DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This is the first Office action on the merits for Application No. 19/045,146, filed 02/18/2025. Claims 1-13 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs,) received on 02/18/2025, 01/16/2026 and 01/20/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Please replace the phrase - -the number of the reinforcing members- - with - -the number of reinforcing number- - to maintain consistency. 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.
Claim 12 is 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
The limitation "a battery cell” in line 1 which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether it is the same as the previous battery cell recited in claim 1. This constitutes a double inclusion in the claim. If applicant intends to present the recited arrangement, the Office recommends that the limitation to recite - -the battery cell- - instead of - - a battery cell- - for clarity.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "a battery cell” in line 1 which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether it is the same as the previous battery cell recited in claim 1. This constitutes a double inclusion in the claim. If applicant intends to present the recited arrangement, the Office recommends that the limitation to recite - -the battery cell- - instead of - - a battery cell- - for clarity.
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 1-5, 7-8, 10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (CN 114571976A, from IDS filed 01/16/2026, translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses a battery box (Fig. 1; Abstract), comprising:
a box body (200) configured to accommodate a battery cell therein (Fig. 1, not labeled);
a bearing plate (140), the box body (200) being arranged on one side of the bearing plate (i.e., lower side of integrated floor 140); and
a reinforcing member (110) fixed to one side of the bearing plate (140) away from the box body (200).
Regarding claim 2, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 1, wherein the reinforcing member (110) has a first protruding portion (see annotated Figure 2 below) protruding along a direction away from one side of the bearing plate (140), and
a cavity is formed between the first protruding portion and the bearing plate (Fig. 3; annotated Figure 2, i.e., cavity or spacing between floor 140 and the protruding portions “PP”).
Regarding claim 3, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 2, wherein the depth of the cavity is larger than or equal to 1.5 times the thickness of the bearing plate (140; shown Figs. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 4, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 2, wherein the reinforcing member (110) has at least two first protruding portions (“PP”), and all of the first protruding portions are spaced apart side by side (Fig. 3; annotated Figure 2).
Regarding claim 5, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 4, wherein all of the first protruding portions (“PP”) are strip-shaped with an equal size (annotated Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 1, wherein the number of the reinforcing members (110,150) is at least two, and all of the reinforcing member (110,150) are laminated on one side of the bearing plate (140) away from the box body (200; Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 8, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 1, wherein the reinforcing member (110) is detachably connected to the bearing plate (140).
Regarding claim 10, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 1, wherein the bearing plate (140) has a second protruding portion (annotated Figure 2, i.e., the other protruding portion of one of the “PP”) protruding along a direction away from one side of the bearing plate (140).
Regarding claim 12, Xu discloses a battery, comprising a battery cell (Fig. 1, 600 shown in Figs. 29a and 30b) and the battery box according to claim 1, the battery cell being accommodated in the battery box (Fig. 1; paras. [0009], [0010] and [0021]).
Regarding claim 13, Xu discloses a vehicle (Figs. 1-4; Abstract), comprising the battery according to claim 12.
PNG
media_image1.png
475
990
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2
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 6, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu as applied to claims 1-5, 7-8 and 10-13 above.
Regarding claim 6, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 4, wherein the reinforcing member (110) further comprises a reinforcing body connected to the first protruding portion, and the thickness of the reinforcing body but does not specifically teach the thickness ranges from 0.6 mm to 2 mm. It is well recognized to a skilled person in the art to have a thin and strong reinforcement in the upper body to keep the vehicle center of gravity low for improving the overall handling and minimizing vibration under various road conditions. Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Xu to have thickness of the reinforcing body ranges between 0.6 mm to 2 mm for the purpose of reducing the vehicle structural weight such that the driving range of the electric vehicle can be improved because lighter vehicle require less energy to move, since it has been held that 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 in absence of unexpected result. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 9, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 1 except the thickness of the bearing plate (140) ranges from 0.6 mm to 3 mm. It is well recognized to a skilled person in the art to have a thin bearing plate to act as a safety shield by absorbing and dissipating impact energy way from the battery cells during a collision.
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Xu to have thickness of the bearing plate ranges 0.6 mm to 3 mm for the purpose of low thermal resistance by allowing heat to pass effortlessly from the battery cells through the plate and into liquid cooling system, since it has been held that 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 in absence of unexpected result. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 11, Xu discloses the battery box according to claim 1, wherein the battery box is used in a vehicle (Figs. 1-2; Abstract), the battery box has a first cantilever (301) connected to a front axle of the vehicle (i.e., front of the vehicle; this feature or the axle of the vehicle is inherent) and
a second cantilever (314) connected to a rear axle of the vehicle (i.e., rear of the vehicle; this feature or the axle of the vehicle is inherent), the bearing plate (140) is arranged between the first cantilever (301) and the second cantilever (314), and
the reinforcing member (110) is arranged closer to the first cantilever (314). Xu does not teach that the reinforcing member is arranged closer to the second cantilever.
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Worden, with reasonable expectation of success, to have the reinforcing member is arranged close to the second cantilever, instead of closer to the front cantilever beam such that deflection and structural vibration under various road conditions can be improved, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. The simple rearrangement of having the reinforcing member closer to the rear cantilever beam would provide stability of the heavy rear drive units and improves torsional stiffness for tire contact with the road is old and well recognized in the art. Thus, having the battery module positioned in either arrangement in the vehicle would perform equally well.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Erlacher et al. (US 10,737,729 B2) disclose a battery mounting arrangement includes a load path optimization component 4 arranged in a battery housing 1 and coplanar to seat cross-members 3 and base panel 7, See Figures 1-8; and
Hihara et al. (US 2015/0249240 A1) disclose a battery mounting structure for vehicle includes a reinforcement 46 disposed between inner panel 42 and outer panel for supporting a fuel cell stack 14 from the vehicle body lower side, see Figures 1-9.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tinh T Dang whose telephone number is (571)270-1776. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM.
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 Mon-Friday from 8AM-4:30PM 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.
/TINH T DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655 August 31, 2026
Prosecution Insights