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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 2, 4-12, 14-17 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed on 12/22/2025 have been entered.
112 rejections have been withdrawn in view of the amendments.
The 102 rejections have been withdrawn in view of the amendments.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-5, 8-12, 14, 15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hitoshi et al (JP 2013139889 A; machine translation) in view of Watanabe et al (US 20140014037 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, 4, 5,
Hitoshi teaches a method of electrode drying (Paragraph 0009) that comprises applying slurry comprising an active material and a solvent on a current collector (Paragraph 0017, Paragraph 0010). Hitoshi teaches that the drying device has a transport section 60 that transports the electrode foil (Paragraph 0014; Figure 10). Hitoshi also teaches a drying reference value that is used to control the heating unit and the air blowing unit (Paragraph 0011), so that desired drying conditions can be set while keeping track of the continuous drying state of the electrode layer. Hitoshi teaches the presence of multiple measuring means on the electrode drying device (Paragraph 0014) including a solvent concentration detection unit. When the solvent concentration is known (Paragraph 0032, 0054), then the solid concentration (content of solid) can also be calculated by (100%- solvent concentration%). Hence, Hitoshi teaches the measurement of content of solid on the electrode.
Furthermore, Hitoshi teaches an additional heating unit 90 that can be switched on in any of the drying zones 51 to 56 based on a drying reference value (Paragraph 0053). The heating unit or additional heating section comprises of electromagnetic induction heating (Paragraph 0072). The control unit 160 stores a dryness reference value defined by the trajectory of the amount of solvent evaporation with respect to time, and then automatically adjusts the heating unit 80, and the additional heating unit 90 so that the solvent evaporation amount M calculated from the measured dryness factor always falls within the range of the dryness reference value (Paragraph 0033, 0054).
PNG
media_image1.png
776
480
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hitoshi does not teach that the reference value is in a range greater than 65% and less than 100%, or the reference value is in a range greater than 72.5% and less than 95%, or the reference value is in a range greater than 80% and less than 90%.
However, Watanabe teaches an electrode drying method and apparatus, that has a staged drying process as shown in Figure 2.
Watanabe discusses the use of auxiliary heater (such as induction heater) present in the drying device and configured to be independently operated by the drying condition control devices (Paragraph 0049). The drying device uses a noncontact moisture meter in each drying zone (Paragraph 0012). The non contact moisture meter is capable of detecting moisture contained in the coating film (Paragraph 0012), and the content of solid can be calculated based on the moisture content measured. By satisfying the moisture content a, b, c, d ,e at each timing in Figure 2, it becomes possible to set a desired drying condition (Paragraph 0013). Furthermore, Watanabe teaches that by setting or controlling the drying condition based on the detection means, it becomes possible to always and assuredly maintain optimum drying condition for optimum drying (Paragraph 0011). In Figure 2, it is seen that the latter drying stage is initiated at a value ‘c’ of the moisture content. It would be obvious to optimize the value of c to include the range of 10-20% moisture. This translates to 80-90% solids content as stated in the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image2.png
331
598
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize drying conditions/degree of drying/solids or moisture % to include the claimed range. One would have been motivated to provide a reference value in order to optimize drying using hot air and induction heating methods. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
PNG
media_image3.png
335
612
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2,
Hitoshi teaches that the drying furnace is divided into a plurality of drying zones, and that each of the drying zones are provided with an additional heating section 90 (Paragraph 0021). Furthermore, Hitoshi teaches that the additional heating section can be adjusted and controlled based on the dryness reference value (paragraph 0033). The heating unit or additional heating section comprises of electromagnetic induction heating (Paragraph 0072). Hence, Hitoshi teaches the presence of an induction heating unit in a zone where the degree of drying reaches a reference value.
Regarding Claim 8,
Hitoshi teaches a conveying unit 60 that continuously conveys the long electrode foil in the drying furnace (Paragraph 0029), and each of the drying zones are provided with nozzles for supplying hot air around the electrode foil being transported (Paragraph 0020).
Regarding Claim 9,
Hitoshi teaches that the drying furnace is divided into a plurality of drying zones, and that each of the drying zones are provided with a heating unit (hot air) and additional heating section 90 (Paragraph 0021). Furthermore, Hitoshi teaches that the additional heating section can be adjusted and controlled based on the dryness reference value (paragraph 0033). The heating unit or additional heating section comprises of electromagnetic induction heating (Paragraph 0072). Hitoshi teaches that the solvent evaporation amount M increases as the amount of heat applied by the heating unit 80 and the additional heating unit 90 and the amount of air blown by the air blowing unit 70 increase (Paragraph 0033).
Regarding Claim 10,
Hitoshi teaches a slurry that comprises a solvent, electrode active material, conductive additive, and a binder (Paragraph 0017).
Regarding Claim 11,
Hitoshi teaches a drying apparatus that comprises of a drying chamber or furnace divided into a plurality of drying zones, and each of the drying zones are provided with a heating unit (hot air) and additional heating section 90 (Paragraph 0021). Furthermore, Hitoshi teaches that the additional heating section can be adjusted and controlled based on the dryness reference value (paragraph 0033). The heating unit or additional heating section comprises of electromagnetic induction heating (Paragraph 0072).
Regarding Claim 12,
Hitoshi teaches that the drying furnace has a hot air supply in the form of nozzles for each drying zones (Paragraph 0020).
Regarding Claim 14 and Claim 15,
Hitoshi does not teach that the reference value is in a range greater than 65% and less than 100%, or the reference value is in a range greater than 72.5% and less than 95%, or the reference value is in a range greater than 80% and less than 90%.
However, Watanabe teaches an electrode drying method and apparatus, that has a staged drying process as shown in Figure 2.
Watanabe discusses the use of auxiliary heater (such as induction heater) present in the drying device and configured to be independently operated by the drying condition control devices (Paragraph 0049). The drying device uses a noncontact moisture meter in each drying zone (Paragraph 0012). The non contact moisture meter is capable of detecting moisture contained in the coating film (Paragraph 0012), and the content of solid can be calculated based on the moisture content measured. By satisfying the moisture content a, b, c, d ,e at each timing in Figure 2, it becomes possible to set a desired drying condition (Paragraph 0013). Furthermore, Watanabe teaches that by setting or controlling the drying condition based on the detection means, it becomes possible to always and assuredly maintain optimum drying condition for optimum drying (Paragraph 0011). In Figure 2, it is seen that the latter drying stage is initiated at a value ‘c’ of the moisture content. It would be obvious to optimize the value of c to include the range of 10-20% moisture. This translates to 80-90% solids content as stated in the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image2.png
331
598
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize drying conditions/degree of drying/solids or moisture % to include the claimed range. One would have been motivated to provide a reference value in order to optimize drying using hot air and induction heating methods. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding Claim 17,
Hitoshi teaches that the slurry comprises a solvent, electrode active material, conductive additive, and a binder (Paragraph 0017).
Claim(s) 6, 7, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hitoshi, Watanabe, and Brownewell et al (US 5321896).
Hitoshi does not specify the output of the induction heating unit being greater than 2.4 kW and less than 3.2 kW, or being greater than 2.6 kW and less than 3.0 kW.
However, Brownewell teaches an apparatus to drying a coating on a metal substrate using induction heating coils (Column 11, Lines 30-35) and a standard convection oven (Column 15, Lines 30-35). Brownewell further states that the power supplied to the induction coil needs to be adjusted depending on the size of the sheet and the coating to be cured (Column 16, lines 10-15). Varying the supply power to the induction coils will result in varying the output power, and in turn optimizing the output power depending on the factors stated above. One would have been motivated to provide an output power as claimed in order to optimize drying the combination of the size of the electrode roll, and the type of active material coating applied to the electrode roll. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
References of Interest
Shen et al (US 20190229338 A1)
Lovens et al (US 20090057301 A1)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant highlights that Hitoshi includes additional heating sections 90 in all drying zones, and Hitoshi inevitably teaches that additional heating may be performed in all drying steps. Examiner asserts that Hitoshi teaches that the additional heating unit can be switched on in any of the drying zones 51 to 56 based on a drying reference value (Paragraph 0053). This is in line with claim 1 wherein “when a content of solid of the slurry reaches a reference value while the current collector passes through a drying apparatus, drying the slurry using induction heating of an induction heating unit”. Claim 1 does not restrict the location of the induction heating unit in the drying apparatus.
Applicant argues that in Watanabe “induction heating that may be performed by the auxiliary heater merely teaches that induction heating is preferably carried out in all drying steps, and provides no teaching whatsoever regarding performing induction heating only in certain steps within a specific range, as in the present invention”. Examiner disagrees. Hitoshi teaches the additional heating unit which is an induction heating unit, and while Watanabe includes the auxiliary heating device, it provides motivation to optimize the drying conditions based on the moisture content detected in the zones. The drying device is provided with a plurality of drying condition means capable of individually controlling a condition of drying in a traveling direction of the substrate sheet (Paragraph 0016).
Applicant argues that the moisture content corresponding to 10-20% based on the position in the graph is not proper. Examiner disagrees that the rejection was not solely based on the position in the graph. The rejection cites obviousness due to optimizing drying conditions/degree of drying/solids or moisture % to include the claimed range. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II). Referring to the graph provides an example of an optimum range condition.
In response to applicant's argument that “Watanabe would raise the drying temperature leading to occurrence of cracks, curls, and other defects”, see MPEP 2145 - arguments presented by applicant cannot take the place of factually supported objective evidence. In fact, Watanabe does allude to the use of the auxiliary heater (Paragraph 0049) to prevent the generation of defects on the coating films (Paragraph 0044).
Conclusion
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 SUHANI JITENDRA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-6278. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 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, Maria Veronica D. Ewald can be reached on 571-272-8519. 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.
/SUHANI JITENDRA PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 1783
/MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783