162 can be detached from the main frame, therefore can be mounted to another manned mower.
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, with a reasonable expectation of success, the structure of Liu to have the whole power supply detachable from the frame, as taught by Wang, in order to easily move or replace the entire power supply assembly. Making the power supply assembly detachable could allow for easier storage of components, make maintenance on certain areas easier, or to easily replace the power supply assembly in case of damage.
Regarding claim 15, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have, with a reasonable expectation of success, the connector of Liu have a rated value of a current outputted by the battery pack through the connector be greater than or equal to 120 A as one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with the parameters, especially when the specifics are not disclosed, so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
The cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Phanco (US 12239051) discloses a battery mounting system for electric zero-turn mower.
Wang et al (US 2026/0116211) discloses a vehicle control method, multi-purpose vehicle, and garden work vehicle.
Moturu et al (US 2024/0072616) discloses a control module for high power motor.
Zeiler et al (US 2023/0200296) discloses an electric vehicle with multiple ports.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY HANNON whose telephone number is (571)270-1943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-6.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at (571) 270-5565. 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.
/TIMOTHY HANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights