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 .
Claim Status
This Office action is responsive to amendments and remarks filed on 11/7/2025.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8, and 10-16 have been amended.
Claims 4-5 have been cancelled.
Claim 34 has been newly added.
Claims 1-34 are currently pending, of which 17-33 are withdrawn.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted 9/20/2022, 9/10/2025, and 9/12/2025 were received and are being considered by the examiner, except where lined-through.
Response to Amendment
In light of the amendment the objection to the specification is withdrawn.
In light of the amendment, interpretation of claims under §112(f) are withdrawn.
In light of the amendment the rejection to the claims under §112(b) is withdrawn.
In light of the amendment the rejection to the claims under §112(d) is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/7/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The crux of the applicant's arguments is the lack of motivation to combine the features of the references. It is the position of the office that the use of rollers for stacking and laminating upper, lower, and center electrode sheets is common in the art and a person of ordinary skill would know how to combine these common features of the device.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a laminator including a heating roller and a heater) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
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, 6-8, 10-13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210344048 A1, SATO et al. provided in the IDS dated 1/9/2024 in view of US 20150064547 A1, AHN et al provided in the IDS dated 9/23/2024.
Regarding claim 1. SATO discloses an apparatus for preparing a unit cell in annotated figure 4B depicted below, the apparatus comprising:
a center electrode reel from which a center electrode sheet (20A [0056] which the reference calls an elongated negative electrode web), is unwound, wherein
the center electrode sheet (20A) is configured to form a plurality of center electrodes (40) which reference calls a positive electrode [0040];
separator reels (depicted in the annotated figure below) from which separator sheets (10A and 30A which the reference calls first and second separator webs respectively) to be stacked with the center electrodes are unwound;
a laminator including [0273] a heating roller called a heat roller (92) and a heater (61, and 62 which the reference calls pressure bonding rollers) configured to apply heat and pressure to laminate a stack which is formed by stacking the plurality of center electrodes with the separator sheets while the plurality of center electrodes are spaced apart from each other and disposed in a row in a longitudinal direction of the separator sheets;
a first nozzle (53 which the reference calls “an adhesive material that has been supplied from a coating machine”) configured to apply an adhesive to an upper surface of the separator sheet disposed on an uppermost layer of the laminated stack;
PNG
media_image1.png
290
583
media_image1.png
Greyscale
SATO does not disclose an upper electrode reel from which an upper electrode sheet, is unwound, wherein
the upper electrode sheet is configured to form a plurality of upper electrodes configured to be stacked on an upper surface of the laminated stack to which the adhesive has been applied.
AHN [title] discloses an Electrode Assembly for Polymer Secondary Battery Cell where it is disclosed in the annotated figure 6 depicted below that
an upper electrode reel (121) which the reference calls (a first electrode material) from which an upper electrode sheet, is unwound, wherein
the upper electrode sheet is configured to form a plurality of upper electrodes configured to be stacked on an upper surface of the laminated stack to which the adhesive has been applied.
PNG
media_image2.png
434
621
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have added the upper electrode reel disclosed by AHN to the apparatus disclosed by SATO in order to reduce steps and increase efficiency.
Regarding claim 6. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 1, wherein SATO discloses in the annotated figure depicted below
the separator reels comprise
an upper separator reel from which an upper separator sheet to be stacked on an upper surface of the center electrode of the plurality of center electrodes (20A) is unwound; and
a lower separator reel from which a lower separator sheet to be stacked on a lower surface of the center electrode is unwound.
PNG
media_image3.png
339
583
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 1. AHN in figure 6 further discloses: a lower electrode reel (123) which the reference calls a second electrode reel, from which a lower electrode sheet, is unwound, wherein the lower electrode sheet is configured to form a plurality of lower electrodes to be stacked on a lower surface of the stack.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have added the lower electrode reel disclosed by AHN to the apparatus disclosed by SATO in order to reduce steps and increase efficiency.
Regarding claim 8. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 7.
SATO modified by AHN does not explicitly disclose a second nozzle configured to apply an adhesive to an upper surface of the lower electrode.
AHN in figure 4B shows a second nozzle (52) coating the top of the second separator web (30A) to be adhered to the bottom of the negative electrode web (20A).
The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have applied adhesive to the top portion of the lower electrode in order to make it adhere to the lower surface of the upper material in the stack.
Regarding claim 10. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 1.
AHN discloses in annotated figure 6 depicted below nip rollers configured to apply pressure to the upper electrode and the laminated stack while rotating when the upper electrode is stacked with the laminated stack.
The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to added the nips disclosed by AHN.
PNG
media_image4.png
424
613
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 1. SATO [0223] discloses “supply of the composition for adhesion from the coating machines 51 to 54 was performed such that coated regions had shapes and ranges” wherein envisioning the first nozzle includes a plurality of first nozzles spaced apart from each other in a width direction of the separator sheets as can be shown in figure 6B where the adhesive is applied in several patterns.
PNG
media_image5.png
483
683
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 11, wherein the spraying area of the adhesive for each first nozzle of the plurality of first nozzles is different from each of the other first nozzles as shown in figure 6B depicted above.
Regarding claim 13. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 6, wherein
the upper separator sheet comprises:
a first base material layer (10A); and
a first coating layer (applied by 53) coated on an upper surface of the first base material layer and configured to be bonded to the upper electrode (40) by the adhesive, wherein
the lower separator sheet comprises:
a second base material layer (30A); and
a second coating layer (applied by 52) coated on an upper surface of the second base material layer and configured to be bonded to the center electrode (20A), wherein
Figure 6B in the rejection of claim 11 above depicts amounts of binder content of the first coating layer (82A) is lower than a binder content of the second coating layer (81A).
Regarding claim 16. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 6, wherein
the upper separator sheet comprises (10A): a first base material layer configured to be bonded (via 53) to the upper electrode (40) by the adhesive, wherein
the lower separator sheet (30A) comprises:
a second base material layer; and
a coating layer (via 52) coated on an upper surface of the second base material layer and bonded to the center electrode (20A).
PNG
media_image6.png
339
583
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210344048 A1, SATO et al. provided in the IDS dated 1/9/2024 in view of US 20150064547 A1, AHN et al provided in the IDS dated 9/23/2024 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20230097190 A1, KITAZAWA et al.
Regarding claims 2 and 3. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 1.
SATO modified by AHN does not disclose a first vision sensor disposed above the center electrode of the plurality of center electrodes configured to photograph the center electrode before the center electrodes are stacked with the separator sheets.
KITAZAWA [title] discloses An Inspection Method, Method of Manufacturing Secondary Battery Laminate and Method of Manufacturing Secondary Battery where
KITAZAWA [0118] discloses a plurality of vision sensors (70A-70F which the reference calls laser displacement gauges) disposed above the center electrode of the plurality of upper electrodes configured to photograph (capture electromagnetic radiation from the laser) the center electrode before the center electrodes are stacked with the separator sheets as well as 70F above the upper electrode satisfying the limitations of claim 3, as can be seen in the annotated figure 1 depicted below.
KITAZAWA [0009] discloses “the accuracy of identification of application defect sites can be improved by using a laser displacement gauge to measure the displacement of the bonding surface to which the coating material has been applied before it is dried.”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used the visual sensors disclosed by KITAZAWA in the apparatus disclosed by SATO modified by AHN in order to identify defect sites and measure the displacement of the bonding surface to which the coating material has been applied before it is dried.
PNG
media_image7.png
567
814
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210344048 A1, SATO et al. provided in the IDS dated 1/9/2024 in view of US 20150064547 A1, AHN et al provided in the IDS dated 9/23/2024 as applied to claims 1, 7, and 8 above, and further in view of US 20230097190 A1, KITAZAWA et al.
Regarding claim 9. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 8.
SATO modified by AHN does not disclose a third vision sensor disposed above the lower electrode configured to photograph the lower electrode before the lower electrode is stacked with the stack.
KITAZAWA introduced in the rejection of claims 2 and 3 above discloses a plurality of vision sensors (70A-70F which the reference calls laser displacement gauges) disposed above the center electrode configured to photograph (capture electromagnetic radiation from the laser) the center electrode before the center electrodes are stacked with the separator sheets as well as a third vision sensor (70A) disposed above the lower electrode (11) configured to photograph the lower electrode before the lower electrode is stacked with the stack.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used the third vision sensor disclosed by KITAZAWA in the assembly of the stack disclosed by SATO modified by AHN in order to identify defect sites and measure the displacement of the bonding surface to which the coating material has been applied before it is dried.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 34 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 34. SATO modified by AHN discloses the apparatus for preparing the unit cell of claim 1.
SATO modified by AHN does not disclose wherein the heat and pressure applied by the heating roller is greater than the heat and pressure applied by the heater.
US 20200259212 A1 VISCO et al. discloses A Lithium Ion Conducting Sulfide Glass Fabrication is the closest art that was found. VISCO discloses in the annotated figure depicted below a heating roller called a roller set (614) (e.g. hot roller) and a heater (616) where the sheet is first heated without any pressure and then passed through a heated roller under some pressure which would be higher than zero.
However, VISCO is not analogous to the instant application and it would not have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the heater and the heating roller with a higher pressure than the heater in order to laminate the stack.
PNG
media_image8.png
622
737
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 LAWRENCE LA RAIA III whose telephone number is (703)756-5441. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 6:00am-4:00pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571) 272-1330. 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.
LAWRENCE LA RAIA III
Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727