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 .
Response to Amendment
An amendment responsive to the non-final Office Action dated November 7, 2025 was submitted on February 9, 2026. Claims 1 and 8 were amended. Claims 3, 4, 9, 13 and 14 were canceled. Claims 1, 2, 5-8 and 10-12 are currently pending.
The amendment to claim 8 has overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) of claims 8 and 10-12 (¶¶ 3-5 of the Office Action). These rejections have therefore been withdrawn.
The amendment to claim 1 has overcome the prior art rejections of claims 1, 2, 5-8 and 10-12 (¶¶ 8-9 and 14-43 of the Office Action). These rejections have therefore been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection of these claims have been made as detailed below.
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, 2, 5-8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Umehara (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0136133 A1, cited in IDS submitted July 8, 2024) and Kimura et al. (International Patent Publication No. WO 2013/137385 A1, machine language translation provided and cited below).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a die coater shim for simultaneously applying an electrode slurry and an insulating coating liquid on a current collector (FIGS. 3 and 5, Abstract of Kim, simultaneous coating slot die including shim plate #50), the die coater shim comprising: a base configured to extend in a width direction (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, rear section of shim #50 extending in the width direction); first and second guides disposed on each end of the base in the width direction, wherein the first and second guides configured to protrude and extend from the base in a direction orthogonal to the width direction and terminate at a respective protruding edge (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, forward sections of shim #50 projecting orthogonally from base portion and forming discharge flow paths #51 therebetween); a first electrode slurry slit extending between an inner corner of the protruding edge of the first guide and an inner corner of the protruding edge of the second guide in the width direction, the first electrode slurry slit disposed between the first and second guides in the width direction (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, discharge flow path #51 disposed between inside corners of forward sections of shim #50 projecting orthogonally from base portion); and first and second insulating coating liquid slits including a groove formed on a surface of each of the first and second guides disposed on a second surface of the base, wherein one end of each of the grooves forms an insulating coating liquid discharge path, the insulating coating liquid discharge paths terminating at a respective outlet configured to discharge the insulating liquid therefrom (FIGS. 3 and 5 of Kim, discharge passages #53b which terminate at an outlet).
Kim does not specifically disclose each of the outlets being positioned along the protruding edge of the respective first and second guides and spaced apart in the width direction from the inner corner of the respective first and second guides. Moreover, in Kim the outlets are positioned adjacent the inside corners of the shim (FIG. 5 of Kim). Umehara, however, discloses a shim for a die coater for simultaneously depositing and electrode material and an insulating material (FIG. 11 of Umehara, shim #83I) comprising insulating material discharge passages (FIG. 11, insulator paste discharge slots #83S2) having outlets spaced from the inside corners of the outer guides forming the discharge slot #83S1 for the electrode material (FIG. 11 of Umehara, spacing #DD). According to Umehara, if the spacing is too small, the insulator material may override the electrode material layer ([0185] of Umehara). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to space the outlets from the inner corner of the respective first and second guides in the die coater shim of Kim. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to prevent the discharged insulator material from overriding the electrode material layer as taught by Umehara ([0185] of Umehara).
Kim also does not specifically disclose that the first electrode slurry slit including a first step portion, wherein a thickness of the first step portion is smaller than a thickness of the base, wherein the thickness of the first step portion forms a first stepped space relative to a first surface of the base, wherein the first stepped space forms an electrode slurry discharge path. Kimura, however, discloses a spacer or shim for depositing an electrode slurry having stepped regions adjacent the edges of the discharge paths (FIG. 7 of Kimura). According to Kimura, the stepped regions result in thinner regions along the edges of the deposited electrode thereby allowing the edges of the electrode to be covered with protective tape #13 without resulting in localized thickening ([0006] of Kim). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form stepped regions at the edges of the discharge paths #51 of the shim plate of Kim. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to form thinner regions along the edges of the deposited electrode material thereby allowing the edges of the electrode to be covered with protective tape #13 without resulting in localized thickening as taught by Kim ([0006] of Kim).
Regarding claim 2, Kimura discloses that the step portion extends to a partial area in the width direction between the first and second guides, wherein the first and second guides protrude and extend from the partial area in the direction orthogonal to the width direction (FIG. 7 of Kimura, thick portion of shim #27A protruding from base form guides and thin portion of shim #27B forms step portion extending partially between guides).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses the die coater shim further comprising: a third guide positioned between the first and second guides, wherein the third guide protrudes and extends from the base in the direction orthogonal to the width direction (FIG. 3 of Kim, central projection of shim plate #50); and third and fourth insulating coating liquid slits including a pair of grooves formed on a surface of the third guide, wherein one end of each of the pair of grooves forms an insulating coating liquid discharge path (FIG. 3 of Kim, double passage portion #55), and Kimura suggests that the step portion includes a first step portion and a second step portion, wherein the first step portion is disposed between the first and third guides and the second step portion is disposed between the third and second guides, wherein the electrode slurry slit includes the first electrode slurry slit and a second electrode slurry slit, wherein the second electrode slurry slit includes a second step portion, wherein a second thickness of the second step portion is smaller than the thickness of the base, wherein the thickness the second step portion forms a second stepped space relative to the first surface of the base, wherein the second stepped space forms a second electrode slurry discharge path. Moreover, as set forth above, Kimura provides motivation to form stepped regions at the edges of the discharge paths #51 of the shim plate of Kim (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses that an outlet of the third insulating coating liquid slit faces the first guide and an outlet of the fourth insulating coating liquid faces the second guide (FIGS. 3 and 5 of Kim, discharge passages #55).
Regarding claim 7, Kimura suggests that a width of each of the first and second step portions are equal (FIG. 7 of Kimura).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses a die coater (FIG. 3 of Kim, coating slot die) comprising: an upper block having an insulating coating liquid inlet (FIG. 3 of Kim, upper die #10 having insulating coating solution passages #11); a lower block coupled to the upper block (FIG. 3 of Kim, lower die #20; FIG. 2, [0039] of Kim, upper and lower dies #10 #20 coupled together via fastening means #70), wherein the lower block includes a manifold configured to accommodate an electrode slurry (FIG. 3 of Kim, dam part #21 of lower die #20); and a die coater shim interposed between the upper block and the lower block so as to form a slit (FIG. 3 of Kim, shim plate #50 having discharge passages #51 which form slits in the assembled die coater), wherein the die coater is configured to simultaneously discharge an insulating coating liquid and the electrode slurry through the slit (FIG. 3, [0028] of Kim, insulating coating solution discharged through flow passages #53 #55 in shim plate #50). As set forth above with respect to claim 1, Kim, Umehara and Kimura suggest a die coater shim according to claim 1 (see analysis of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses that the die coater shim includes: a base configured to extend in a width direction (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, rear section of shim #50 extending in the width direction); first and second guides disposed on each end of the base in the width direction, wherein the first and second guides protrude and extend from the base in a direction orthogonal to the width direction (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, forward sections of shim #50 projecting orthogonally from base portion and forming discharge flow paths #51 therebetween); an electrode slurry slit disposed between the first and second guides in the width direction (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, discharge flow path #51 disposed between forward sections of shim #50 projecting orthogonally from base portion); and first and second insulating coating liquid slits including a groove formed on a surface of each of the first and second guides disposed on a second surface of the base, wherein one end of each of the grooves forms the insulating coating liquid discharge path (FIGS. 3 and 5 of Kim, discharge passages #53).
Kim does not specifically disclose the electrode slurry slit including a step portion, wherein a thickness of the step portion is smaller than a thickness of the base, wherein the thickness of the step portion forms a stepped space relative to a first surface of the base, wherein the stepped space forms an electrode slurry discharge path. Kimura, however, discloses a spacer or shim for depositing an electrode slurry having stepped regions adjacent the edges of the discharge paths (FIG. 7 of Kimura). According to Kimura, the stepped regions result in thinner regions along the edges of the deposited electrode thereby allowing the edges of the electrode to be covered with protective tape #13 without resulting in localized thickening ([0006] of Kim). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form stepped regions at the edges of the discharge paths #51 of the shim plate of Kim. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to form thinner regions along the edges of the deposited electrode material thereby allowing the edges of the electrode to be covered with protective tape #13 without resulting in localized thickening as taught by Kim ([0006] of Kim).
Regarding claim 10, Kimura discloses that the step portion extends to a partial area in the width direction between the first and second guides, wherein the first and second guides protrude and extend from the partial area in the direction orthogonal to the width direction (FIG. 7 of Kimura, thick portion of shim #27A protruding from base form guides and thin portion of shim #27B forms step portion extending partially between guides).
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses that the one end of each of the grooves forms an outlet of the first and second insulating coating liquid slits, wherein the one end of each of the grooves extends to a protruding end portion of each of the first and second guides (FIGS. 3 and 5 of Kim, outlets of discharge passages #53).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses that the one end of each of the grooves is spaced further apart in the width direction from inner corners of the first and second guides (FIGS. 3 and 5 of Kim, end of discharge passages #53 spaced from inside corners of discharge flow paths #51).
Claims 1, 2, 5-8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Umehara and Fujiwara et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2010-51845 A, cited in IDS submitted June 9, 2023, machine language translation provided and cited below).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a die coater shim for simultaneously applying an electrode slurry and an insulating coating liquid on a current collector (FIGS. 3 and 5, Abstract of Kim, simultaneous coating slot die including shim plate #50), the die coater shim comprising: a base configured to extend in a width direction (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, rear section of shim #50 extending in the width direction); first and second guides disposed on each end of the base in the width direction, wherein the first and second guides configured to protrude and extend from the base in a direction orthogonal to the width direction and terminate at a respective protruding edge (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, forward sections of shim #50 projecting orthogonally from base portion and forming discharge flow paths #51 therebetween); a first electrode slurry slit extending between an inner corner of the protruding edge of the first guide and an inner corner of the protruding edge of the second guide in the width direction, the first electrode slurry slit disposed between the first and second guides in the width direction (FIGS. 3 or 5 of Kim, discharge flow path #51 disposed between inside corners of forward sections of shim #50 projecting orthogonally from base portion); and first and second insulating coating liquid slits including a groove formed on a surface of each of the first and second guides disposed on a second surface of the base, wherein one end of each of the grooves forms an insulating coating liquid discharge path, the insulating coating liquid discharge paths terminating at a respective outlet configured to discharge the insulating liquid therefrom (FIGS. 3 and 5 of Kim, discharge passages #53b which terminate at an outlet).
Kim does not specifically disclose each of the outlets being positioned along the protruding edge of the respective first and second guides and spaced apart in the width direction from the inner corner of the respective first and second guides. Moreover, in Kim the outlets are positioned adjacent the inside corners of the shim (FIG. 5 of Kim). Umehara, however, discloses a shim for a die coater for simultaneously depositing and electrode material and an insulating material (FIG. 11 of Umehara, shim #83I) comprising insulating material discharge passages (FIG. 11, insulator paste discharge slots #83S2) having outlets spaced from the inside corners of the outer guides forming the discharge slot #83S1 for the electrode material (FIG. 11 of Umehara, spacing #DD). According to Umehara, if the spacing is too small, the insulator material may override the electrode material layer ([0185] of Umehara). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to space the outlets from the inner corner of the respective first and second guides in the die coater shim of Kim. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to prevent the discharged insulator material from overriding the electrode material layer as taught by Umehara ([0185] of Umehara).
Kim also does not specifically disclose that the first electrode slurry slit including a first step portion, wherein a thickness of the first step portion is smaller than a thickness of the base, wherein the thickness of the first step portion forms a first stepped space relative to a first surface of the base, wherein the first stepped space forms an electrode slurry discharge path. Fujiwara, however, discloses a spacer or shim for depositing a liquid using a slot-die coating method wherein the shim has a stepped region forming a discharge path for the liquid (FIGS. 1-2 of Fujiwara). According to Fujiwara, the stepped region allows for control of the pressure in the manifold to control liquid leakage, to prevent air from remaining in the manifold and to prevent deformation of the coater ([0020] of Fujiwara). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form a stepped region in the shim plate of Kim. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to control of the pressure in the manifold to control liquid leakage, to prevent air from remaining in the manifold and to prevent deformation of the coater as taught by Fujiwara ([0020] of Fujiwara).
Regarding claim 2, Fujiwara discloses that the step portion extends to a partial area in the width direction between the first and second guides, wherein the first and second guides protrude and extend from the partial area in the direction orthogonal to the width direction (FIGS. 1-2 of Fujiwara, portion of shim 5 extends in a width direction between portion of shim 4 extending from base).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses the die coater shim further comprising: a third guide positioned between the first and second guides, wherein the third guide protrudes and extends from the base in the direction orthogonal to the width direction (FIG. 3 of Kim, central projection of shim plate #50); and third and fourth insulating coating liquid slits including a pair of grooves formed on a surface of the third guide, wherein one end of each of the pair of grooves forms an insulating coating liquid discharge path (FIG. 3 of Kim, double passage portion #55), and Fujiwara suggests that the step portion includes a first step portion and a second step portion, wherein the first step portion is disposed between the first and third guides and the second step portion is disposed between the third and second guides, wherein the electrode slurry slit includes the first electrode slurry slit and a second electrode slurry slit, wherein the second electrode slurry slit includes a second step portion, wherein a second thickness of the second step portion is smaller than the thickness of the base, wherein the thickness the second step portion forms a second stepped space relative to the first surface of the base, wherein the second stepped space forms a second electrode slurry discharge path. Moreover, as set forth above, Fujiwara provides motivation to form a stepped region in the shim plate of Kim (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses that an outlet of the third insulating coating liquid slit faces the first guide and an outlet of the fourth insulating coating liquid faces the second guide (FIGS. 3 and 5 of Kim, discharge passages #55).
Regarding claim 7, Kim and Fujiwara suggest that a width of each of the first and second step portions are equal (FIG. 3 and 5b of Kim, discharge flow paths #51 are of equal width; FIGS. 1-2 of Fujiwara, step extends across width of flow path).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses a die coater (FIG. 3 of Kim, coating slot die) comprising: an upper block having an insulating coating liquid inlet (FIG. 3 of Kim, upper die #10 having insulating coating solution passages #11); a lower block coupled to the upper block (FIG. 3 of Kim, lower die #20; FIG. 2, [0039] of Kim, upper and lower dies #10 #20 coupled together via fastening means #70), wherein the lower block includes a manifold configured to accommodate an electrode slurry (FIG. 3 of Kim, dam part #21 of lower die #20); and a die coater shim interposed between the upper block and the lower block so as to form a slit (FIG. 3 of Kim, shim plate #50 having discharge passages #51 which form slits in the assembled die coater), wherein the die coater is configured to simultaneously discharge an insulating coating liquid and the electrode slurry through the slit (FIG. 3, [0028] of Kim, insulating coating solution discharged through flow passages #53 #55 in shim plate #50). As set forth above with respect to claim 1, Kim, Umehara and Fujiwara suggest a die coater shim according to claim 1 (see analysis of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 10, Fujiwara discloses that the step portion extends to a partial area in the width direction between the first and second guides, wherein the first and second guides protrude and extend from the partial area in the direction orthogonal to the width direction (FIG. 1 of Fujiwara, step portion of shim #5 covers partial area in width direction between projections of shim #4).
Regarding claim 11, Fujiwara discloses that: a boundary between the base and the step portion coincides with a rear end of the manifold provided in the lower block, wherein the rear end of the manifold is disposed adjacent to the base of the die coater (Abstract, FIGS. 1-2 of Fujiwara, stacked shim formed by first and second shims #4 #5; FIG. 2a of Fujiwara, rear end of manifold #22 adjacent base or rear portion of shim #4); and an end portion of the step portion coincides with a front end of the manifold or protrudes from the front end of the manifold, wherein the front end of the manifold is disposed further away from the base of the die coater than the rear end of the manifold (FIG. 2a of Fujiwara, end portion of step formed by shim #5 protrudes from the front end of manifold).
Regarding claim 12, Fujiwara does not specifically disclose that the end portion of the step portion protrudes 10 mm or less from the front end of the manifold. Fujiwara, however, discloses that the distance that the end portion of the step extends from the front of the manifold (FIG. 1b, distance #L1) can be adjusted to prevent liquid leakage and to prevent air from remaining in the manifold ([0023] of Fujiwara). Fujiwara therefore establishes that the distance #L1 is a variable which achieves a recognized result (i.e., to prevent liquid leakage and to prevent air from remaining in the manifold) ([0023] of Fujiwara). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the distance #L1 in the modified method, including providing a distance L1 as recited in claim 12. Moreover, as set forth in the MPEP, once a parameter is recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977) (MPEP §2144.05 II B).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered to the extent that they apply to the new grounds of rejection but they are not persuasive.
The applicant asserts that none of the references relied upon in the previous Office Action teach or reasonably suggest that the outlets of the discharge paths are spaced apart in the width direction from the inner corner of the first and second guides as recited in claim 1 (pp. 5-6 of the amendment). The Office Action, however, is relying upon the Umehara reference to address this limitation.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHRISTOPHER W. RAIMUND whose telephone number is (571) 270-7560. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00-4:30.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
CHRISTOPHER W. RAIMUND
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1746
/CHRISTOPHER W RAIMUND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights