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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/1/2026 has been entered.
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 1-13 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 1 recites the limitation "heat the electrode to a first temperature ranging from 90 degrees Celsius or more to 150 degrees Celsius or less…heat to a second temperature ranging from 90 degrees Celsius or more to 150 degrees Celsius or less…maintaining a temperature of the electrode at a temperature equal to or higher than the first temperature and lower than the second temperature while the electrode is on the path”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how the device heats the electrode to a first temperature (between 90 and 150 degrees C) and further required to maintain a temperature of the electrode equal to or higher than the first temperature, and heats the electrode to a second temperature (between 90 and 150 degrees C) and further required to maintain a temperature of the electrode lower than the second temperature. Further, the claim limitation “maintaining a temperature of the electrode at a temperature equal to or higher than the first temperature and lower than the second temperature while the electrode is on the path” is unclear whether the temperature maintained is equal to or higher than the entirety of the first temperature range of 90 to 150 degrees C or within said range, and whether the temperature maintained is lower than the entirety of the second temperature range of 90 to 150 degrees C or within said range.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the third temperature is equal to the first temperature or the second temperature, or higher than the first temperature or both the first and the second temperatures”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the third temperature is equal to the first temperature range or just a single first temperature; equal to the second temperature range or just a single second temperature; higher than the first temperature range or just a single first temperature; or higher than both the first temperature range and second temperature range or a single first temperature and a single second temperature.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the third temperature is 90 degrees Celsius to 150 degrees Celsius or less”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the third temperature range or a single third temperature within the range is required to satisfy the temperature relationship recited in claim 8.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “An electrode assembly manufactured by using an electrode prepared by the electrode drying device of claim 1”. The Examiner notes that the limitation “…manufactured using an electrode prepared by the electrode drying device of claim 1” is a product-by-process limitation, and product-by-process limitations are not given patentable weight since the method does not provide additional structure to the product claim (see MPEP 2113 and 2114). Thus, said limitation, which is a product-by-process limitation, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the claim actually requires the structure of the electrode drying device of claim 1.
Further, dependent claims 2-13 are rendered indefinite due to their dependency on any of the indefinite claims above.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “An electrode assembly manufactured by using an electrode prepared by the electrode drying device of claim 1”. The Examiner notes that the limitation “…manufactured using an electrode prepared by the electrode drying device of claim 1” is a product-by-process limitation, and product-by-process limitations are not given patentable weight since the method does not provide additional structure to the product claim (see MPEP 2113 and 2114). Thus, said limitation, which is a product-by-process limitation and does not positively require the electrode drying device of claim 1, fails to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends
Further, claim 12 is directed to “An electrode assembly…” which is separate from the electrode drying device of claim 1 and there is nothing in the claim further limiting the structure of the electrode drying device of claim 1.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 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, NICOLE BUIE-HATCHER can be reached at (571)270-3879. 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.
/James Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 6/25/2026
Prosecution Insights