DETAILED ACTION
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
The “jacking apparatus” [for driving the jacking bracket] “to ascend and descend along a third direction that intersects with both the first direction and the second direction”, as recited in Claim 7;
The “first driving apparatus….” [for driving] “the first shaper and the fourth shaper are driven by the first driving apparatus to move toward each other or move away from each other along the first screw rod”, as recited in Claim 14;
The “second driving apparatus …” [for driving] “the second shaper and the third shaper are driven by the second driving apparatus to move away from each other or move toward each other along the second screw rod”, as recited in Claim 14; and
The “detection apparatus for detecting a quantity of stacked workpieces in the workpiece queue”, as recited in Claim 17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-4, 9-10, 15-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 218664300 (“CN ‘300”; cited by Applicant; English translation of the Description provided with this Office Action) in view of CN 116544484 (“CN 484”; cited by Applicant; English translation of the Description provided with this Office Action).
With regard to Claim 1, CN ‘300 discloses a stacking apparatus (Figs. 1-3, “Detailed Ways”, P3-P6) comprising:
a shaping device (4, Figs. 2-3, P5-P6) that receives a row of at least two workpieces/battery cells from a pre-stacking device (2), the shaping device having shapers (401) arranged on a base bracket (the frame shown in Fig. 3), wherein the shapers act in pairs to perform an alignment operation for aligning workpieces (P5-P6),
wherein paired shapers (401) are configured in such a way that at least one of the actions enables the paired shapers to approach or move away from each other along a first direction above the stacking table (via 402, 403, 404, Fig. 3, P5-P6), and
the alignment operation is performed through the approaching action of the shapers, to obtain a neat workpiece queue through stacking (Fig. 3, P5-P6).
While CN ‘300 discloses that the shaping device is mounted on a base bracket that is further mounted on a frame (Figs. 2-3), and CN ‘300 also discloses a stacking table (2) that is also mounted on a frame, CN ‘300 fails to specifically teach a stacking table and the shaping device/shapers that are mounted on the same base bracket. CN ‘484 discloses a stacking apparatus for carrying at least one workpiece/battery cell (Figs. 1-9, “Detailed ways”, P4-P10), wherein both the shaping device (32, Fig. 7) and the stacking device (31) are mounted on a base bracket (321, 322, Figs. 7-9) of a stacking table (30, Figs. 4, 7-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention, to modify CN ‘300 to include both the stacking device and the shapers on a base bracket of a stacking table because it would reduce the overall dimensions of the stacking apparatus since the shapers and stacking device could be located adjacent each other (and not in a linear path as shown by CN ‘300) thereby making the overall stacking and shaping operation more efficient since the rows of workpieces/battery cells would have less distance to travel and the shaping and stacking could occur closer in distance and time to each other.
With regard to Claims 2 and 9, CN ‘300 discloses a push plate (206, 207) for performing a pushing operation on the workpieces (P5), wherein the push plate is arranged on the base bracket along a second, perpendicular direction that intersects with the first direction (Fig. 2), and is configured to be able to move forward or backward and the pushing operation is performed through the forward movement action of the push plate (Fig. 2, P2, P5); and a reference plate (blocking body, P5), arranged on the base bracket and arranged on an opposite side of the push plate along the second direction, and configured to block the workpiece (P2, P5). CN ‘484 also discloses a push plate (325, 326, Figs. 8-9) arranged on the base bracket (321) that moves forward and backwards to push the workpieces/battery cells (P9-P10).
With regard to Claim 3, while CN ‘300 discloses a push plate (206, 207) and a reference plate (blocking body), only the blocking body is able to ascend and descend (P5). CN ‘484 discloses a push plate (325, 326, Figs. 8-9) arranged on the base bracket (321) that is configured to be able to ascend and descend between a first position and a second position at which the pushing operation is performed, and when the push plate ascends to the first position, a channel is formed below the push plate (Figs. 8-9, P9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention, to modify CN ‘300 such that its push plate (206) was also vertically movable in a manner similar to the push plate of CN ‘484 because it would allow the push plate to be able to move to the vertical level of the workpieces when stacking is being performed while also being out of the way when stacking is not being performed, as taught by CN ‘484 (P9).
With regard to Claim 4, CN ‘300 discloses wherein each shaper has a shaping surface facing an adjacent shaper, and the shaping surface is used for contact with the workpiece (Fig. 3, P5-P6).
With regard to Claim 10, CN ‘300 discloses at least two shapers sequentially arranged along the first direction, the two shapers being configured to be able to approach or move away from each other along the first direction, and the alignment operation is performed through the approaching action (Fig. 3).
With regard to Claim 15, CN ‘300 fails to teach a manipulator. CN ‘484 discloses at least one manipulator (50, Fig. 4), wherein the manipulator is configured to place at least one workpiece at a specified position on the stacking table in a specified orientation, and the specified position comprises a position at which a tray (40, Figs. 4-5) for accommodating the workpiece is located (P9).
With regard to Claims 16 and 18, CN ‘300 fails to teach a conveying guide rail that provides a workpiece holding tray to the stacking table. CN ‘484 discloses a conveying guide rail (10, 20, 21, Figs. 4-5), the conveying guide rail is configured to enable a tray (40) for accommodating the workpiece to enter the stacking table or exit the stacking table along a second direction that intersects with the first direction(Fig. 4), and a stopper (22) is arranged near one end of the conveying guide rail that is away from the shapers (Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention, to modify CN ‘300 to use a tray for holding the workpieces and providing a conveying guide rail to provide the tray to the stacking table because the tray would assist in keeping the workpieces stacked and shaped for any subsequent operations (P10).
With regard to Claim 18, CN ‘300 fails to teach a tray for placing the workpiece. CN ‘484 discloses a tray (40, Figs. 4-5, P9) where the workpieces are placed for stacking and shaping.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 20 are allowed.
Claims 5-8, 11-14, and 17 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. WO 2019/002457 discloses a stacking apparatus for producing battery modules that includes a stacking table, a push plate, and a manipulator for loading the battery cells into the stacking table.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LYNN E SCHWENNING whose telephone number is (313)446-4861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5 pm EST.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272 -7097. 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.
/LYNN E SCHWENNING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652