Detailed Office Action
The communication dated 5/4/2026 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 12-20 are withdrawn from examination. Claims 1-20 remain pending.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-11) in the reply filed on 5/4/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 12-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description on page 10: 31.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KO (US-2019/0363389), hereinafter KO, in view of FUKUOKA (CN-102593420-A, and its English translation), hereinafter FUKUOKA. Note that the italicized text below are the instant claims.
Regarding claim 1, KO discloses A secondary battery lamination device comprising: a laminate moving portion configured to move a laminate in a first direction {[abstract], [FIG. 1] note the first direction is from left to right},
the laminate formed by sequentially stacking a positive electrode, a separator, and a negative electrode {[abstract] note stacking electrodes with separators and electrodes indicating the positive and the negative electrode};
heat source portion positioned on a first side and/or the other first side and a second side of the laminate moving portion {[0036], [FIG. 1] note the two heaters 130 on both sides},
and the heat source portion configured to supply heat to the laminate to bond the positive electrode, the separator, and the negative electrode to one another {[0011] note thermal bonding};
and a pressurizing portion configured to apply a pressure to the laminate, the pressurizing portion being disposed downstream of the heat source portion in the first direction {[0042], [0057], [FIG. 1] note both the pressurizing portions 120 and 150 are downstream of the heater 130}.
KO, however, is silent on the heater 130 being an infrared LED lamp or the limitations “using infrared lamps”, “an infrared LED (Light-Emitting Diode)”, and “the infrared LED heat source portion configured to supply supplies infrared light”.
In the same field of endeavor that is related to electrode manufacturing device, FUKUOKA discloses the use of plurality of infrared LED lights or lamps to heat the electrode assembly {[abstract], [0013]-[0014] note heating by LED lamp}.
At the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of FUKUOKA in the device of KO and have used infrared LED lamps for the heating of the laminated electrodes of KO.
As disclosed by FUKUOKA, the advantage of this heating device is that wavelength of the infrared radiation can be chosen such that effective heating is implemented {[0013]}.
Regarding claim 2, modified KO discloses wherein the infrared LED heat source portion comprises a first infrared LED heat source portion positioned on the first side of the laminate moving portion; and a second infrared LED heat source portion positioned on the second side of the laminate moving portion {[FIG.1] note that in modified KO, the heaters 130 are infrared LED and as seen are located on both sides of the laminate moving portion}.
Regarding claim 3, modified KO discloses wherein the laminate moving portion is in the form of a conveyor belt {[0037]}.
Regarding claim 4, FUKUOKA discloses wherein the plurality of infrared LED lamps comprised in the first infrared LED heat source portion and the plurality of infrared LED lamps comprised in the second infrared LED heat source portion each comprise a respective plurality of infrared LED lamps are arranged symmetrically based on a centerline of the laminate moving portion {[FIG. 1] note the plurality of LED infrared lamps 30 are symmetrically located, note that the motivation statement outlined under claim 1 applies here as well}.
Regarding claim 7, modified KO discloses wherein the pressurizing portion comprises a roller {[0057], [FIG. 1] note roller 150}.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of KO and FUKUOKA as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of WOO (US-2019/0229324), hereinafter WOO.
Regarding claims 5-6, the combination of KO and FUKUOKA discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 4 as discussed above. This combination, however, is silent on claim 5 limitation of “wherein with respect to the plurality of infrared LED lamps of each of the first and second infrared LED heat source portions, when an array of matrix form (a * b) having a vertically and b horizontally is defined as one set, 1 to 5 sets of the LED lamps are disposed in each of the first and second infrared LED heat source portions” and claim 6 limitation of “wherein the infrared LED lamps of each of the first and second LED heat source portions are operated individually”.
In the same filed of endeavor that is related to electrode heating device and manufacturing system for secondary battery, WOO discloses wherein with respect to the plurality of infrared LED lamps of each of the first and second infrared LED heat source portions, when an array of matrix form (a * b) having a vertically and b horizontally is defined as one set, 1 to 5 sets of the LED lamps are disposed in each of the first and second infrared LED heat source portions (claim 5) {note that modified KO has infrared LED lamps, [0002], [0007], [0025], [FIG. 4] note the array (a*b) of the heating lamps with 3 lamps horizontally and 5 lamps vertically defining one set, [FIG. 3] note the additional sets},
wherein the infrared LED lamps of each of the first and second LED heat source portions are operated individually (claim 6) {[0057] note each lamp has its own power source, thus can be operated individually}.
Regarding claim 5 and at the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of WOO in the combination apparatus of KO and FUKUOKA and have arranged the plurality of infrared LED lamps in arrays of a*b with one or more set.
As disclosed by WOO, the advantage of this array heating is quick heating that results in a reduction of the working time and thereby significantly improves the productivity of the electrode {[0007]}.
Regarding claim 6 and at the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of WOO in the combination apparatus of KO and FUKUOKA and have operated each lamp individually. One would have been motivated to do so, so that different regions of the laminate, as needed, can be heated with different intensity to optimize the product, if needed.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of KO and FUKUOKA as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CHOI (US-2022/0294024), hereinafter CHOI, as evidenced by MASUMA (JP-2013065471-A and its English translation), hereinafter MASUMA. The Examiner notes that CHOI is the English family member of WO-2021101005-A1 with a publication date of 5/27/2021.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of KO and FUKUOKA discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. This combination, however, is silent on the extent of applied pressure to the electrode during lamination.
In the same field of endeavor that is related to battery electrode lamination, CHOI discloses wherein the pressurizing portion is configured to apply the pressure to the laminate of 900 to 1000 kg {[abstract] note that as evidenced by MASUMA in paragraph [0034], typical battery size is 100 cm2, thus pressure of 500 kg or higher}.
At the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of CHOI in the combination apparatus of KO and FUKUOKA and have used the indicated lamination pressure. As disclosed by CHOI, the advantage of this extent of pressure is to efficiently bond the electrodes and the separator {[abstract], [0043]}.
The Examiner notes that CHOI discloses a pressure of 5000 kg or higher that encompasses the claimed range. A prima facie case of obviousness is established when a claimed narrow range is within a broad prior art range or partially overlaps or touches the broad range. Harris, 409 F.3d at 1341; Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1329-30. Also, see MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of KO and FUKUOKA as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of NAGASAKA (US-2013/0306237), hereinafter NAGASAKA.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of KO and FUKUOKA discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. This combination, however, is silent on a fan sheet disposed near the lamps.
In the same field of endeavor that is related to laminating electrodes, NAGASAKA discloses further comprising a fan sheet disposed adjacent to the infrared LED heat source portion, the fan sheet comprising a plurality of fans {[0128]}.
At the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of NAGASAKA in the combination apparatus of KO and FUKUOKA and have used the cooling fan. As disclosed by NAGASAKA, the advantage of this fan is to efficiently cool the system {[0128]}.
Regarding the fan being disposed near the lamp and plurality of fans, NAGASAKA however, discloses only one fan and the fan is disposed near the laminated structure.
However, and at the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have replicated the fan of NAGASAKA to obtain plurality of fans and have disposed some of these fans near the lamps, since it has been held that a mere duplication or replication of working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art {see MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(B)}. One would have been motivated to do so in order to also cool the plurality of the lamps and prevents overheating.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of KO and FUKUOKA as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of SHIM (US-2022/0052372), hereinafter SHIM. The Examiner notes that SHIM is the English family member of WO-2020180028-A1 with a publication date of 9/10/2020.
Regarding claims 10, the combination of KO and FUKUOKA discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and 4 as discussed above. This combination, however, is silent on limitation of claim 10 reciting “further comprising an electronic box having a control portion configured to control operation of the laminate moving portion, the infrared LED heat source portion, and the pressurizing portion” and claim 11 reciting “further comprising a temperature sensor configured to be connected to the positive electrode and/or the negative electrode”.
In the same filed of endeavor that is related to laminating electrodes, SHIM discloses further comprising an electronic box having a control portion configured to control operation of the laminate moving portion, the infrared LED heat source portion, and the pressurizing portion (claim 10) {[0015], [0056], [0059]},
further comprising a temperature sensor configured to be connected to the positive electrode and/or the negative electrode (claim 11) {[0015]}.
At the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of SHIM in the combination apparatus of KO and FUKUOKA and have incorporated the controller, electronic box, and temperature sensor of SHIM in the apparatus of the combination above. As disclosed by SHIM, the advantage of this controller/sensor is to adjust the intensity of the heaters as needed {[0037]}.
The Examiner notes that SHIM discloses using controller to control the heater and thus silent on using the controller to control laminate moving portion and the pressurizing portion as recited in instant claim 10.
However, and at the effective fling date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have also used the controller of SHIM to control the movement of the laminate moving portion and the pressurizing portion, since it has been held that broadly providing an automated means to replace manual activity which accomplishes the same result involves only routine skill in the art {see MPEP 2144.04 (III). One would have been motivated to do so in order to increase the efficiency of the operation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to S. BEHROOZ GHORISHI whose telephone number is (571)272-1373. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-(alt Fri) 7:30-5:00.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. 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.
/S. BEHROOZ GHORISHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights