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 .
In the amendment filed on 11/17/25, applicants have amended claims 1, 5, 9-11. The 102 rejections over the reference to JP’262 and JP’283 have been withdrawn in view of the amendment.
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 1-15 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. In claim 1, lines 9 and 11, the phrase “the width direction”, with the phrase “a longitudinal direction along the width direction” and with the phrase “a plurality of parts in the width direction”, is unclear because it is unclear if “the width direction” is the width direction of the die or of the substrate (as shown in applicants’ specification teaches the width direction of the substrate on para [0024-0025] and [0027-0028]; the width direction of the die on para [0033], [0037] and [0044]). For the purpose of examination, “the width direction of the die” is assumed.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2003-205262 in view of JP-2018-18678 A.
Regarding claim 1, JP’262 teaches (see Fig 1) a die (1) with a slit (5) that has a longitudinal direction along a width direction of the die and is configured to discharge a coating liquid to form a coating film on a substrate; a first flow path (11) that is configured to supply the coating liquid toward the die; a first manifold (10) that is linked to the first flow path and is configured to hold the coating liquid that flows in from the first flow path(11); a plurality of second flow paths (9) that are linked to the first manifold (10); a second manifold (4) that is linked to the second flow paths (9) and the slit (5), has a longitudinal direction along the width direction of the die, and is configured to hold the coating liquid that flows in from the second flow paths (9); and an adjustment unit (8) that is provided along at least one of the second flow paths (9) and is configured to adjust a flow of the coating liquid flowing through the at least one of the second flow paths (9). JP’262 lacks teaching the second manifold being divided into a plurality of parts in the width direction of the die. However, JP’678 teaches (see Figs 3-5, see English translation pages 1-11) a coating device having a die head (62) with a second manifold (63) divided into a plurality of parts (portions 77-78) in the width direction of the die. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a second manifold being divided into a plurality of parts as claimed in JP’262 to apply different binder rations by one application as taught by JP’678 (see English Translation on page 7).
As to claim 2, JP'262 teaches (see Fig 1) the first manifold (10) and the
adjustment unit (8) are provided on the outside of the die.
Regarding claim 3, JP'262 the first manifold (10) and at least a coating liquid flow
path portion of the adjustment unit (8) are provided on the inside of the die.
As to claim 4, in JP'262 the second flow paths (9) have lengths that are equal to
each other (see Fig 1).
Regarding claims 5 and 9-11, in JP'262 (see Figs 1-3) the linking portions (connection parts of lines 9) between the second flow paths (9) and the
first manifold (10) are arranged with respect to each other in a longitudinal direction of
the first manifold (10).
Regarding claim 7, JP'262 teaches the second flow paths (9) have lengths that
are equal to each other (see Figs 1 and 3).
As to claim 8, JP'262 the second flow paths (9) have lengths that are equal to
each other (see Figs 1 and 3).
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2019-171283 in view of JP-2018-18678 A.
Regarding claim 1, JP'283 discloses (see Figs 1-3) a coating device configured
to form a coating film on a substrate comprising: a die with a slit (4) that has a longitudinal direction along a width direction of the die and is configured to discharge a coating liquid to form a coating film on the substrate; a first flow path (supply path 8) that is configured to supply the coating liquid toward the die; a first manifold (path 7) that is linked to the first flow path (8) and is configured to hold the coating liquid that flows in from the first flow path (8); a plurality of second flow paths (9) that are linked to the first manifold (7); a second manifold (5) that is linked to the second flow paths and the slit (4), has a longitudinal direction along a width direction (see Fig 2), and is configured to hold the coating liquid that flows in from the second flow paths (9); and an adjustment unit (11, 12) that is provided along at least one of the second flow paths (9) and is configured to adjust a flow of the coating liquid flowing through the at least one of the second flow paths (9). JP’283 lacks teaching the second manifold being divided into a plurality of parts in the width direction of the die. However, JP’678 teaches (see Figs 3-5, see English translation pages 1-11) a coating device having a die head (62) with a second manifold (63) divided into a plurality of parts (portions 77-78) in the width direction of the die. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a second manifold being divided into a plurality of parts as claimed in JP’283 to apply different binder rations by one application as taught by JP’678 (see English Translation on page 7).
As to claim 2, JP'283 teaches (see Fig 1) the first manifold (7) and the
adjustment unit (12) are provided on the outside of the die.
Regarding claim 3, JP'283 the first manifold (7) and at least a coating liquid flow
path portion of the adjustment unit (11) are provided on the inside of the die.
As to claim 4, in JP'283 the second flow paths (9) have lengths that are equal to
each other (see Fig 1).
Regarding claims 5 and 9-11, in JP'283 (see Figs 1-3) the linking portions (connection parts of lines 9) between the second flow paths (9) and the first manifold (7) are arranged with respect to each other in the lengthwise direction of the first manifold (7).
Regarding claim 7, JP'283 teaches the second flow paths (9) have lengths that
are equal to each other (see Figs 1 and 3).
As to claim 8, JP'283 the second flow paths (9) have lengths that are equal to
each other (see Figs 1 and 3).
Claim(s) 6 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over JP2003-205262 or JP2019-171283 in view of JP-2018-18678 A as applied to claim 1 and further in view of JP2010-167408.
JP'262 or JP’283 as modified lacks teaching an intermittent supply unit. However, JP'408 teaches (see Fig 1-2) an intermittent supply unit (14) that is configured to intermittently supply the coating liquid and is provided to a supply path (feeding path 13) of the coating liquid to the first flow path. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an intermittent supply unit in JP'262 or JP'283 to simplify an apparatus structure and to eliminate the need of a long period of time for flow rate adjustment as taught by JP'408 (see Abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEWEBDAR T TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-1238. The examiner can normally be reached 7.00-3:30 PM.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
YEWEBDAR T. TADESSE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717
/YEWEBDAR T TADESSE/