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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/28/23, 6/26/24, and 7/26/24 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 6/28/23. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 5392332 B2 (hereinafter “JP’332”) in view of KR 2021-0050721 A (hereinafter “KR’721”) and CN 212856488 U (hereinafter “CN’488”).
As to Claim 1:
JP’332 discloses:
an electrode manufacturing apparatus including a supply part configured to supply an electrode precursor, wherein an electrode slurry is disposed on a substrate, as JP’332 teaches applying an active material solution to a current collector which is then supplied into a drying apparatus (p. 5, lines 12–22; p. 6, lines 1–10);
a drying part configured to dry the electrode slurry so as to manufacture an electrode, wherein the drying part is a drying chamber that dries the slurry-coated current collector (p. 6, lines 11–25);
an air supply part configured to supply a high-temperature vapor to the electrode precursor, wherein the high-temperature vapor is atmospheric superheated steam supplied from a steam generation unit (p. 7, lines 3–14);
an air introducing part configured to introduce the high-temperature vapor to a flow path, and that the flow path communicates the air introducing part with the air supply part, as shown by steam supply piping extending from the superheated steam generator to the drying chamber (p. 7, lines 15–28; p. 8, lines 1–8);
a sensor configured to measure humidity in the drying system, and a controller configured to receive humidity information for controlling the drying conditions (p. 8, lines 9–22);
an air discharge part configured to be opened or closed to discharge a portion of the vapor, as JP’332 teaches an exhaust path including a damper/valve for discharging steam from the drying chamber (p. 9, lines 1–15);
a discharge part configured to discharge the electrode, wherein the dried electrode exits the drying chamber and is transported downstream, such as by winding or conveying (p. 9, lines 16–28); and
a control part configured to collect humidity information and to control opening or closing of the air discharge part to regulate humidity in the drying apparatus (p. 10, lines 1–18).
However, JP’332 does not disclose (i) a monitoring part configured to monitor the electrode discharged by the discharge part, (ii) a humidifying part configured to humidify the high-temperature vapor circulating along the flow path, or (iii) a control part configured to control a degree of humidification by such a humidifying part.
KR’721 discloses a monitoring part configured to monitor an electrode discharged from a drying chamber, wherein a monitoring sensor detects the dry state or surface condition of the electrode after drying (p. 6, lines 5–18).
KR’721 further discloses a control part configured to collect monitoring information obtained by the monitoring part together with temperature and humidity information, and to control drying conditions based on such information (p. 7, lines 1–14).
KR’721 also discloses that the controller controls airflow and exhaust components, such as dampers and fans, in response to the monitoring information and humidity information (p. 7, lines 15–28).
CN’488 discloses a humidifying part configured to humidify air in a flow path, wherein a humidifier is disposed in an air pipeline supplying air to a battery electrode drying oven (p. 3, lines 1–12).
CN’488 further discloses a sensor configured to measure humidity in the pipeline, and a controller configured to control a degree of humidification by controlling the operation of the humidifier based on the humidity sensor output (p. 3, lines 13–25; p. 4, lines 1–10).
JP’332, KR’721, and CN’488 are analogous arts because each reference is directed to electrode drying systems for lithium-ion battery manufacturing and addresses controlling drying conditions (humidity, airflow, and drying state) to improve electrode quality, such that a person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably look to these references in combination.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrode manufacturing apparatus of JP’332 to include the monitoring part and feedback control taught by KR’721 and the humidifying part and degree-of-humidification control taught by CN’488, because KR’721 teaches that monitoring the dried electrode and using monitoring information together with humidity information improves drying stability, and CN’488 teaches that actively humidifying process air in a pipeline using a humidifier and humidity sensor allows precise control of drying conditions.
As to Claim 2:
JP’332 discloses an electrode manufacturing apparatus including a drying part, a high-temperature vapor supply, humidity sensing, exhaust control, and a controller for controlling drying conditions of a slurry-coated electrode (p. 5, lines 12–22; p. 6, lines 11–25; p. 7, lines 3–14; p. 8, lines 9–22).
However, JP’332 does not disclose a monitoring part comprising a vision sensing part configured to detect a crack in the electrode, as JP’332 controls drying conditions based on process parameters and does not describe optical inspection or surface-condition monitoring of the dried electrode.
KR’721 discloses a monitoring sensor configured to monitor the surface condition of an electrode after it is discharged from a drying chamber, wherein the monitoring sensor detects abnormal surface states of the electrode (p. 6, lines 5–18). KR’721 further discloses that the monitoring sensor may be a photo sensor that detects surface conditions based on light reflectance or a black-and-white degree of the electrode surface (p. 6, lines 13–18).
A photo sensor that optically inspects the electrode surface to detect abnormal surface conditions constitutes a vision sensing part, and cracks are a type of abnormal surface condition detectable by optical inspection.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrode manufacturing apparatus of JP’332 to include the vision-based monitoring part taught by KR’721, because KR’721 teaches that optical surface inspection of a dried electrode is effective for detecting abnormal surface conditions, including cracks, thereby improving drying quality.
As to Claim 3:
JP’332 discloses a control part configured to control humidity of a high-temperature vapor in a drying chamber based on humidity sensor information, including controlling exhaust flow to regulate humidity during electrode drying (p. 8, lines 9–22; p. 9, lines 1–15; p. 10, lines 1–18).
However, JP’332 does not disclose controlling humidity in response to detection of a crack in the electrode, nor increasing humidity when a crack is detected until no crack is detected, nor maintaining a determined humidity once the crack is no longer detected.
KR’721 discloses that cracks and other surface defects occur due to overdrying or inappropriate drying conditions, including humidity imbalance, and that a controller adjusts drying conditions when an abnormal surface condition is detected (p. 6, lines 13–18; p. 7, lines 1–18). KR’721 further teaches feedback control that continues until the abnormal surface condition is resolved (p. 7, lines 11–18).
CN’488 discloses a humidifying part disposed in a flow path, a humidity sensor, and a controller configured to increase humidity by increasing humidifier output, to determine a target humidity, and to maintain the determined humidity once a stable condition is achieved (p. 3, lines 13–25; p. 4, lines 1–10).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the humidity control of JP’332 to increase humidity when a crack or abnormal surface condition is detected, as taught by KR’721, and to implement such humidity adjustment using the humidifying hardware and control method taught by CN’488, because using a humidifier to correct humidity-related defects identified by optical monitoring represents a predictable use of prior-art elements to stabilize electrode drying.
As to Claim 4:
JP’332 discloses an electrode manufacturing method including supplying an electrode precursor made by applying an electrode slurry onto a substrate into a drying part (p. 5, lines 12–22; p. 6, lines 1–10), drying the electrode slurry while supplying a high-temperature vapor (p. 6, lines 11–25; p. 7, lines 3–14), adjusting humidity in the drying part (p. 8, lines 9–22), and discharging the electrode from the drying part (p. 9, lines 16–28).
However, JP’332 does not disclose monitoring the discharged electrode or collecting monitoring information together with humidity information to control humidity.
KR’721 discloses monitoring the electrode after discharge and collecting monitoring information indicative of surface condition (p. 6, lines 5–18), and using such monitoring information together with humidity-related information to control drying conditions (p. 7, lines 1–18).
CN’488 discloses controlling humidity in a drying system using a humidifier and humidity sensor (p. 3, lines 13–25; p. 4, lines 1–10).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrode manufacturing method of JP’332 to include monitoring the discharged electrode and collecting monitoring information as taught by KR’721, and to control humidity using the techniques taught by CN’488, because the references collectively teach that feedback from electrode condition monitoring and active humidity control are effective and predictable techniques for stabilizing electrode drying processes.
As to Claim 5:
JP’332 discloses the electrode manufacturing method of Claim 4, including drying a slurry-coated electrode using high-temperature vapor and controlling humidity in a drying chamber (p. 5, lines 12–22; p. 6, lines 11–25; p. 7, lines 3–14; p. 8, lines 9–22).
However, JP’332 does not disclose detecting a crack in the electrode by using a camera configured to capture an image of a surface of the electrode after the electrode is discharged from the drying part.
KR’721 discloses detecting abnormal surface conditions of a discharged electrode using a photo sensor that optically inspects the electrode surface based on reflectance or black-and-white degree (p. 6, lines 13–18). Such optical inspection inherently detects surface defects, including cracks.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the method of JP’332 to detect cracks in the electrode by using a camera as taught by KR’721, because visual inspection using a camera is a known and predictable technique for detecting surface defects in battery electrodes after drying.
As to Claim 6:
JP’332 further discloses controlling humidity in the drying part, including collecting humidity information using a humidity sensor and controlling exhaust flow via a damper or valve to regulate humidity within the drying chamber (p. 8, lines 9–22; p. 9, lines 1–15; p. 10, lines 1–18).
JP’332 therefore teaches controlling the humidity in the drying part during electrode drying and maintaining a target humidity level through feedback control based on humidity sensor information (p. 8, lines 9–22).
However, JP’332 does not disclose controlling humidity based on whether a crack is formed in the electrode, nor increasing humidity when a crack is detected until no crack is detected, nor determining a humidity at which no crack is detected and maintaining that humidity based on monitoring of the electrode.
KR’721 discloses monitoring the electrode after it is discharged from the drying part, wherein a monitoring sensor detects an abnormal surface condition or defect of the electrode (p. 6, lines 5–18). KR’721 further discloses collecting monitoring information and performing feedback control of drying conditions based on whether an abnormal condition is detected, such that control continues until the abnormal condition is resolved (p. 7, lines 1–18).
CN’488 teaches increasing humidity using a humidifier, determining a target humidity, and maintaining that humidity once stable conditions are achieved (p. 3, lines 13–25; p. 4, lines 1–10).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the humidity control method of JP’332 to increase the humidity in the drying part when a crack or abnormal condition is detected in the electrode, as taught by KR’721, and to determine and maintain a humidity at which no crack is detected using the humidifying control taught by CN’488, because the references collectively teach that defect-based feedback control and active humidification are predictable and effective techniques for stabilizing electrode drying and preventing cracking.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY K VO whose telephone number is (571)272-3242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/JIMMY VO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/JIMMY VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723