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 .
Application Status
This action is responsive to the claims filed 12 December 2025.
Claims 1-10 are currently pending and being examined.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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 5-6 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 5 recites “The packaging device according to claim 4, wherein: the first transmission assembly comprises … and the second transmission assembly comprises”, but claim 4 only requires either a first or second transmission assembly. Therefore, it is unclear how claim 5 now requires both assemblies. Examiner will interpret as “and/or” like claim 4.
Claim 6 is unclear for the same reason as claim 5 because claim 4 only requires either a first or second transmission assembly. Therefore, it is unclear how claim 6 now requires both assemblies Examiner will interpret as “and/or” like claim 4.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4 and 7-10 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claim 1: The subject matter of the packaging device is allowable over the prior art because of the arrangement of the combination of structural limitations set forth in the claim and their functional relationship to one another. Claim 1 includes the following limitation which, in combination with the other limitations of the claim, are what make the subject matter allowable over the prior art, as the subject matter is neither taught or suggested by the prior art:
“a guide mechanism, wherein the packaging mechanism is mounted at the guide mechanism, and wherein the guide mechanism is configured to:
prior to the battery being conveyed to the position where the packaging mechanism is disposed, drive the packaging mechanism to move towards the battery in a second direction; and
when the battery is conveyed to the position where the packaging mechanism is disposed, drive the packaging mechanism to move in the first direction same as the battery and synchronously with the battery, the first direction being different from the second direction.”
The prior art closest to teaching the claim limitations is CN209374581, which teaches a packaging device comprising: a driving assembly, two brackets spaced apart from each other, and two pressing members arranged parallel to each other, wherein the two pressing members are rotatably mounted at the two brackets and configured to press the film on to the surface of a battery. However, CN209374584 fails to teach driving the packaging mechanism to move towards the battery in a second direction and drive the packaging mechanism to move in the first direction same as the battery and synchronously with the battery, the first direction being different from the second direction.
CN117884294A teaches conveying mechanism configured to convey a battery, a guide mechanism configured to: prior to the battery being conveyed to the position where the packaging mechanism is disposed, drive the packaging mechanism to move towards the battery in a first direction and drive the mechanism to move in a direction different than the first direction. However, CN117884294A to teach driving the packaging mechanism to move towards the battery in a second direction and drive the packaging mechanism to move in the first direction same as the battery and synchronously with the battery, the first direction being different from the second direction.
Therefore, the combination set forth in the claims are not discussed, taught, or suggested in the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 5-6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATIE L GERTH whose telephone number is (303)297-4602. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-4pm (CT).
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, Shelley Self can be reached at (571)272-4524. 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.
/KATIE L GERTH/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights