Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/172,292

MANUFACTURING METHOD AND MANUFACTURING APPARATUS OF ELECTRODE STRUCTURE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 21, 2023
Examiner
SONG, KEVIN
Art Unit
1728
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
16 granted / 23 resolved
+4.6% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
79
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
70.5%
+30.5% vs TC avg
§102
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
§112
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 23 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 11/24/2025 is acknowledged. 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. Claim(s) 1, 4, and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (US-20220140308-A1). Regarding claim 1, Nishida discloses a manufacturing method of an electrode structure comprising: conveying a belt-like member (“belt-like” is interpreted as a part that is belt-shaped which is long, flat, and rectangular, and may be a continuous band of material) in which a surface of a current collector is coated with an active material-containing layer (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 1A, [0012], [0025] regarding a positive electrode plate 1 which has active material coated along a longitudinal direction, that is then conveyed as a belt-like member through a compression device 10 as described in [0036], fig. 5), and an uncoated region not coated with the active material-containing layer is formed in one of a pair of long edges along a longitudinal direction and a vicinity thereof in the current collector (see e.g., Nishida; [0012], fig. 1A, [0025], regarding non-coated regions R2); rolling the active material-containing layer in the conveyed belt-like member (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5, [0036], wherein the active material layer included in the positive electrode plate 1 as the belt-like member is rolled through compression device 10); pulling the belt-like member toward a downstream side (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5, [0036], [0043], [0045], showing the member pulled to the downstream side), on the downstream side of a rolling unit, such as pass roll 13, configured to roll the active material-containing layer (“downstream side” is broadly interpreted as a relative term, wherein any portion that the material being rolled proceeds towards and having a previous section that the material is moving away from is downstream; in the case of Nishida, downstream side may be any area downstream of pass roll 13 corresponding to a rolling unit as relatively claimed; while Nishida defines different sections as upstream and downstream sides, the term as claimed is interpreted according to the broadest reasonable interpretation) (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5), thereby applying a tension in the longitudinal direction to the belt-like member between a pulling unit configured to pull the belt-like member and the rolling unit (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5, [0045], regarding downstream side tension sensor roll 36, which applies tension to the member between the previous rollers including pass roll 13 and the tension roll 36); and bringing, between the rolling unit and the pulling unit, holding members into contact with the uncoated region of the current to which the tension is applied, thereby holding the uncoated region with holding members (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5, [0054], regarding at least one of rolls 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, or 40 may be a straightening roll 50 as shown in fig. 6a-b, which only contact the uncoated portions R2 with diameter portions 52; [0013], [0061] regarding preventing wrinkles using this method; for the case wherein the rolling unit is roll 13 and the pulling unit is roll 36, any of rolls 30, 32, 34 may be a straightening roll 50 which corresponds with the claimed holding members). Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein the holding members are a pair of holding members which contact from opposite sides in a thickness direction of the belt-like member to thereby hold the uncoated region between the pair of holding members. However, Nishida does disclose press rolls 16a and 16b (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5), which are a pair of rollers holding the belt-like member from opposite sides in a thickness direction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the straightening rolls of rolls 30, 32, or 34 to have a duplicate roller on the opposite side of the belt-like member in the thickness direction to thereby hold contact the uncoated region of the current collector from both sides. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because similar to how the press rolls 16a and 16b compresses the material passing through the rollers (see e.g., Nishida; [0044]), duplicating the straightening roll 50 to hold the current collector from opposite sides would also compress the material and reduce the problem of wrinkles developing in the non-coated current collector region (see e.g., Nishida; [0008]-[0010]). Regarding claim 4, Nishida teaches the method according to claim 1. Modified Nishida above regarding claim 1 teaches wherein the holding member may be a pair of holding members comprising of straightening rolls 50. Nishida further discloses holding members comes in contact with the uncoated region over an entire width between the one of the pair of long edges and a coating end of the active material-containing layer, in a widthwise direction of the belt-like member (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 6a-b, annotated fig. 6a below, wherein the roller portion 52 contacts all of the uncoated portion R2; modified Nishida which provides a holding member on the opposite side would cover the entire uncoated region over the entire width on the other side of the current collector). PNG media_image1.png 407 953 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 6, Nishida teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the pulling unit pulls the belt-like member to the downstream side in a state in which the belt-like member is sandwiched between a pair of pulling rollers (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5, regarding rollers 22, 24, or 42, 44 which may correspond to the pulling rollers pulling the belt-like member downstream), and a friction coefficient of the holding members is smaller than that of the pulling rollers (see e.g., Nishida; [0039], [0050], regarding how the pulling rollers 22, 24, 42, 44 may be metallic, and [0056] regarding the straightening rolls 50 corresponding to the holding members may include nylon or polytetrafluoroethylene, which both have a friction coefficient smaller than the metallic material of the pulling rollers). Regarding claim 7, Nishida teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising pushing the uncoated region of the current collector against the belt-like member to which the tension is applied, by using a projection projecting toward an outer peripheral side in a roller between the rolling unit and the pair of holding members, thereby enlarging the uncoated region in the longitudinal direction (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 6a-b, regarding projections 52, [0057], regarding elongating the uncoated regions). Nishida discloses that at least one roll, meaning any number of rolls, may be a straightening roll 50 as shown in fig. 6 (see e.g., Nishida; [0054]). In the modification above regarding claim 1, roller 34 may be a straightening roll 50, and may be duplicated to be a pair of holding members. One of the rolls situated between the rolling unit 13 and roller 34, such as rolls 30 or 32 may then be another straightening roller 50, which has the projection as claimed that projects toward an outer peripheral side and elongates the uncoated region. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made roll 30 or 32 into another straightening roll as disclosed by Nishida (see e.g., Nishida; [0054]) which has the projection as claimed to thereby further reduce wrinkling (see e.g., Nishida; [0010]). Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (US-20220140308-A1), and in further view of Uematsu (US-20130074711-A1). Regarding claim 2, Nishida teaches the method according to claim 1. Nishida shows that the width of the uncoated region is small relative to the coated region (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 1, fig. 6). Nishida does not explicitly disclose the contact range of the holding members with the uncoated regions in the longitudinal direction of the belt-like member, so Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein in a case where a contact range within which the pair of holding members come in contact with the uncoated region of the current collector is defined, a dimension of the contact range in the longitudinal direction of the belt-like member is not less than twice a width of the uncoated region. However, Uematsu discloses a guide roller 36 which similarly contacts an uncoated region of the electrode layer being rolled and similarly functions to stretch the layer thereby apply tension and reduce wrinkling (see e.g., Uematsu; fig. 2, [0011], [0016], [0023]). Uematsu discloses that the electrode sheet is wound around the guide roller at preferably 60° or more (see e.g., Uematsu; [0025], fig. 4), which corresponds with the contact range in the longitudinal direction of the belt-like member. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have had the belt-like member of Nishida wrap around the holding member rollers at 60° or more such that a dimension of the contact range in the longitudinal direction of the belt-like member is not less than twice a width of the uncoated region in order to reduce cracking or fracture of the uncoated portion (see e.g., Uematsu; [0042]). Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (US-20220140308-A1), and in further view of Tomioka (JP-2014013689-A) (see translation). Regarding claim 3, Nishida teaches the method according to claim 1. Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein each of the pair of holding members comes in contact with the uncoated region of the current collector in a nonrotatable state. However, Tomioka discloses a press part 40, 50 which contact uncoated regions 12b of the current collector in a nonrotatable state (see e.g., Tomioka; fig. 4, 5, [0028]). Tomioka similarly discloses the manufacturing method comprising of rollers which move the electrode as a belt-like member (see e.g., Tomioka; fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the manufacturing method of Nishida by using non-rotating holding members as disclosed by Tomioka in order to suppress distortion between the coating and uncoated portions and produce efficiently (see e.g., Tomioka; [0016]). Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (US-20220140308-A1), and in further view of APT "APT, Electric Battery Electrode Sheets Calendering Machine Lab Roller Press, Accessed Via Wayback Machine dated 07/04/2022" (see attached NPL). Regarding claim 5, Nishida discloses the method according to claim 1. Nishida discloses press rolls 16a and 16b which may correspond with the rolling unit as claimed below. In this case, regarding claim 1, the downstream side may be the region downstream of the press rolls 16a and 16b (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5). The pulling unit may correspond with rollers 42 and 44 (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5). Nishida discloses that 36, 38, and 40 may also be straightening rolls 50 (see e.g., Nishida; [0054]), and when duplicated in the same manner as claim 1 above, the rolls may correspond with the claimed pair of holding members. Therefore, when Nishida is evaluated with press rolls 16a and 16b corresponding to the claimed rolling unit, Nishida still teaches instant claim 1. Nishida discloses wherein the rolling unit, 16a and 16b, pushes the active material-containing layer from both sides in the thickness direction of the belt-like member by sandwiching the active material-containing layer between a pair of press rollers (see e.g., Nishida; fig. 5, [0044]). Nishida discloses that the material of the straightening rollers corresponding to the claimed holding members may not particularly limited, but a metal material such as a stainless steel, and a resin material such as a monomer cast nylon, and a polytetrafluoroethylene (see e.g., Nishida; [0056]). Nishida does not explicitly disclose the material of the press rollers, so Nishida does not explicitly disclose a material forming the holding members is softer than a material forming the press rollers. However, APT discloses a roller press machine wherein the roller material is HRC62 (see e.g., APT; page 5), which refers to the Rockwell C scale indicating extremely hard materials. Materials such as tungsten carbide or high-carbon steel are known to be at this toughness level. The press roller disclosed by APT is further analogous art because it is designed for processing electrode sheets. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the press rollers 16a and 16b disclosed by Nishida such that the materials are of HRC62 hardness as disclosed by APT. Then, the material forming the holding members, which may be a material such as polytetrafluoroethylene (see e.g., Nishida; [0056]), is much softer than the material forming the press rollers. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make use this hard material as the press roller material in order to obtain a positive electrode plate and a negative electrode plate that are highly packed (see e.g., Nishida; [0003]). Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (US-20220140308-A1), and in further view of Matsuya (US-20210210764-A1). Regarding claim 8, Nishida teaches the method according to claim 1. Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein in the coating the surface of the current collector with the active material-containing layer, the current collector is coated with the active material-containing layer such that a width of the uncoated region in a widthwise direction of the belt-like member is larger than 25 mm. However, Matsuya discloses a positive electrode with an uncoated portion wherein the uncoated portion in the widthwise direction is 30 mm (see e.g., Matsuya; figs. 3-4, table 1, [0047], regarding uncoated portion Lu of 30 mm), which overlaps with the claimed range of larger than 25 mm. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the uncoated region disclosed by Nishida by providing a width of 30 mm disclosed by Matsuya. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to have a current collector suitable for connecting with other terminals by welding or the like (see e.g., Matsuya; [0032]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN SONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7337. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST. 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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. /KEVIN SONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1728 /MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 06, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 06, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603328
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603352
Battery Pack Having Refrigerant Circulation Channel Provided in Pack Case
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12580195
LITHIUM-ION SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573633
Binder for Anode of Secondary Battery, Anode of Secondary Battery and Secondary Battery
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562364
Electrode Slurry Coating System Capable of Controlling the Flow Rate of Electrode Slurry and Electrode Slurry Coating Method Using the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+27.5%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 23 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month