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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/26/26 has been entered.
Considering the amendment filed 5/26/26, claims 1-15 remain in application with 15 having been withdrawn from consideration as being directed toward a non-elected invention as detailed in paper filed 4/18/25. Claims 1-14 remain in the application for prosecution thereof.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Che et al. (2005/027691) in combination with WO 2018/134485 in combination with Yoo et al. (10/393,587) and Mashburn (5,483,037) further in combination with Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000).
Che et al. (2005/027691) teaches a method of fabricating an electrochemical device using ultrafast pulsed laser deposition. Che et al. (2005/027691) teaches an apparatus including a controlled chamber (20), target (30), substrate (40), holding devices (50,60) to move the target and substrate respectively, a laser beam source (70) which can be controlled to improve uniformity of erosion on target and/or film growth on substrate [0043]-[0045] and Fig. 1). The target can include a lithium target [0039].
Che et al. (2005/027691) fails to teach optical components to change direction and optical properties.
WO 2018/134485 teaches a method of manufacture of cathode materials for nanostructured Li ion batteries using short term laser pulses. WO 2018/134485 teaches PLD whereby lasers are directed toward targets and formation of the coating on a substrate in a roll-to-roll fashion is performed. Substrates are moved in a roll-to-roll process whereby different material targets are utilized to form the different layers. Mirrors (31) are utilized to change direction and affect optical properties of the laser between the laser source and the target (Figs 4-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Che et al. (2005/027691) process to include mirror (claimed optical components) to control the direction and properties of the laser as evidenced by WO 2018/134485 with the expectation of improving the process by controlling these factors.
Che et al. (2005/027691) and WO 2018/134485 fail to teach measurement of electromagnetic radiation generated by the laser and adjusting the energy and surface area spot on target based thereon.
Yoo et al. (10/393,587) teaches a method for laser ablation analysis including ablation spectroscopy whereby emissions from a plasma plume can be simultaneously analyzed in various ways using these spectrometers (abstract). Yoo et al. (10/393,587) teaches measuring electromagnetic radiation generated by the plasma plume to be optically communicated to the spectrometer and the detector. The position sensor is then used to automatically correct the positions of the stage and the target based thereon (col. 3, line 5-40; col. 4, line 58 – col. 5, line 55; col. 6, lines 8-65 and col. 7, lines 1-60).
Mashburn (5,483,037) teaches adjusting the laser pulse energy by utilizing a pulse energy detector which produces an electrical signal indicative of the beam intensity and providing this signal to a controller (26) to control the laser pulse energy on the next cycle to prevent variations of the laser characteristics (col. 4, lines 45-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Che et al. (2005/027691) and WO 2018/134485 to adjust the surface are of the laser spot by measuring/controlling the electromagnetic radiation of the laser/plume as evidence by Yoo et al. (10/393,587) and to control the energy density of the laser using a pulse energy detector as evidence by Mashburn (5,483,037) with the expectation of more precisely controlling the coating layer as well as optimizing target removal.
Che et al. (2005/027691) in combination with WO 2018/134485 in combination with Yoo et al. (10/393,587) and Mashburn (5,483,037) fails to teach a protective and moveable window between the optical measuring device and the sputtered/ablated material
Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000) teaches a similar process for laser ablation using a scanning arrangement and coating process. Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000) teaches in order to avoid or at least minimize build up on the mirror from the laser ablated material, a protective shield or moveable widow between the target and the mirror can be utilized ([0067]-[0076]). The Examiner takes the position that with this teaching along with the spectrometers/sensors utilized in Yoo et al. (10/393,587) and Mashburn (5,483,037), one skilled in the art would have been suggested to also protect the spectrometers/sensors from ablated material and hence utilized a protective moveable window therebetween.
Regarding claim 1, the chamber, light/laser source, lithium target, substrate movement of the target and substrate and controlling laser beam is taught by Che et al. (2005/027691) while WO 2018/134485 teaches the optical component to change and affect the laser. Yoo et al. (10/393,587) teaches electromagnetic radiation analysis to control the movement of the target to optimize ablation therefrom. Regarding the processing step by thermal treatment with a laser, WO 2018/134485 teaches heating and this would be suggestive of using any heating means including the claimed laser light with the expectation of similar success regardless of the type of heat treatment utilized absent a showing of criticality thereof. Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000) teaches using protective moveable windows between the spectrometers/sensors and the ablated material.
Regarding claim 2, Che et al. (2005/027691) [0039] and WO 2018/134485 (pg. 9, lines 7-15) teaches current collector substrates.
Regarding claim 3, Che et al. (2005/027691) [0039] and WO 2018/134485 (col. 6, lines 25-30) teach lithium layers for battery or electrochemical devices.
Regarding claim 4, both Che et al. (2005/027691) (abstract) and WO 2018/134485 (col. 4, lines 1-7 and claim 30) teaches layered structures.
Regarding claim 5, WO 2018/134485 teaches coating separate layers that do not encounter one another during deposition (Figs. 8a,8b).
Regarding claim 6, Che et al. (2005/027691) [0029] and WO 2018/134485 (col. 2o0, lines 14-15 and claim 24) teach the layers are about 5 microns in thickness with the overall thickness being no more than 100 microns.
Regarding claim 9, WO 2018/134485 teaches more than 1 target and plumes encountering each other to form the composite coating (Fig. 7).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Che et al. (2005/027691) [0039] and WO 2018/134485 (col. 6, lines 25-30) which utilize Li composite materials as targets.
Regarding claim 12, Che et al. (2005/027691) [0032] WO 2018/134485 teaches the Li can be in liquid form when exposed to the laser (col. 8, lines 16-23).
Regarding claim 13, WO 2018/134485 (col. 4, lines 8-19) teaches protective coatings.
Regarding claim 14, Che et al. (2005/027691) [0039] and WO 2018/134485 (pg. 9, lines 7-15) teaches current collector substrates while Che et al. (2005/027691) [0029] and WO 2018/134485 (col. 20, lines 14-15 and claim 24) teach the layers are about 5 microns in thickness with the overall thickness being no more than 100 microns.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Che et al. (2005/027691) in combination with WO 2018/134485 in combination with Yoo et al. (10/393,587) and Mashburn (5,483,037) further in combination with Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000) further in combination with Mashburn (5,558,788).
Features detailed above concerning the teachings of Che et al. (2005/027691) in combination with WO 2018/134485 in combination with Yoo et al. (10/393,587) and Mashburn (5,483,037) further in combination with Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000) are incorporated here.
Che et al. (2005/027691) in combination with WO 2018/134485 in combination with Yoo et al. (10/393,587) and Mashburn (5,483,037) further in combination with Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000) fails to teach two separate lasers contacting target and partially overlapping.
Mashburn (5,558,788) teaches a dual beam optical system for pulsed laser ablation film deposition (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Che et al. (2005/027691) in combination with WO 2018/134485 in combination with Yoo et al. (10/393,587) and Mashburn (5,483,037) further in combination with Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000) laser ablation process to include dual beam pulsed laser ablation as evidenced by Mashburn (5,558,788) resulting in more uniform films (col. 1, lines 10-20).
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argued the prior art fails to teach a protective and moveable window between the optical measuring device and the sputtered/ablated material
Kekkonen et al. (2017/0350000) teaches this as detailed above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN K TALBOT whose telephone number is (571)272-1428. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 7-4PM.
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, MICHAEL CLEVELAND can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/BRIAN K TALBOT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights