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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on February 14, 2025 and December 16, 2025 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign mentioned in the description: box body 11. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “cantilever structure is arranged at least one end of the box body”. The statement lacks clarity because of a missing preposition. Examiner has understood the excerpt as “cantilever structure is arranged on at least one end of the box body”.
Claims 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 12 recite “the first cantilever beam” in singular form without identifying either of the two first cantilever beams initially recited in claim 4. Examiner has understood the reference as “each of the first cantilever beams”.
Claims 9 and 10 recite “battery box (10)” while other claims refer to the battery box without the numeral indication. Examiner has consistently understood “battery box (10)” as “battery box”.
Claims 4 and 11 recite the phrases “intersects with” and “intersect with” in reference to directions X, Y, or Z. In consideration of the spatial geometric context of the claims and to avoid ambiguity, Examiner has understood the phrases simply as “intersects” and “intersect”, disregarding the preposition “with”.
Claim 18 recites “second supporting section is configured to be connected to the front axle”. Examiner believes the statement contains a typographical error and has understood it as “second supporting section is configured to be connected to the rear axle”.
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 8 and 11 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.
Regarding claim 8, the excerpt “two side surfaces of the box body along the second direction (Y)” lacks clarity and can be misunderstood as “two side surfaces of the box body extended along the second direction (Y)”. Examiner has understood the excerpt as “two side surfaces of the box body arranged at an interval along the second direction (Y)”. The added clarifying language follows the form of claim 4 in describing the position of the first cantilever beams.
Regarding claim 11, the phrase "optionally" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear which limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(h). To advance prosecution, the Examiner has excluded the remainder of the claim following the phrase from claim limitations.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN 114715275 A), hereinafter "Li".
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a battery box, comprising: a box body (middle body 15 of chassis structure 100 comprising installation grooves formed by a partially recessed upper end surface and covered with cover plate 6, figs. 1-2), wherein the interior of the box body is configured to accommodate a battery cell arranged on the box body (battery packs of battery assembly mounted and fixed within a limit installation structure of middle body 15; “separators 5 are arranged to separate the installation grooves into a plurality of the installation spaces, so that each installation space can be installed with a battery pack of one unit alone”, pp. 8-9, lines 56-18), wherein the cantilever structure is configured to be connected to a front axle and/or rear axle of a vehicle (“front axle assembly [21] includes a front wheel assembly [211] … provided on the front body 14”, p. 8, line 25 and p. 1, lines 36-37, figs. 1-2 and 9).
Regarding claim 2, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 1, wherein the cantilever structure is arranged on at least one end of the box body along a first direction X, and the cantilever structure extends along the first direction (X) and towards a side away from the box body (front body 14 and rear body 16 shown extending along the X axis and away from middle body 15 in annotated fig. 2 below).
Regarding claim 3, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 2, wherein the cantilever structure comprises a first cantilever structure, wherein the first cantilever structure is configured to be connected to the front axle (“front axle assembly [21] includes a front wheel assembly [211] … provided on the front body 14”, p. 8, line 25 and p. 1, lines 36-37; front body 14 shown configured to be connected to front axle 21 in figs. 1-2 and 9).
Regarding claim 4, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 3, wherein the first cantilever structure comprises two first cantilever beams, the two first cantilever beams are arranged on the box body at an interval along a second direction (Y), the two first cantilever beams are both configured to be connected to the front axle (longitudinal beams 14a and 14b of front body 14 configured to be connected to front axle 21 as stated relevant to claim 3, annotated fig. 2), and the second direction (Y) intersects the first direction (X).
PNG
media_image1.png
628
778
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 4, wherein two side surfaces of the box body arranged at an interval along the second direction (Y) are defined as two beam side surfaces respectively, and projections of the two first cantilever beams on the box body along the first direction (X) are both between the two beam side surfaces (side beams 15a and 15b of middle body 15 shown enclosing projections of longitudinal beams 14a and 14b along the Y axis, annotated fig. 9 below).
Regarding claim 9, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 8, wherein a minimum distance between each of the first cantilever beams and the beam side surface relatively close to each of the first cantilever beams in the second direction (Y) is W, and 50 mm <W< 500 mm (annotated fig. 2 shows the distance between side beam 15b and longitudinal beam 14b along the Y axis sufficient to substantially accommodate thickness of a tire which is well within the stated range for W).
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 8, wherein a transition portion is connected between each of the first cantilever beams and the box body, the transition portion extends in a circular arc from each of the first cantilever beams to the beam side surface, and the transition portion is recessed towards each of the first cantilever beams (recessed transition portion labeled TP in annotated fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 4, wherein the box body comprises a beam top surface arranged along a third direction (Z), each of the first cantilever beams is arranged beyond the beam top surface in the third direction (Z) (position of longitudinal beams 14a and 14b shown respectively beyond top surface of side beams 15a and 15b in annotated fig. 2), and each two of the first direction (X), the second direction (Y) and the third direction (Z) intersect each other.
Regarding claim 12, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 4, wherein each of the first cantilever beams comprises a first supporting section (14s, annotated fig. 9) and a first mounting section (14m, annotated fig. 9) in sequence along the first direction (X), the first supporting section is configured to be connected to the front axle (14s shown in the figure proximate front axle), and the first mounting section extends in a direction away from the first supporting section (14m shown in the figure extending away from 14s).
PNG
media_image2.png
558
912
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 4, wherein the first cantilever structure further comprises a first cross beam (cross beam 14c, annotated fig. 2), wherein the first cross beam is connected between the two first cantilever beams (14c shown connected between 14a and 14b in the figure).
Regarding claim 14, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 1, wherein the cantilever structure further comprises a second cantilever structure (rear body 16, figs. 2 and 9-10), and the second cantilever structure is configured to be connected to the rear axle (“rear axle assembly [22] includes a rear wheel assembly [221] … provided on the rear body 16”, p. 8, line 25 and p. 1, lines 36-37, figs. 1-2 and 9).
Regarding claim 15, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 3, wherein the cantilever structure further comprises a second cantilever structure (rear body 16, figs. 2 and 9-10), the second cantilever structure is connected to one end of the box body facing away from the first cantilever structure (rear body 16 facing away from front body 14, fig. 2), and the second cantilever structure is configured to be connected to the rear axle (“rear axle assembly [22] includes a rear wheel assembly [221] … provided on the rear body 16”, p. 8, line 25 and p. 1, lines 36-37, figs. 1-2 and 9).
Regarding claim 16, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 14, wherein the second cantilever structure comprises two second cantilever beams, the two second cantilever beams are arranged on the box body at an interval, and the two second cantilever beams are both configured to be connected to the rear axle (longitudinal beams 16a and 16b of rear body 16 configured to be connected to rear axle 22 as stated relevant to claim 14, annotated fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 16, wherein the second cantilever structure further comprises a second cross beam (cross beam 16c, annotated fig. 2), and the second cross beam is connected between the two second cantilever beams (16c shown between 16a and 16b in the figure).
Regarding claim 18, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 16, wherein the second cantilever structure comprises a second supporting section (16s, annotated fig. 9) and a second mounting section (16m, annotated fig. 9) in sequence along the first direction (X), the second supporting section is configured to be connected to the rear axle (16s shown in the figure proximate rear axle), and the second mounting section extends in a direction away from the second supporting section (16m shown in the figure extending away from 16s).
Regarding claim 19, Li discloses a battery, comprising a battery cell (battery packs of battery assembly mounted and fixed within a limit installation structure of middle body 15; “separators 5 are arranged to separate the installation grooves into a plurality of the installation spaces, so that each installation space can be installed with a battery pack of one unit alone”, pp. 8-9, lines 56-18) and the battery box according to claim 1, wherein the battery cell is accommodated in the box body (“battery is installed and fixed on the limit installation structure”, p. 3, line 10).
Regarding claim 20, Li discloses a vehicle (electric vehicle comprising chassis structure 100, p. 1, line 29) comprising the battery according to claim 19.
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.
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.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (CN 114261268 A), hereinafter "Yang" and Peng et al. (CN 203293886 U), hereinafter “Peng”.
Regarding claim 5, Li discloses the battery box according to claim 4, but Li is silent regarding an installation platform. Yang teaches an integrated structure of a new energy vehicle body and a battery pack (fig. 2, p. 1, lines 42-60) wherein an installation platform is arranged on each of the first cantilever beams (see annotated fig. 4 of Yang below), with a mating hole being provided in the installation platform, and the mating hole is configured to install the front axle. Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the installation platform from Yang with the chassis structure disclosed by Li. Peng, who also teaches an electric vehicle chassis integrated with the battery system (p. 3, lines 12-22, figs. 1-4), recites the motivation for integrating suspension with the chassis as “conducive to ensuring the reliability of shock absorption” (p. 3, lines 41-43). The combination would predictably achieve the desired result.
Regarding claim 6, the combination discloses the battery box according to claim 5, wherein the installation platform is arranged at one end of the first cantilever beam close to the box body (annotated fig. 4 of Yang shows the installation platform arranged on the cantilever beam at an end close to the battery installation cavity as identified by the upper cover plate assembly 3, p. 3, lines 49-56).
Regarding claim 7, the combination discloses the battery box according to claim 5, wherein a reinforcing rib is arranged on the installation platform, and the reinforcing rib extends on the surface of the installation platform in a direction away from the first cantilever beam (reinforcing pattern comprising at least one reinforcing rib extending away from cantilever beam visible on installation platform of annotated fig. 4).
PNG
media_image3.png
600
830
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional art of record relates to vehicular structures for supporting battery packs having features relevant to the claimed invention. Xiao et al. (CN 113752813 A) and Jiang (CN 214189822 U) disclose integrated vehicle body structures comprising battery packs and intended to reduce overall vehicle weight. Hannefort et al. (DE 102018122854 A1) teach a chassis for an electric vehicle with the goal of optimizing stability and weight. Wang et al. (CN 202528831 U) and Ajisaka (US 2018/0272852 A1) also disclose vehicle mounted battery structures sharing common aspects with the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD OMID NEYZARI whose telephone number is (571)272-9530. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 AM-5 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, 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.
/MOHAMMAD OMID NEYZARI/Examiner, Art Unit 3613
/JAMES A SHRIVER II/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights