Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 17/911,005

CUTTING DEVICE AND CUTTING METHOD

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Sep 12, 2022
Priority
Mar 11, 2020 — JP 2020-041883 +1 more
Examiner
ROSARIO-APONTE, ALBA T
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
2 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allowance Rate
254 granted / 468 resolved
-15.7% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
516
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
43.1%
+3.1% vs TC avg
§102
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
§112
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 468 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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, 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WATANABE (US 2018/0304410). Regarding claim 1, WATANABE teaches a cutting device (100; Fig. 1) comprising: a conveyance unit (10, 13a-13n, 23a-23n, 70, 80) that conveys a continuous body (1) of a plurality of electrode plates (3); a laser scanning unit (50, 60, 50’) that scans the continuous body with laser light (para. 0055-0056); and a control unit including circuits that control the laser scanning unit (inherently present to control the laser emission devices and the servomotors; para. 0055-0056; 0062) so as to scan the continuous body while performing intermittent irradiation with the laser light (para. 0055-0062), thereby forming a plurality of unit cutting sections (product cut by cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given; only patentable weight is given to the structure of the claimed cutting device; also Watanabe cutting device forms cutting portions of Sy; as shown in Fig. 6; laser cutting is well established in cutting multitude of complex shapes and/or patterns) that are continuous and dividing the continuous body into a first portion (1a; product cut by cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given) and a second portion (1b; product cut by cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given), wherein the unit cutting sections have a main line section extending along a boundary of the first portion and the second and a bent section that bends and extends from an end of the main line section (as explained above, these limitations are for the product cut by the claimed cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given), wherein the main line section is linear and extends in a first direction (as explained above, these limitations are for the product cut by the claimed cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given), wherein the bent section extends in a direction intersecting the first direction (as explained above, these limitations are for the product cut by the claimed cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given), and wherein bent sections in two adjacent unit cutting sections extend non-parallel to each other and intersect each other in a middle of respective bent sections, thereby causing the two adjacent unit cutting sections to be continuous (as explained above, these limitations are for the product cut by the claimed cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given). Regarding claim 3, WATANABE teaches the cutting device according to claim 1, wherein the continuous body has a strip shape that is long in a conveyance direction (as shown in Fig. 1) and has an electrode active material coated part (1a) arranged in the center of the continuous body in the width direction orthogonal to the conveyance direction (abstract; para. 0004) and an electrode active material uncoated part (1b) arranged at an end of the continuous body in a width direction (as shown in Fig. 6), the control unit controls the laser scanning unit such that at least the uncoated part is cut to form a plurality of tabs (5; product cut by cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given; only patentable weight is given to the structure of the claimed cutting device; laser cutting is well established in cutting multitude of complex shapes and/or patterns) arranged at predetermined intervals in the conveyance direction (as explained above, these limitations are for the product cut by the claimed cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given) and at least part of the bent section extends outward in the width direction (as explained above, these limitations are for the product cut by the claimed cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given). Regarding claim 4, WATANABE teaches the cutting device according to claim 3, except for, wherein in a unit cutting section located in a connection region connecting two adjacent tabs in the conveyance direction, the bent section extends outward in the width direction, and in a unit cutting section located at the top part of the tab in the width direction, the bent section extends inward in the width direction (product cut by cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given; only patentable weight is given to the structure of the claimed cutting device; also Watanabe cutting device forms cutting portions of Sy; as shown in Fig. 6; laser cutting is well established in cutting multitude of complex shapes and/or patterns). Reasons for Allowance The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: allowance of claim 5 is indicated because the prior art of record does not show or fairly suggest a cutting method wherein bent sections in two adjacent unit cutting sections extend non-parallel to each other and intersect each other in a middle of respective bent sections, thereby causing the two adjacent unit cutting sections to be continuous as recited in claim 5. 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.” Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 03/12/2026 regarding claim 5 are persuasive, and therefore, claim 5 has been allowed. Applicant's arguments filed 03/12/2026 regarding claims 1, 3 and 4 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that “Applicant respectfully submits that the cited references, taken individually or in combination, fail to disclose or suggest the features of amended independent claim 1, particularly with respect to the features of "wherein bent sections in two adjacent unit cutting sections extend non-parallel to each other and intersect each other in a middle of respective bent sections, thereby causing the two adjacent unit cutting sections to be continuous."… FIG. 6 of Watanabe illustrate the rectangular-shape tab 5 having the fusion-cutting line Sy (allegedly corresponding to the main line). However, neither in Watanabe's FIG. 6 nor in paragraphs [0043] and [0062], Watanabe describes the shape or geometry of the fusion cutting line Sy when the tab 5 is formed into a non-rectangular tab (e.g., semicircular or halfmoon shape). In fact, the cited portions of Watanabe are silent regarding the tab 5, regardless of its shape, intersecting with another tab 5. Accordingly, Watanabe fails to identically disclose or suggest the features of "wherein bent sections in two adjacent unit cutting sections extend non-parallel to each other and intersect each other in a middle of respective bent sections, thereby causing the two adjacent unit cutting sections to be continuous."” on remarks page 6, lines 3-7, and page 7, lines 1-10. In response to Applicant’s arguments, the limitations regarding the plurality of unit cutting sections are considered a product cut by cutting device, therefore, little or no patentable weight is given, only patentable weight is given to the structure of the claimed cutting device. Also, Watanabe cutting device forms cutting portions of Sy, as shown in Fig. 6, and laser cutting is well established in cutting multitude of complex shapes and/or patterns. For these reasons, the arguments are not persuasive. Regarding claims 3 and 4, Applicant relies on the same arguments, therefore, the same response applies. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBA T ROSARIO-APONTE whose telephone number is (571)272-9325. The examiner can normally be reached M to F; 8am-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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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. /ALBA T ROSARIO-APONTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 04/03/2026 /JUSTIN C DODSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 12, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 08, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12606365
SELF REGULATING HEATER IN AN INTERMEDIATE BULK CONTAINER
3y 9m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12599984
FASTENING METHOD
6y 0m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594631
LASER MACHINING METHOD
3y 6m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576462
METHOD OF PROCESSING PLATE-SHAPED WORKPIECE
3y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12551962
ENGINE-DRIVEN AIR COMPRESSOR/GENERATOR LOAD PRIORITY CONTROL SYSTEM AND METHOD
3y 3m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+26.8%)
3y 10m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 468 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month