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 .
Response to Amendment
In the reply dated November 11, 2025, there are no amendments. Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-20 are pending.
Oath/Declaration
In the reply dated November 11, 2025, the Applicant has provided a Declaration of Matthew A. Spence under C.F.R 1.132. The Examiner has fully considered the Declaration (see Response to Arguments).
Status of Application
The Examiner has maintains the previous rejections as provided in the Office Action dated June 11, 2025, which are copied below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-2, 3-9, 11-16, and 18-20 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.
The term “enhanced bond” in claims 1, 9, and 16 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “enhanced bond” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Enhanced bond” has no ordinary meaning, there is no support in the specification to provide clarification for the meaning of “an enhanced bond”, and “enhanced bond” is not defined by the claim. An enhanced bond, as claimed, is a relative term that must be compared with another type of less enhanced bond by some degree, such as the strength of the join between the carbon fibers or carbonized fibers and the strap. Further, in addition to how much it is enhanced or how it is measured, it is unclear how is it enhanced or what makes the structure the bond enhanced. None of these questions are answerable, making the scope of the claim unclear. All other claims depend on Claims 1, 9, and 16; therefore, all claims are indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugie et al. [US20070160910A1, dated July 12, 2007, as provided on the IDS dated March 28, 2024 as CN100448093C], hereinafter Sugie, in view of Abrahamson et al. [US20180366719A1, dated December 20, 2018], hereinafter Abrahamson.
Regarding Claim 1, Sugie discloses a lead-acid battery [Sugie abstract] comprising:
a container with a cover [Sugie 0035-0038, Fig. 1, container 12 with cover 15], the container having one or more compartments [Sugie 0035-0038, Fig. 1, chambers 14 with partitions 13];
one or more cell elements [Sugie 0035-0038, Fig. 1, electrode plate pack 11 with cell elements as positive electrode plates 2 and negative electrode plate 3] are provided in the one or more compartments [Sugie 0036], the one or more cell elements comprising a positive electrode and a negative electrode [Sugie 0035-0038, Fig. 1, cell elements as positive electrode plates 2 and negative electrode plate 3], the positive electrode having a positive substrate or current collector and a positive electrochemically active material in contact with the positive substrate or current collector [Sugie 0040, Fig. 2, positive electrode plate 2 with electrode grid 21 as the current collector and active material 24], the negative electrode having a negative substrate or current collector and a negative electrochemically active material in contact with the negative substrate or current collector [Sugie 0052, Fig. 3, negative electrode plate 3 with electrode grid 31 as the current collector and active material 34];
the current collector having a frame member being a strap extending the current collector composed of a lead-calcium alloy [Sugie 0040-0041; 0052-0054 (Sugie discloses positive electrode grid 21 includes mesh 25, frame/strap 23, and tab/lug 22 [Sugie 0040] and is made of a Pb-alloy including at least one of Ca and Sn [Sugie 0041]. The negative electrode grid 31 includes mesh 35, frame/strap 33, and tab/lug 32 [Sugie 0052] made of a Pb-alloy including at least one of Ca and Sn [Sugie 0053]. As shown in Figs. 2 and 3, the straps 23 and 33 extend the width of their respective current collectors.)];
electrolyte provided within the container [Sugie 0068, 0083, and throughout]; and
one or more terminal posts extending from the container or the cover and electrically coupled to the one or more cell elements [Sugie 0038, 0083, Fig. 1, terminal posts 16 (positive) and 17 (negative)].
While Sugie discloses the claimed positive and negative electrode [Sugie 0035-0038, Fig. 1, cell elements as positive electrode plates 2 and negative electrode plate 3], said respective electrochemically active material [Sugie 0040, Fig. 2, positive electrode plate 2 with electrode grid 21 as the current collector and active material 24; Sugie 0052, Fig. 3, negative electrode plate 3 with electrode grid 31 as the current collector and active material 34], a current collector having a frame member being a strap extending the current collector composed of a lead calcium alloy [Sugie 0040-0041; 0052-0054 (Sugie discloses positive electrode grid 21 includes mesh 25, frame/strap 23, and tab/lug 22 [Sugie 0040] and is made of a Pb-alloy including at least one of Ca and Sn [Sugie 0041]. The negative electrode grid 31 includes mesh 35, frame/strap 33, and tab/lug 32 [Sugie 0052] made of a Pb-alloy including at least one of Ca and Sn [Sugie 0053].)],
Sugie is silent to a cured carbon or carbonized fiber mat and therefore does not explicitly disclose “wherein at least one of the positive electrode or the negative electrode comprises a cured carbon or carbonized fiber mat current collector impregnated with said respective electrochemically active material the cured carbon or carbonized fiber mat current collector having a frame member and a plurality of carbon fibers or carbonized fibers, with the frame member being a strap extending the current collector, with each of the plurality of carbon fibers or carbonized fibers bonded to the strap and extended from the strap, with the strap, composed of a lead-calcium alloy, having an enhanced bond between the strap and the plurality of carbon fibers or carbonized fibers”.
Abrahamson discloses a lead-acid battery electrode [Abrahamson abstract and throughout] comprises a cured carbon fiber mat current collector [Abrahamson 0023, 0138-0143, Figs. 9-11, 23, 24, and throughout, reads on carbon mat where 0143 and throughout reads on cured] impregnated with said respective electrochemically active material [Abrahamson abstract, 0144-0148, 0166 and throughout] the cured carbon fiber mat current collector having a frame member [Abrahamson 0144-0148, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, frame 450] and a plurality of carbon fibers [Abrahamson 0138 explicitly discloses plurality of carbon fibers as well as 0144-0148, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, plurality of carbon fibers 451], with the frame member being a strap extending the current collector [Abrahamson 0144-0148, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, part 402 reads on claimed strap and extends the width and depth of the current collector], with each of the plurality of carbon fibers bonded to the strap and extended from the strap [Abrahamson 0147-0158, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, (Abrahamson discloses the method for connecting the plurality of carbon fibers to the strap (lug) through pressure impregnation [0147-157] and/or welding/soldering [0158], and both methods read on bonded to the strap and extended from the strap.)], with the strap, composed of a lead alloy [Abrahamson 0143, 0157 (Abrahamson discloses lead or a lead alloy, such as Pb-Sn], having an enhanced bond between the strap and the plurality of carbon fibers [Abrahamson 0147-0158, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, (Abrahamson discloses the method for connecting the plurality of carbon fibers to the strap (lug) through pressure impregnation [0147-157] and/or welding/soldering [0158]. While Abrahamson does not explicitly disclose “an enhanced bond”, the scope of enhanced bond is unclear as provided in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection above. Further, Abrahamson explicitly discloses a pressure impregnation of the carbon fibers into the strap where about 95% of the fibers are impregnated into the strap, which indicates a secure bond for electrical connection [[0143 and throughout].)].
Abrahamson discloses a lead alloy, such as lead-tin as described above but does not explicitly disclose a lead-calcium alloy. Given the analogous art lead-acid battery disclosures of Sugie and Abrahamson combined, the skilled artisan would know how to substitute Abrahamson’s current collector comprised of a cured carbon fiber mat impregnated with an active layer material and having a frame being a strap with well-secured bonding of the strap to the carbon fiber mat for either of Sugie’s positive or negative electrode using Sugie’s specified lead-calcium alloy for Abrahamson’s lead ally strap. Sugie’s lead-acid battery would be improved by Abrahamson’s carbon fiber current collector with active material paste impregnated within the carbon fibers due to its disclosed improved lead-acid battery performance, particularity for lead-acid battery use in hybrid vehicles performance [Abrahamson 0001-0008]. Sugie identifies lead-alloys for electrodes can be lead-calcium, lead-tin, or lead-calcium-tin for good corrosion resistance and mechanical strength [Sugie 0041-0042, 0054]; therefore, the skilled artisan would understand that Sugie’s disclosed list of lead alloys are art recognized materials suitable for usage for electrodes/current collectors in lead acid batteries. (See MPEP 2144.06) Therefore, it would be obvious to try Sugie’s disclosure of lead-calcium current collectors as the specific type of lead alloy in Abrahamson’s lead alloy current collector. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Sugie and Abrahamson as described above for a lead-acid battery with good corrosion resistance [Sugie 0041-0041, 0054] and service life [Sugie 0001 and throughout] and good performance [Abrahamson, 0002-0003 and throughout, for application to vehicle batteries [Sugie 0001 and throughout, Abrahamson 0001-0003], such as hybrids [Abrahamson 0001]. (See MPEP 2143(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; (B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; (C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (E) "Obvious to try" – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.)
Regarding Claim 2, modified Sugie discloses the lead-acid battery of claim 1, wherein the frame member is a lead-calcium- tin alloy [Sugie 0041-0043; 0053-0054].
Regarding Claim 4, modified Sugie discloses the lead-acid battery of claim 1, wherein the frame member comprises a lug [Sugie 0040, Fig. 2, tab 22 as lug; Sugie 0052, Fig. 3, tab 32 as lug; Abrahamson 0148, Figs. 23-24, lug 403].
Regarding Claim 5, modified Sugie discloses the lead-acid battery of claim 1, wherein at least one of the positive electrode or the negative electrode is a grid composed of a lead material [Sugie 0041, 0053, 0060, 0073 (Sugie discloses a lead alloy grid material [0041, 0054]. Further, Sugie discloses the active material is lead and lead oxide [0060], which fills the grid of the positive and/or negative electrode [0073].); Abrahamson 0009, 0138, Fig. 23-24, (Abrahamson discloses an electrode with a woven material comprising intersecting warp and weft or knitted [0138], for example, which reads on a grid, which is impregnated with a Pb-based paste [0009-0010, 0027, 0135, and throughout], which reads on composed of a lead material.)].
Regarding Claim 6, modified Sugie discloses the lead-acid battery of claim 1, wherein the one or more cell elements further comprise a separator [Sugie 0035, Fig. 1, separator 4].
Regarding Claim 7, modified Sugie discloses the lead-acid battery of claim 6, wherein the separator is an absorbent glass mat [Sugie 0025, 0065-0066 (Sugie discloses the separator can be a glass fiber mat. The skilled artisan knows the separator has to be permeable to the electrolyte, which reads on absorbent, and the fiber structure of Sugie’s glass fiber mat would also read on absorbent.)].
Regarding Claim 8, modified Sugie discloses the lead-acid battery of any of claim 1, wherein the positive electrochemically active material or the negative electrochemically active material further comprises an additive [Sugie 0021-0024, 0058-0061 (Sugie discloses antimony and antimony-based additives, sulfuric acid, and lignin.); Abrahamson 0136, (Abrahamson discloses additives such as carbon black, barium sulphate, lignosulphonate.].
Regarding Claim 9, Sugie discloses an electrode for a lead acid battery [Sugie abstract and throughout, Figs. 1-3, electrode plate 2 or 3] comprising:
a frame member being a strap extending the current collector, composed of a lead- calcium alloy [Sugie 0040-0041; 0052-0054 (Sugie discloses positive electrode grid 21 includes mesh 25, frame/strap 23, and tab/lug 22 [Sugie 0040] and is made of a Pb-alloy including at least one of Ca and Sn [Sugie 0041]. The negative electrode grid 31 includes mesh 35, frame/strap 33, and tab/lug 32 [Sugie 0052] made of a Pb-alloy including at least one of Ca and Sn [Sugie 0053]. As shown, the straps 23 and 33 extend the width of the respective current collectors in Figs. 2 and 3.)];
Sugie is silent to “a cured carbon or carbonized fiber mat current collector impregnated with an electrochemically active material, and having a frame member and a cured carbon or carbonized fiber mat having a plurality of carbon fibers or carbonized fibers, with the plurality of carbon fibers or carbonized fibers bonding to the strap and extended from the strap with the strap composed of a lead-calcium alloy, having an enhanced bond between the strap and the plurality of caron fibers or carbonized fibers”.
Abrahamson discloses a lead-acid battery electrode [Abrahamson abstract and throughout] comprises a cured carbon fiber mat current collector [Abrahamson 0023, 0138-0143, Figs. 9-11, 23, 24, and throughout, carbon fiber mat, where [0143 and throughout] reads on cured] impregnated with an electrochemically active material [Abrahamson abstract, 0144-0148, 0166 and throughout], and having a frame member [Abrahamson 0144-0148, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, frame 450] and a cured carbon fiber mat having a plurality of carbon fibers [Abrahamson 0138 explicitly discloses plurality of carbon fibers as well as 0143-0148, Figs. 9-11, 23-24, and throughout, plurality of carbon fibers 451, where [0143 and throughout] reads on cured]], and
the frame member being a strap extending the current collector [Abrahamson 0144-0148, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, part 402 reads on claimed strap and extends the width and depth of the current collector], with the plurality of carbon fibers bonded to the strap and extended from the strap [Abrahamson 0147-0158, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, (Abrahamson discloses the method for connecting the plurality of carbon fibers to the strap (lug) through pressure impregnation [0147-157] and/or welding/soldering [0158], and both methods read on bonded to the strap and extended from the strap.)], with the strap, composed of a lead alloy [Abrahamson 0143, 0157 (Abrahamson discloses lead or a lead alloy, such as Pb-Sn], having an enhanced bond between the strap and the plurality of carbon fibers [Abrahamson 0147-0158, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, (Abrahamson discloses the method for connecting the plurality of carbon fibers to the strap (lug) through pressure impregnation [0147-157] and/or welding/soldering [0158]. While Abrahamson does not explicitly disclose “an enhanced bond”, the scope of enhanced bond is unclear as provided in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection above. Further, Abrahamson explicitly discloses a pressure impregnation of the carbon fibers into the strap where about 95% of the fibers are impregnated into the strap, which indicates a secure bond for electrical connection [[0143 and throughout].)].
Abrahamson discloses a lead alloy, such as lead-tin as described above but does not explicitly disclose a lead-calcium alloy. Given the analogous art lead-acid battery disclosures of Sugie and Abrahamson combined, the skilled artisan would know how to substitute Abrahamson’s current collector comprised of a cured carbon fiber mat impregnated with an active layer material and having a frame being a strap with well-secured bonding of the strap to the carbon fiber mat for either of Sugie’s positive or negative electrode using Sugie’s specified lead-calcium alloy for Abrahamson’s lead ally strap. Sugie’s lead-acid battery would be improved by Abrahamson’s carbon fiber current collector with active material paste impregnated within the carbon fibers due to its disclosed improved lead-acid battery performance, particularity for lead-acid battery use in hybrid vehicles performance [Abrahamson 0001-0008]. Sugie identifies lead-alloys for electrodes can be lead-calcium, lead-tin, or lead-calcium-tin for good corrosion resistance and mechanical strength [Sugie 0041-0042, 0054]; therefore, the skilled artisan would understand that Sugie’s disclosed list of lead alloys are art recognized materials suitable for usage for electrodes/current collectors in lead acid batteries. (See MPEP 2144.06) Therefore, it would be obvious to try Sugie’s disclosure of lead-calcium current collectors as the specific type of lead alloy in Abrahamson’s lead alloy current collector. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Sugie and Abrahamson as described above for an electrode for a lead-acid battery with good corrosion resistance [Sugie 0041-0041, 0054] and service life [Sugie 0001 and throughout] and good performance [Abrahamson, 0002-0003 and throughout, for application to vehicle batteries [Sugie 0001 and throughout, Abrahamson 0001-0003], such as hybrids [Abrahamson 0001]. (See MPEP 2143(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; (B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; (C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (E) "Obvious to try" – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.)
Regarding Claim 11, modified Sugie discloses the electrode of claim 9, wherein the frame member comprises a lug [Sugie 0040, Fig. 2, tab 22 as lug; Sugie 0052, Fig. 3, tab 32 as lug; Abrahamson 0148, Figs. 23-24, lug 403].
Regarding Claim 12, modified Sugie discloses the electrode of claim 9, wherein the electrode is a negative electrode [Sugie 0052-0054, Abrahamson 0135 (The limitations for Claim 9 are disclosed for a negative electrode by each Sugie and Abrahamson.)].
Regarding Claim 13, modified Sugie discloses the electrode of claim 9, wherein the electrode is a positive electrode [Sugie 0040-0042, Abrahamson abstract and throughout (The limitations for Claim 9 are explicitly disclosed for a positive electrode by Sugie. The skilled artisan would know that Abrahamson’s disclosure could be applied to either positive or negative electrodes as implemented in the battery of Sugie as described in Claim 9.)].
Regarding Claim 14, modified Sugie discloses the electrode of claim 9, wherein the frame member is a lead-calcium-tin alloy [Sugie 0041-0043; 0053-0054, as combined with the invention of Abrahamson as described in Claim 9].
Regarding Claim 15, modified Sugie discloses a battery comprising the electrode of claim 9 [Sugie abstract and throughout; Abrahamson abstract and throughout describe the method of producing electrodes for a battery but do not explicitly disclose a battery.].
Regarding Claim 16, Sugie discloses a current collector [Sugie abstract and throughout, positive and negative grid as current collector] comprising:
a frame member composed of a lead-calcium alloy [Sugie 0040-0041; 0052-0054 (Sugie discloses positive electrode grid 21 includes mesh 25, frame/strap 23, and tab/lug 22 [Sugie 0040] made of a Pb-alloy including at least one of Ca and Sn [Sugie 0041]. The negative electrode grid 31 includes mesh 35, frame/strap 33, and tab/lug 32 [Sugie 0052] made of a Pb-alloy including at least one of Ca and Sn [Sugie 0053].)].
Sugie is silent to “a cured carbon or carbonized fiber mat, the cured carbon or carbonized fiber mat current collector comprising a frame member; and the frame member comprises a strap extending the current collector, with a plurality of carbon fibers or carbonized fibers of the cured carbon or carbonized fiber mat bonded to the strap and extended from the strap, with the strap, composed of a lead-calcium alloy, having an enhanced bond between the strap and the plurality of carbon fibers or carbonized fibers”.
Abrahamson discloses a lead-acid battery electrode [Abrahamson abstract and throughout] comprises a cured carbon mat current collector [Abrahamson 0023, 0138-0143, Figs. 9-11, 23, 24, and throughout, reads on carbon mat where 0143 and throughout reads on cured] impregnated with said respective electrochemically active material [Abrahamson abstract, 0144-0148, 0166 and throughout] comprising a frame member [Abrahamson 0144-0148, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, frame 450]; and
the frame member comprises a strap extending the current collector [Abrahamson 0144-0148, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, part 402 reads on claimed strap and extends the width and depth of the current collector], with a plurality of carbon fibers of the cured carbon fiber mat [Abrahamson 0138 explicitly discloses plurality of carbon fibers as well as 0144-0148, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, plurality of carbon fibers 451] bonded to the strap and extended from the strap [Abrahamson 0147-0158, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, (Abrahamson discloses the method for connecting the plurality of carbon fibers to the strap (lug) through pressure impregnation [0147-157] and/or welding/soldering [0158], and both methods read on bonded to the strap and extended from the strap.)], with the strap, composed of a lead alloy [Abrahamson 0143, 0157 (Abrahamson discloses lead or a lead alloy, such as Pb-Sn], having an enhanced bond between the strap and the plurality of carbon fibers [Abrahamson 0147-0158, Figs. 23-24, and throughout, (Abrahamson discloses the method for connecting the plurality of carbon fibers to the strap (lug) through pressure impregnation [0147-157] and/or welding/soldering [0158]. While Abrahamson does not explicitly disclose “an enhanced bond”, the scope of enhanced bond is unclear as provided in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection above. Further, Abrahamson explicitly discloses a pressure impregnation of the carbon fibers into the strap where about 95% of the fibers are impregnated into the strap, which indicates a secure bond for electrical connection [[0143 and throughout].)].
Abrahamson discloses a lead alloy, such as lead-tin as described above but does not explicitly disclose a lead-calcium alloy. Given the analogous art lead-acid battery disclosures of Sugie and Abrahamson combined, the skilled artisan would know how to substitute Abrahamson’s current collector comprised of a cured carbon fiber mat impregnated with an active layer material and having a frame being a strap with well-secured bonding of the strap to the carbon fiber mat for either of Sugie’s positive or negative electrode using Sugie’s specified lead-calcium alloy for Abrahamson’s lead ally strap. Sugie’s lead-acid battery would be improved by Abrahamson’s carbon fiber current collector with active material paste impregnated within the carbon fibers due to its disclosed improved lead-acid battery performance, particularity for lead-acid battery use in hybrid vehicles performance [Abrahamson 0001-0008]. Sugie identifies lead-alloys for electrodes can be lead-calcium, lead-tin, or lead-calcium-tin for good corrosion resistance and mechanical strength [Sugie 0041-0042, 0054]; therefore, the skilled artisan would understand that Sugie’s disclosed list of lead alloys are art recognized materials suitable for usage for electrodes/current collectors in lead acid batteries. (See MPEP 2144.06) Therefore, it would be obvious to try Sugie’s disclosure of lead-calcium current collectors as the specific type of lead alloy in Abrahamson’s lead alloy current collector. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Sugie and Abrahamson as described above for a current collector for a lead-acid battery with good corrosion resistance [Sugie 0041-0041, 0054] and service life [Sugie 0001 and throughout] and good performance [Abrahamson, 0002-0003 and throughout, for application to vehicle batteries [Sugie 0001 and throughout, Abrahamson 0001-0003], such as hybrids [Abrahamson 0001]. (See MPEP 2143(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; (B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; (C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (E) "Obvious to try" – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.)
Regarding Claim 18, modified Sugie discloses the current collector of claim 16, wherein the frame member comprises a lug [Sugie 0040, Fig. 2, tab 22 as lug; Sugie 0052, Fig. 3, tab 32 as lug; Abrahamson 0148, Figs. 23-24, lug 403].
Regarding Claim 19, modified Sugie discloses the current collector of claim 16, wherein the frame member is a lead-calcium-tin alloy [Sugie 0041-0043; 0053-0054].
Regarding Claim 20, modified Sugie discloses a battery having the current collector of claim 16 [Sugie abstract and throughout; Abrahamson abstract and throughout describe the method of producing electrodes for a battery but do not explicitly disclose a battery.].
Response to Arguments
The Declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 filed November 11, 2025 is insufficient to overcome the rejection of Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-20 based upon 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and U.S.C. 103 as set forth in the last Office action dated June 11, 2025.
With regard to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection over the term “enhanced bonding”, in summary the Declaration recites in paragraphs 3 the differences between non-graphitized raw carbon fibers and graphitized carbon fibers and the industry challenges in bonding a strap to a carbon fiber mat. In summary, paragraphs 4-7 recite the Applicant’s carbon is distinguished over the prior art due to a graphitizing process where acrylonitrile undergoes polymerization, cyclization, high temperature oxidation, and graphitization through the removal of nitrogen, resulting in a reduced diameter, tortuous graphitized fibers. Paragraph 8 states “the application of graphitized carbon fibers of the fiber mat to the metal allow strap resulting in bonding properties between the fiber mat and metal allow strap not anticipated. It was expected that the bonding between the metal allow strap and the fiber mat, comprising graphitized carbon fibers, would be similar to that of the bond between a fiber mat, consisting of non-graphitized carbon fibers and an alloy strap. However, the bond between the metal alloy strap and the fiber mat, comprising graphitized carbon fibers, possessed increasing in strength properties as well as rigidity.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees that the Declaration’s description of the Applicant’s carbon fibers is commensurate with the carbon fibers of the instant application. The instant specification does not specify graphitized fibers, acrylonitrile, or any of the process characteristics (polymerization, cyclization, high temperature oxidation, and graphitization through the removal of nitrogen) that provide the fiber characteristics (reduced diameter, tortuosity) as described in the Declaration nor are the recited fiber characteristics provided in the instant specification. The instant specification and claims are merely drawn to an invention with cured carbon fibers or carbonized fibers with none of the Declaration’s recited characteristics of the carbon fibers (reduced diameter or tortuous). Secondly, the Declaration provides no evidence of an “enhanced bond” or the recited increased strength or rigidity in the Declaration paragraph 8. Further, such evidence is not provided in the instant specification.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments on pgs. 6-7 of the Applicant’s Response that the Declaration provides evidence that one of ordinary skill in the art knows what “enhanced bond” means. First, as described above, the Declaration is not commensurate with the instant specification or the claimed invention nor is any evidence provided of an “enhanced bond”. The As provided in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejected in the Office Action dated June 11, 2025 and copied above, the term “enhanced bond” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. An enhanced bond, as claimed, is a relative term that must be compared with another type of less enhanced bond by some degree, such as the strength of the join between the carbon fibers or carbonized fibers and the strap. These questions are not answerable from the specification or in the Declaration. For these reasons, the indefiniteness rejection is maintained.
With regard to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of the recited claims over Sugie in view of Abrahamson, the Declaration recites in paragraph 10, that substituting a fiber mat in place of the grid in Sugie would result in negating the purpose of applying the antimony in Sugie. The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Declaration’s assertion. First, arguments regarding antimony are not commensurate with the instant claims or the instant invention. Secondly, Sugie’s invention does not require antimony [Sugie 0042-0044] but Sugie does provide that antimony can be included as an impurity without adversely effecting performance [Sugie 0043]. Further, Sugie does not disclose antimony for corrosion resistance, as recited in the Declaration, and instead discloses a Pb-Ca alloy, a Pb-Sn alloy, or a Pb-Ca-Sn alloy that may include Ba, Ag, Al, and Bi to provide corrosion resistance [Sugie 0042-0044]. Therefore, the arguments in the Declaration are not commensurate with Sugie’s invention.
In paragraph 10, the Declaration recites that Abrahamson does not process carbon fiber to create graphite for the manufacture of an electrode; therefore, since Abrahamson does not disclose graphite, the enhanced bonding between the carbon fibers and the alloy strap are not present in Abrahamson. While the Examiner agrees that Abrahamson does not explicitly disclose graphite, graphite is not provided in the instant invention or the instant claims. Abrahamson does, however, disclose oxidized polyacrylonitrile fabric/felt [Abrahamson 0023, 0140, 0171] stabilized and carbonized at 1000 to 1600 ° C [Abrahamson 0023, 0138-0143, 0171], which reads on cured carbon fibers/carbonized fibers. Further, Abrahamson discloses carbon fiber material derived from rayon, polyacrylonitrile, phenol resin, or pitch materials [Abrahamson 0140], for which the broadest reasonable interpretation would be carbon fibers or carbonized fibers. Further, Abrahamson teaches a strap 402 [Fig. 23] can be lead or a lead alloy [Abrahamson 0143] and pressure impregnation of the lug material (Pb or Pb alloy) into the fiber material [Abrahamson 0151-0153 and throughout]. For these reasons, the Declaration is insufficient to overcome the rejections recited in the Office Action dated June 11, 2025.
Applicant’s arguments on pgs. 5-8 are regarding the Declaration as it applies to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection, which the Examiner has responded to above and maintained the rejection.
Applicant’s arguments on 8-13 are drawn to the obviousness rejections over Sugie in view of Abrahamson. Applicant argues on pgs. 9-10 that, as provided in the Spence Declaration, the graphitization of the carbon fibers provides the claimed enhanced bond. The Examiner respectfully disagrees for the reasons described above, mainly that such arguments are not commensurate with the instant invention, including the instant specification and the instant claims, since graphitization of carbon fibers is not recited in the rejected claim(s) nor in the instant specification. Further, the instant specification provides no evidence of an enhanced bond, as described above. Meanwhile, Abrahamson discloses a secured bonding between the strap made of lead or a lead alloy through a pressure impregnation of the carbon fibers into the strap where about 95% of the fibers are impregnated into the strap, which indicates a secure bond for electrical connection [[0143 and throughout].)]. Therefore, evidence of Abrahamson’s enhanced bonding would be considered greater than evidence of enhanced bonding between the strap and the carbon fibers in the instant invention.
Applicant argues on pgs. 10-11 that the Examiner is errored in combining the teachings of Sugie and Abrahamson and applying MPEP 2144.06 due to the unanticipated benefits of “the bond between the metal alloy strap and the fiber mat, comprising graphitized carbon fibers, possessed increasing in strength properties as well as rigidity.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, as described repeatedly above, the instant invention is not commensurate with graphitized fibers as recited in the Declaration. Second, there is no evidence of an enhanced bond provided in the instant invention or in the Declaration. Third, Abrahamson discloses Pb alloys can be used for the strap as described above and further discloses a Pb-Sn alloy can be used [Abrahamson 0157]. Sugie discloses a Pb alloy, a Pb-Ca alloy, a Pb-Sn alloy, and a Pb-Ca-Sn alloy [Sugie 0042-0045]. Thus, the Examiner’s recitation of MPEP 2144.06 is appropriate as both a functional equivalent and a mechanical equivalent. Further, in the Office Action dated June 11, 2025, the Examiner provided additional motivation for the combination of Sugie and Abrahamson and recited MPEP 2143. For the reasons provided above, evidence of obviousness of claim 1 over the applied prior art outweighs evidence of nonobviousness, and the rejections of claims 1-2 and 4-8 are maintained.
The Applicant applies the same arguments to claim 9; therefore, evidence of obviousness of claim 9 over the applied prior art outweighs evidence of nonobviousness, and the rejections of claims 9 and 11-15 are maintained. Likewise, the Applicant applies the same arguments to claim 16; therefore, evidence of obviousness of Claim 16 over the applied prior art outweighs evidence of nonobviousness, and the rejections of claims 16 and 18-20 are maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. T. LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1681. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)270-5256. 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.
/M. T. LEONARD/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
/MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724