DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-5, 8-13 and 16 (filed 10/08/2025) have been considered in this action. Claims 1, 13 and 16 have been amended. Claims 6, 7, 14 and 15 have been canceled. Claims 2-5 and 8-12 have been presented in the same format as previously presented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9 paragraph 2, filed 10/08/2025, with respect to objection to the specification have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the specification has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9 paragraph 3, filed 10/08/2025, with respect to objection to claim 10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claim 10 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9 paragraph 4, filed 10/08/2025, with respect to rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see page 9 paragraph 5, filed 10/08/2025, with respect to rejection of claims 1-13 under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant submits that:
“[page 10]…the present amendment transform the alleged abstract idea into a practical application by improving the physical manufacturing process of the coating production by utilizing the claimed adjusted drying process. This is described in [0085] of the published application….”
The examiner disagrees, and as noted in the previous rejection, no practical application is afforded because no claimed element or limitation requires the use of the at least one drying process. While the newly amended claimed feature relate to how a drying process is partitioned into multiple stages/procedures, the claim does not every require that a practical application of those stages is actually utilized as either an improvement to the functioning of a computer, or the implementation of the process to improve a drying process for manufacturing a product that is improved. The stages are claimed in the form of a further description of an intended use, as the wherein clause that states:
providing at least one recommended procedure for adjusting the at least one drying process which comprises the at least one predictive value for the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer suitable for being used during the at least one of the drying stages, wherein the at least one drying process is partitioned into an initial drying stage, a critical drying stage following the initial drying stage, and a final drying stage which follows the critical drying stage, wherein the at least one drying process is adjusted by using an evaporation rate of a drying profile during the initial drying stage, applies the evaporation rate of a mild drying profile during the critical drying stage, and returns to the evaporation rate of the rough drying profile during the final drying stage.
The underlined material is merely further describing an intended use of “for adjusting the at least one drying process” because the claim does not recite under the BRI, that the practical application of actually performing a drying process with the recommended procedure is performed. The applicant’s arguments are therefore found unpersuasive, and the examiner maintains their previous rejection of claims 1-5 and 8-13 under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 11 paragraph 1, filed 10/08/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 6-8 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and claims 2-5, 9-11 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of applicant provided reference by Stefan Jaiser “Film Formation of Lithium-Ion Battery Electrodes during Drying: The Interrelation of Process, Microstructure and Properties” which teaches the use of three drying stages with different drying rate (evaporation rates). See below for a mapping of the newly amended features to Jaiser.
It is noted that applicant’s arguments regarding Kiel and how “drying zones” are differentiated by “drying stages” by zones only referring to a physical consecutive spatial arrangement, while drying stages refers to consecutive procedures is not found persuasive. Accordingly, this description of Keil is not in line with the explanation provided by Keil, in which it is described that “[0045] in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings. Further, one or more zones may include the aforementioned technologies, including infrared, ultraviolet, electron beam, or any combination, to enhance the heating and drying of the coating layers at a given stage of the drying profile within the overall drying time in the dryer” and “[0069] each of said zones having specific air velocity and air temperature settings in order to reach a target web exit temperatures corresponding to the target exit moisture of 2.5%” which teaches that zones have different settings, and thus correspond well with different stages because different drying parameters are utilized in the different zones. Accordingly, the use of different parameters in different zones corresponds with different stages when drying a substrate in a dryer, as performed by Kiel.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-5 and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception in the form of an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims are directed to the statutory category of invention of a method.
Step 2A Prong One:
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8-12 are method claims directed to (A) Mathematical concepts and Mental processes. The acts of employing at least one model and determining a predictive value using the model from claim 1 are directed to abstract ideas of mathematical concepts in the form of mathematical calculations using a model, and the acts of determining a predictive value using a model and providing a recommendation are directed to abstract ideas of mental processing steps in the form of making mental determinations and recommendations with the aid of pen and paper.
Step 2A Prong Two:
The claim(s) do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered individually and in combination because the additional elements, which are recited at a high level of generality, provide conventional functions that do not add meaningful limits to practicing the abstract idea.
Claim 1 recites, in part the additional elements of, receiving information and a computer-implemented method for adjusting at least one drying process by providing a recommendation. These limitations describe the concept of use of mathematical concepts in the form of a model, and the mental processing of making recommendations, which corresponds to the concepts identified as abstract ideas by the courts. The above additional elements such as receiving information is the insignificant extra-solution activity of information gathering, while the recitation of the method being providing a recommendation for the adjusting at least one drying process and for the use of three drying stages without the actual implementation of that adjustment recites a mere field of use that relates the abstract ideas to the particular field of drying processes without significantly more, and merely associates the recommendation as an intended use to adjust the drying process, without actually having to adjust the drying the process.
For example: limitation described above as the process being for adjusting at least one drying process using three drying stages is extra solution activity and amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application”, (see MPEP 2106.05(h): “..vi. Limiting the abstract idea of collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis to data related to the electric power grid, because limiting application of the abstract idea to power-grid monitoring is simply an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, Electric Power Group”) while the receiving of information and providing a recommendation are elements that amount to little more than information gathering steps that that fail to place meaningful limits on the claim as they amount to mere data gathering (see MPEP 2106.05(g): “…In Flook, the Court reasoned that "[t]he notion that post-solution activity, no matter how conventional or obvious in itself, can transform an unpatentable principle into a patentable process exalts form over substance. A competent draftsman could attach some form of post-solution activity to almost any mathematical formula". 437 U.S. at 590; 198 USPQ at 197; Id. (holding that step of adjusting an alarm limit variable to a figure computed according to a mathematical formula was "post-solution activity"). See also Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 79, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1968 (2012) (additional element of measuring metabolites of a drug administered to a patient was insignificant extra-solution activity).”).
The abstract idea described in claim 1 is not meaningfully different than those abstract ideas found by the courts, therefor the claim is considered to be directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, when considered both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The claim recites the additional elements of:
receiving information about a layout of the at least two consecutive drying stages, about a composition of the preparation, and about the at least one substrate; This limitation amounts to an additional element that merely collects additional information in the form of layout and substrate composition information.
providing at least one recommended procedure for adjusting the at least one drying process which comprises the at least one predictive value for the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer suitable for being used during the at least one of the drying stages, wherein the at least one drying process is partitioned into an initial drying stage, a critical drying stage following the initial drying stage, and a final drying stage which follows the critical drying stage, wherein the at least one drying process is adjusted by using an evaporation rate of a drying profile during the initial drying stage, applies the evaporation rate of a mild drying profile during the critical drying stage, and returns to the evaporation rate of the rough drying profile during the final drying stage. This limitation recite an intended use of “for adjusting at least one drying process” and the remaining elements of the limitation are merely further limiting this intended use, but fails to afford a practical application of that intended use as a claimed step.
Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. The claim does not recite under the BRI, that the practical application of actually performing a drying process with the recommended procedure is performed. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves another technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementations and functions directed towards an intended use.
Dependent claims 2-12 are drawn to additional elements that fail to offer a practical application of the abstract idea. These limitations are considered to be drawn to the abstract idea without adding significantly more. For example, claims 2-5 further specify optional parameters surrounding the model, but fail to offer any use of the model that affords a practical application. Claims 6-12 relate to procedures performed in a drying process, however the claims are interpreted in such a way that no actual drying process needs to be performed, because the claim is a method and thus is only limited by the method steps of receiving, employing, determining, and recommending, as outlined by claim 1. In other words, claim 1 does not require a drying process actually be performed, thus limitations that limit a drying process fail to substantially limit a claim. See MPEP 2111.04 for further explanation of how “wherein” clauses fail to limit a method when they fail to offer any meaning and purpose to the manipulative steps.
Claims 1-12 are therefore not drawn to eligible subject matter as they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed towards an abstract idea without significantly more.
In regards to Claim 13, the claim is directed towards a system/machine that implements the method steps of claim 1. Accordingly, a similar analysis as applied to claim 1 and finding an abstract idea can be afforded to those corresponding steps of claim 13. Claim 13 contains the additional elements of at least one processing unit, at least one communication interface, and at least one further communication interface. These additional elements are merely computer hardware used as a tool for implementing the abstract ideas of claim 1. In other words, these additional elements amount to little more than appending the words “apply it” to the claim as outlined in MPEP 2106.05(f).
Accordingly, claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being directed towards an abstract idea without significantly more.
It is noted that claim 16 affords a practical application, as it includes the use of a control unit that implements the recommended procedure through control actions to control the coating device, and thus does not receive a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101. It is recommended that a similar step be implemented in the above rejected claims 1-13 to overcome the determination of the claims being directed towards abstract ideas without significantly more.
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 1-5, 8-13 and 16 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.
Claims 1, 13 and 16 each recites the limitation "the rough drying profile" in the final limitation of each independent claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear what “the rough drying profile” is and how it relates to “returning to the evaporation rate of the rough drying profile” as there is no previously established rough drying profile linked to the “initial drying stage” to return to. It is unclear what the scope of “rough drying profile” is. For the sake of compact prosecution, the examiner shall consider “the rough drying profile” to mean a drying profile during a final drying stage with an evaporation/drying rate that is the same as the initial stage.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keil et al. (US 20190081317, hereinafter Keil) in view of Stefan Jaiser “Film Formation of Lithium-Ion Battery Electrodes during Drying: The Interrelation of Process, Microstructure and Properties” (hereinafter, Jaiser).
In regards to Claim 1, Keil discloses “A computer-implemented method for adjusting at least one drying process designated for producing at least one coating on at least one substrate, wherein the at least one drying process is applied to at least one preparation deposited on the at least one substrate” ([0001] The embodiments disclosed herein relate to a system and method for coating a substrate, such as coating operations, for example those used in manufacturing batteries, where the substrate is coated in a series of discrete patches (intermittent coating) and/or in lanes; [0045] The flotation dryer 30 may be comprised of a single zone having a set air temperature and set air jet velocity from the convection nozzles throughout the entire dryer length or, in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings; [0063] The processing unit may be a general purpose computing device such as a microprocessor. Alternatively, it may be a specialized processing device, such as a programmable logic controller (PLC)) “wherein the at least one drying process comprises at least two consecutive drying stages after which the at least one coating is produced” ([0045] The flotation dryer 30 may be comprised of a single zone having a set air temperature and set air jet velocity from the convection nozzles throughout the entire dryer length or, in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings; [0051] In certain embodiments, an inline secondary drying step may be carried out after calendering. As shown in FIG. 5, a secondary dryer 34 may be positioned downstream of the calendering operation to further dry the coatings on the substrate and reduce the residual solvent level to the final targeted value) “wherein the method comprises:(i) receiving information about a layout of the at least two consecutive drying stages, about a composition of the preparation, and about the at least one substrate” ([0045] The flotation dryer 30 may be comprised of a single zone having a set air temperature and set air jet velocity from the convection nozzles throughout the entire dryer length or, in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings. [0051] In certain embodiments, the secondary dryer is configured to contain and convey a continuous web of substrate inside a drying enclosure, where the web is guided in a serpentine or “festoon” like path with the coating having been solidified or cured in a prior drying step. This arrangement provides a web path of substantial cumulative length to be contained within the volume of the secondary dryer while exposing both sides of the coated substrate to a drying atmosphere. Relatively long exposure times, such as drying times in the range of one half minute to 5 minutes may be accomplished in a smaller volume footprint as compared to other web path arrangements such as planar or arched roll support ovens. Exposure time may be calculated by dividing the cumulative path length of the festoon by the transport speed of the substrate to be dried. Total cumulative path lengths from 10 to 50 meters are practical with cumulative path lengths of 100 meters or more achievable with low inertia rollers or driven rollers; wherein the length of the festoon is a layout parameter used to change the second drying process along with the transport/conveyance speed, and the use of single zone vs. many zones is a layout of the first dryer; [0041] A substrate 20, such as a current collector, is shown wrapped around an unwind roller 22. In certain embodiments, the current collector is a metal foil suitable for use as an electrode for a battery, such as a lithium-ion battery. Typically the metal foil is copper for the anode and aluminum for the cathode. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that substrates other than current collectors may be used in the systems and methods disclosed herein, and the metal foil current collector substrate is merely an exemplary embodiment. [0062] In some embodiments, a series of combined dual side coating and calendering operations can be combined to create multilayer, variable density electrodes, or electrodes with varying coating compositions. These multilayer electrodes could be coated in multiple layers at the preferred coating location, or a series of sequential or tandem simultaneous dual side coating machines could be connected in series to carry out to coat, dry and calender multilayer or variable density or electrodes with varying compositions; wherein the configuration of the substrate as single sided or dual sided is information about the substrate used for control, or whether it is copper or aluminum [0067] Based on said coat weight measurement and the specific gravity of the solids in the wet slurry as specified in the slurry formulation, a mass-balance determination of the equivalent dry coating mass per unit area and calendered thickness can be made in the controller unit 100 and compared to the coat weight density and thickness specifications previously stated. These specifications or production targets are entered into the controller unit 100 memory through a human-machine interface (HMI) 101. These specifications are set up as recipes for easy retrieval and modification for the various product type production targets stored within; wherein specific gravity and mass weight are of the coating/preparation) “(ii) employing at least one model configured to generate at least one predictive value for at least one setting parameter for at least one associated dryer being used during at least one of the drying stages” ([0069] Said corresponding web temperature and velocity settings are predetermined in the control unit by algorithms developed for each type of battery coating from structured experiments (such a “designs of experiments” known as DOE's), regression studies, drying engineering models or other suitable techniques alone or in combination as are known to those skilled in the art of drying operations. The predetermined settings are typically stored as recipes in memory in HMI 101 and loaded in the controller unit 100 (PLC) memory during make ready procedures for the battery collector product to me produced) “(iii) determining the at least one predictive value for the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer being used during the at least one of the drying stages based on the at least one model and the information;” ([0069] The predetermined settings are typically stored as recipes in memory in HMI 101 and loaded in the controller unit 100 (PLC) memory during make ready procedures for the battery collector product to me produced. In the present example the flotation air jet velocities are set by the control unit are in the range of 30 to 35 meters per second in order to deliver heat transfer coefficients in the range of 50 to 100 watts per square meter per Celsius degree, and the web exit temperature control in Zone 3 measured with sensor 130 is set at 65° C. as determined in said algorithm to reach the exit target of 2.5% moisture. Said zone air temperatures are measured and regulated to set points of 110, 115 and 120° C. in Zones 1, 2 and 3 respectively by closed-loop control systems included for each zone. Nozzle air jet velocities are preferably measured and regulated to set point by closed-loop control systems included for each zone) “and (iv) providing at least one recommended procedure for adjusting the at least one drying process which comprises the at least one predictive value for the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer suitable for being used during the at least one of the drying stages” ([0063] The controller unit may be in electrical communication (e.g., wired, wirelessly) with one or more of the operating units in the system, including one or more of the coating heads, the dryer, the calender, the slitter, web conveying equipment, sensors, etc. The controller also may be associated with a human machine interface or HMI that displays or otherwise indicates to an operator one or more of the parameters involved in operating the system and/or carrying out the methods described herein. [0069] The web temperature is measured at the exit of the dryer by non-contact IR sensor 130 and in preferred embodiments similarly at the end of each dryer zone, each of said zones having specific air velocity and air temperature settings in order to reach a target web exit temperatures corresponding to the target exit moisture of 2.5%. Said corresponding web temperature and velocity settings are predetermined in the control unit by algorithms developed for each type of battery coating from structured experiments (such a “designs of experiments” known as DOE's), regression studies, drying engineering models or other suitable techniques alone or in combination as are known to those skilled in the art of drying operations. The predetermined settings are typically stored as recipes in memory in HMI 101 and loaded in the controller unit 100 (PLC) memory during make ready procedures for the battery collector product to me produced; wherein the setpoints determined by the models/DOEs are recommended procedures to adjust a drying process to those setpoints) “wherein the at least one drying process is partitioned into an initial drying stage, a critical drying stage following the initial drying stage, and a final drying stage which follows the critical drying stage…” ([0045] in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings. Further, one or more zones may include the aforementioned technologies, including infrared, ultraviolet, electron beam, or any combination, to enhance the heating and drying of the coating layers at a given stage of the drying profile within the overall drying time in the dryer; [0069] Immediately following the aforementioned applications of wet coating on both sides of the substrate, the coated web is subsequently dried (both sides simultaneously) in, for example, a 3-zone flotation dryer 30… the web exit temperature control in Zone 3 measured with sensor 130 is set at 65° C. as determined in said algorithm to reach the exit target of 2.5% moisture. Said zone air temperatures are measured and regulated to set points of 110, 115 and 120° C. in Zones 1, 2 and 3 respectively by closed-loop control systems included for each zone. Nozzle air jet velocities are preferably measured and regulated to set point by closed-loop control systems included for each zone).
Kiel fails to teach “…wherein the at least one drying process is adjusted by using an evaporation rate of a drying profile during the initial drying stage, applies the evaporation rate of a mild drying profile during the critical drying stage, and returns to the evaporation rate of the rough drying profile during the final drying stage”.
Jaiser teaches “…wherein the at least one drying process is adjusted by using an evaporation rate of a drying profile during the initial drying stage, applies the evaporation rate of a mild drying profile during the critical drying stage, and returns to the evaporation rate of the rough drying profile during the final drying stage” ([page 227] A low drying rate (LDR) was adjusted during this characteristic stage to prevent the binder from depleting at the film domains close to the substrate. In order to reduce the total drying time, a high drying rate (HDR) was adjusted during the initial and the third drying stages. Samples were produced through the developed tripartite process that feature the same level of adhesion as reference samples produced at significantly lower average drying rate. Therefore, a custom tripartite drying process could be experimentally realized, thereby allowing for the maintenance of adhesion while the drying time was successfully reduced by about 40%. Within the framework of the presented experiments, the drying rate was solely altered by a variation in the aerodynamic gas flow conditions. The film temperature during drying as well as the solvent loading in the gas phase are also considered major drying parameters and will definitely introduce further challenges and options for drying profile customization”.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have modified the three zones of drying that correspond with three different stages of drying that have different parameter settings for the dryer to achieve during a drying profile execution as taught by Kiel, with the use of drying profiles of Jaiser in which evaporation/drying rates are adjusted so that a first and final drying stage utilize a high drying rate during the first and final drying stages, while the middle/characteristic drying stage utilizes a drying rate is a low drying rate, because it would gain the stated benefit of Jaiser, namely that “[page 227]…the drying time was successfully reduced by about 40%”. This is further supported by the fact that both references are in the same field of use (drying processes for substrate materials) and both recommend adjustment of air flow parameters to achieve a desired drying process through multiple zones/stages. By combining these references, it can be considered taking the known drying methods of Keil which dries a substrate at different settings in three different zones/stages, and improving it by modifying the three zones/stages with the use of a high drying rate in the first and final drying stage/zone, while the middle stage/zone utilizes a low drying rate, in a known way that would achieve predictable results.
In regards to Claim 8, the combination of Keil and Jaiser teaches the method of drying as incorporated by claim 1 above. Keil further teaches “The computer-implemented method according to claim 1 wherein the at least one recommended procedure comprises adjusting the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer to a constant value during the at least one drying stage.” ([0074] Continuing the example, following the calendering step and weight and thickness measurements of the coating, the web is preferably guided into an inline secondary drying operation to reduce the residual moisture from 2.5% to the target value, e.g., less than 200 ppm. The target exit web temperature and drying atmosphere temperature in the secondary dryer is predetermined to be 175° C. in the control unit by algorithms developed for each type of battery coating from structured experiments (such a “designs of experiments” known as DOE's), regression studies, drying engineering models or other suitable techniques alone or in combination as are known to those skilled in the art of drying operations. In the present example the air is heated by an electric coil to a set point temperature of 180° C. and regulated by a closed loop control system regulating the heat output from the electric coil). Jaiser further teaches “…adjusting the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer to a constant value during the at least one drying stage” ([page 227] A low drying rate (LDR) was adjusted during this characteristic stage to prevent the binder from depleting at the film domains close to the substrate. In order to reduce the total drying time, a high drying rate (HDR) was adjusted during the initial and the third drying stages).
In regards to Claim 13, Keil teaches “A system for adjusting at least one drying process designated for producing at least one coating on at least one substrate, the system comprising:- at least one processing unit, wherein the at least one processing unit is configured to perform a computer-implemented method for adjusting at least one drying process designated for producing at least one coating on at least one substrate, wherein the at least one drying process is applied to at least one preparation deposited on the at least one substrate” ([0001] The embodiments disclosed herein relate to a system and method for coating a substrate, such as coating operations, for example those used in manufacturing batteries, where the substrate is coated in a series of discrete patches (intermittent coating) and/or in lanes; [0045] The flotation dryer 30 may be comprised of a single zone having a set air temperature and set air jet velocity from the convection nozzles throughout the entire dryer length or, in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings; [0063] a controller may be provided, the controller having a processing unit and a storage element. The processing unit may be a general purpose computing device such as a microprocessor. Alternatively, it may be a specialized processing device, such as a programmable logic controller (PLC)...The storage element may contain instructions, which when executed by the processing unit, enable the system to perform the functions described herein) “wherein the at least one drying process comprises at least two consecutive drying stages after which the at least one coating is produced” ([0045] The flotation dryer 30 may be comprised of a single zone having a set air temperature and set air jet velocity from the convection nozzles throughout the entire dryer length or, in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings; [0051] In certain embodiments, an inline secondary drying step may be carried out after calendering. As shown in FIG. 5, a secondary dryer 34 may be positioned downstream of the calendering operation to further dry the coatings on the substrate and reduce the residual solvent level to the final targeted value) “wherein the method comprises: (i) receiving information about a layout of the at least two consecutive drying stages, about a composition of the preparation, and about the at least one substrate” ([0045] The flotation dryer 30 may be comprised of a single zone having a set air temperature and set air jet velocity from the convection nozzles throughout the entire dryer length or, in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings. [0051] In certain embodiments, the secondary dryer is configured to contain and convey a continuous web of substrate inside a drying enclosure, where the web is guided in a serpentine or “festoon” like path with the coating having been solidified or cured in a prior drying step. This arrangement provides a web path of substantial cumulative length to be contained within the volume of the secondary dryer while exposing both sides of the coated substrate to a drying atmosphere. Relatively long exposure times, such as drying times in the range of one half minute to 5 minutes may be accomplished in a smaller volume footprint as compared to other web path arrangements such as planar or arched roll support ovens. Exposure time may be calculated by dividing the cumulative path length of the festoon by the transport speed of the substrate to be dried. Total cumulative path lengths from 10 to 50 meters are practical with cumulative path lengths of 100 meters or more achievable with low inertia rollers or driven rollers; wherein the length of the festoon is a layout parameter used to change the second drying process, and the use of single zone vs. many zones is a layout of the first dryer; [0041] A substrate 20, such as a current collector, is shown wrapped around an unwind roller 22. In certain embodiments, the current collector is a metal foil suitable for use as an electrode for a battery, such as a lithium-ion battery. Typically the metal foil is copper for the anode and aluminum for the cathode. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that substrates other than current collectors may be used in the systems and methods disclosed herein, and the metal foil current collector substrate is merely an exemplary embodiment. [0062] In some embodiments, a series of combined dual side coating and calendering operations can be combined to create multilayer, variable density electrodes, or electrodes with varying coating compositions. These multilayer electrodes could be coated in multiple layers at the preferred coating location, or a series of sequential or tandem simultaneous dual side coating machines could be connected in series to carry out to coat, dry and calender multilayer or variable density or electrodes with varying compositions; wherein the configuration of the substrate as single sided or dual sided is information about the substrate used for control [0067] Based on said coat weight measurement and the specific gravity of the solids in the wet slurry as specified in the slurry formulation, a mass-balance determination of the equivalent dry coating mass per unit area and calendered thickness can be made in the controller unit 100 and compared to the coat weight density and thickness specifications previously stated. These specifications or production targets are entered into the controller unit 100 memory through a human-machine interface (HMI) 101. These specifications are set up as recipes for easy retrieval and modification for the various product type production targets stored within; wherein specific gravity and mass weight are of the coating/preparation) “(ii) employing at least one model configured to generate at least one predictive value for at least one setting parameter for at least one associated dryer being used during at least one of the drying stages” ([0069] Said corresponding web temperature and velocity settings are predetermined in the control unit by algorithms developed for each type of battery coating from structured experiments (such a “designs of experiments” known as DOE's), regression studies, drying engineering models or other suitable techniques alone or in combination as are known to those skilled in the art of drying operations. The predetermined settings are typically stored as recipes in memory in HMI 101 and loaded in the controller unit 100 (PLC) memory during make ready procedures for the battery collector product to me produced) “(iii) determining the at least one predictive value for the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer being used during the at least one of the drying stages based on the at least one model and the information” ([0069] The predetermined settings are typically stored as recipes in memory in HMI 101 and loaded in the controller unit 100 (PLC) memory during make ready procedures for the battery collector product to me produced. In the present example the flotation air jet velocities are set by the control unit are in the range of 30 to 35 meters per second in order to deliver heat transfer coefficients in the range of 50 to 100 watts per square meter per Celsius degree, and the web exit temperature control in Zone 3 measured with sensor 130 is set at 65° C. as determined in said algorithm to reach the exit target of 2.5% moisture. Said zone air temperatures are measured and regulated to set points of 110, 115 and 120° C. in Zones 1, 2 and 3 respectively by closed-loop control systems included for each zone. Nozzle air jet velocities are preferably measured and regulated to set point by closed-loop control systems included for each zone) “(iv) providing at least one recommended procedure for adjusting the at least one drying process which comprises the at least one predictive value for the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer being used during the at least one of the drying stages;” ([0069] The web temperature is measured at the exit of the dryer by non-contact IR sensor 130 and in preferred embodiments similarly at the end of each dryer zone, each of said zones having specific air velocity and air temperature settings in order to reach a target web exit temperatures corresponding to the target exit moisture of 2.5%. Said corresponding web temperature and velocity settings are predetermined in the control unit by algorithms developed for each type of battery coating from structured experiments (such a “designs of experiments” known as DOE's), regression studies, drying engineering models or other suitable techniques alone or in combination as are known to those skilled in the art of drying operations. The predetermined settings are typically stored as recipes in memory in HMI 101 and loaded in the controller unit 100 (PLC) memory during make ready procedures for the battery collector product to me produced; wherein the setpoints determined by the models/DOEs are recommended procedures to adjust a drying process to those setpoints) “at least one communication interface configured to receive the information according to step (i); and - at least one further communication interface configured to provide the at least one recommended procedure for adjusting the at least one drying process according to step (iv)” ([0063] The controller unit may be in electrical communication (e.g., wired, wirelessly) with one or more of the operating units in the system, including one or more of the coating heads, the dryer, the calender, the slitter, web conveying equipment, sensors, etc. The controller also may be associated with a human machine interface or HMI that displays or otherwise indicates to an operator one or more of the parameters involved in operating the system and/or carrying out the methods described herein. [0067] These specifications or production targets are entered into the controller unit 100 memory through a human-machine interface (HMI) 101. These specifications are set up as recipes for easy retrieval and modification for the various product type production targets stored within. If the calculated coat weight differs from the target value, a new target wet thickness is calculated automatically in the control unit (or alternatively by manual means) and the volumetric flow rate of wet slurry supplied to the first coating head 24 is increased in the case of the measured value being less than the target, or decreased in the case where the measured thickness value exceeds the target. Accordingly the pump speed is increased or decreased by the control function output to the pump drive in the control unit; wherien the interface for sending display output of recommendation via HMI is one interface, while that for receiving the parameters via HMI is another interface) “wherein the at least one drying process is partitioned into an initial drying stage, a critical drying stage following the initial drying stage, and a final drying stage which follows the critical drying stage…” ([0045] in preferred embodiments, comprised of two or more zones each having an independent set of air temperature and air velocity settings. Further, one or more zones may include the aforementioned technologies, including infrared, ultraviolet, electron beam, or any combination, to enhance the heating and drying of the coating layers at a given stage of the drying profile within the overall drying time in the dryer; [0069] Immediately following the aforementioned applications of wet coating on both sides of the substrate, the coated web is subsequently dried (both sides simultaneously) in, for example, a 3-zone flotation dryer 30… the web exit temperature control in Zone 3 measured with sensor 130 is set at 65° C. as determined in said algorithm to reach the exit target of 2.5% moisture. Said zone air temperatures are measured and regulated to set points of 110, 115 and 120° C. in Zones 1, 2 and 3 respectively by closed-loop control systems included for each zone. Nozzle air jet velocities are preferably measured and regulated to set point by closed-loop control systems included for each zone).
Kiel fails to teach “…wherein the at least one drying process is adjusted by using an evaporation rate of a drying profile during the initial drying stage, applies the evaporation rate of a mild drying profile during the critical drying stage, and returns to the evaporation rate of the rough drying profile during the final drying stage”.
Jaiser teaches “…wherein the at least one drying process is adjusted by using an evaporation rate of a drying profile during the initial drying stage, applies the evaporation rate of a mild drying profile during the critical drying stage, and returns to the evaporation rate of the rough drying profile during the final drying stage” ([page 227] A low drying rate (LDR) was adjusted during this characteristic stage to prevent the binder from depleting at the film domains close to the substrate. In order to reduce the total drying time, a high drying rate (HDR) was adjusted during the initial and the third drying stages. Samples were produced through the developed tripartite process that feature the same level of adhesion as reference samples produced at significantly lower average drying rate. Therefore, a custom tripartite drying process could be experimentally realized, thereby allowing for the maintenance of adhesion while the drying time was successfully reduced by about 40%. Within the framework of the presented experiments, the drying rate was solely altered by a variation in the aerodynamic gas flow conditions. The film temperature during drying as well as the solvent loading in the gas phase are also considered major drying parameters and will definitely introduce further challenges and options for drying profile customization”.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have modified the three zones of drying that correspond with three different stages of drying that have different parameter settings for the dryer to achieve during a drying profile execution as taught by Kiel, with the use of drying profiles of Jaiser in which evaporation/drying rates are adjusted so that a first and final drying stage utilize a high drying rate during the first and final drying stages, while the middle/characteristic drying stage utilizes a drying rate is a low drying rate, because it would gain the stated benefit of Jaiser, namely that “[page 227]…the drying time was successfully reduced by about 40%”. This is further supported by the fact that both references are in the same field of use (drying processes for substrate materials) and both recommend adjustment of air flow parameters to achieve a desired drying process through multiple zones/stages. By combining these references, it can be considered taking the known drying methods of Keil which dries a substrate at different settings in three different zones/stages, and improving it by modifying the three zones/stages with the use of a high drying rate in the first and final drying stage/zone, while the middle stage/zone utilizes a low drying rate, in a known way that would achieve predictable results.
Claims 2-5, 9-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keil as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamakawa et al. (WO 2014129214, hereinafter Yamakawa).
In regards to Claim 2, the combination of Keil and Jaiser teaches the method as incorporated by claim 1 above. Keil further teaches “The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one model is generated by using at least one known value for the at least one setting parameter for the at least one associated dryer being used during the at least one of the drying stages wherein the at least one known value for the at least one setting parameter for the at