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
Applicant is advised that should claim 10 be found allowable, claim 19 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
For purposes of examination Claim 19 has been examined to have depended from Claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 4 and 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. It is unclear how the support plate (disclosed to be element 4; first mention paragraph [0025] of the instant specification filed on 10/28/2024) is floor panel of the motor vehicle which closes an interior of the motor vehicle. All the instant figures show element 4 located on the underside of the vehicle which would not be considered “a floor panel”. As best understood claim 4 has been examined to read “support plate forms a panel of the motor vehicle which closes an interior of the motor vehicle”.
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, 3, 8, 10-12, 14, 17-20 and Claims 4 and 15, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 10 2017 212 260 issued to Mahle (Foreign Citation No. 1 in the IDS filed on 10/28/2024—see translation attached to this Office Action).
Regarding Claim 1, Mahle teaches in Figures 1-12 and respective portions of the specification of a motor vehicle, comprising:
a load-bearing structure (1) having at least two longitudinal members (8); and
a battery (18) that includes a single-piece battery frame (the interior portion of the longitudinal member 8 that faces the battery modules 18) that laterally delimits the battery to form at least radially internal portions (see Figures 4-8 where the interior portions of longitudinal member 8 have portion with a radius that face batteries 18) of the at least two longitudinal members (18),
a support plate (3) that forms a base which covers an underside of the battery frame (see Figures 4-8), and a plurality of battery cells (see Figures 4-8 which show a plurality of battery cells 18) arranged in the battery frame and fastened on the support plate (3).
Regarding Claim 3, Mahle teaches an underside of the support plate (3) forms an underride protection plate of the motor vehicle (the support plate would defect debris kicked up by the tires and is thus a protection plate for protecting the batteries).
Regarding Claim 4, Mahle teaches the support plate support plate (3) forms a panel of the motor vehicle which closes an interior of the motor vehicle—see figures.
Regarding Claim 8, Mahle teaches cross-members (17) fastened to the support plate (3).
Regarding Claim 10, Mahle teaches the support plate (3) comprises upward-facing pockets into which the battery cells are inserted—see where partitions (17) are located in Figure 5.
Regarding Claim 11, Mahle teaches the battery (18) comprises a high-voltage battery (18).
Regarding Claim 12, Mahle teaches in Figures 1-12 and respective portions of the specification of a motor vehicle, comprising:
longitudinal members (8) forming a load-bearing structure (1); and
a battery (18) that includes a battery housing (see Figure 4-8) comprising a single-piece battery frame (the interior portion of the longitudinal member 8 that faces the battery modules 18) that laterally delimits the battery to form at least radially internal portions (see Figures 4-8 where the interior portions of longitudinal member 8 have portions with a radius that face the batteries 18) of the at least two longitudinal members (18), a support plate (3) that forms a base which covers an underside of the battery frame (see Figures 4-8), and a plurality of battery cells (see Figures 4-8 which show a plurality of battery cells 18) arranged in the battery frame and fastened on the support plate (3).
Regarding Claim 14, Mahle teaches an underside of the support plate (3) forms an underride protection plate of the motor vehicle (the support plate would defect debris kicked up by the tires and is thus a protection plate for protecting the batteries).
Regarding Claim 15, Mahle teaches the support plate support plate (3) forms a panel of the motor vehicle which closes an interior of the motor vehicle—see figures.
Regarding Claim 17, Mahle teaches cross-members (17) fastened to the support plate (3).
Regarding Claim 18, Mahle teaches the support plate (3) comprises upward-facing pockets into which the battery cells are inserted—see where partitions (17) are located in Figure 5.
Regarding Claim 19, Mahle teaches the support plate (3) comprises upward-facing pockets into which the battery cells are inserted—see partitions 17.
Regarding Claim 20, the method for producing the vehicle taught by Mahle inherently includes forming a load-bearing structure (1) having at least two longitudinal members (8); forming a battery housing (see Figures 4-8) with a single-piece battery frame (the interior portion of the longitudinal member 8 that faces the battery modules 18) that form at least radially internal portions (see Figures 4-8 where the interior portions of longitudinal member 8 have portion with a radius that face batteries 18) of the at least two longitudinal members (18), a support plate (3) that forms a base which covers an underside of the battery frame (see Figures 4-8), and fastening a plurality of battery cells (see Figures 4-8 which show a plurality of battery cells 18) arranged in the battery frame and fastened on the support plate (3); fastening the battery frame to a second longitudinal member (Figures 4-8 shows two longitudinal members 8); and fastening the support plate (3) with the fastened battery cells (18) to the lower region of the battery frame (see Figures 4-8).
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahle, as disclosed above, in view of U.S. Patent 9,227,582 issued to Katayama et al.
Regarding Claims 2 and 13, Mahle teaches the support plate (3) is fastened in sealing fashion to the battery frame (8) via a screw connection (elements 11a, 12a, 13a). Mahle does not explicelty disclose a sealing element at the connection.
Katayama et al. teaches of a sealing element (40) located between a battery tray (38) and battery cover (40) and secured with bolts (41) to hermetically seal the battery pack—see at least Figures 3 and 4 and Col. 4, lines 36-48.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a sealing element, as taught by Katayama et al., for the connection between the battery frame (8) and the support plate (3) for the invention taught by Mahle. One would be motivated to provide a sealing element to hermetically seal the battery compartment to prevent water and debris from entering the battery compartment.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7, 9 and 16 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the primary reason for the indication of allowable subject matter in this case is the inclusion of in claims 5 and 16 where a portion of a lower region of the battery frame forms a flange and the flange facilitates fastening of the battery frame to a second longitudinal member; in re claim 9 and 18, where the battery frame forms radially internal portions of the cross-members that are fastened to the support plate, in combination with the other elements recited, not found in the prior art of record.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN L SWENSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5572. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (9-5).
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303) 297-4337. 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.
BRIAN SWENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3618
/BRIAN L SWENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights