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 February 20, 2026 was submitted on May 19, 2026. Claim 1 was amended. Claim 13 was added. Claims 1-13 are currently pending.
The amendments to claim 1 have overcome the prior art rejections of claims 1-12 (¶¶ 4-12 and 16-23 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 These rejections have therefore been withdrawn.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. New claim 13 has also been addressed 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.
Claims 1-7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min et al. (Korean Patent Publication No. KR 10-2134587 B1, cited in IDS submitted September 6, 2023, machine language translation provided and cited below) in view of Kimura et al. (International Patent Publication No. WO 2013/137385 A1, machine language translation provided and cited below).
Regarding claim 1, Min discloses a slot die coater for discharging and applying an electrode active material slurry to a current collector through a discharge port (Abstract, FIG. 3 of Min, apparatus for coating electrode components; FIG. 1, [0008] of Min, apparatus #10 is composed of a slot die #20), the slot die coater comprising: a lower die block comprising a first manifold in which the electrode active material slurry is accommodated (FIG. 3 of Min, lower die #110); an upper die block comprising a second manifold in which an coating solution is accommodated (FIG. 3 of Min, upper die #130); and a shim plate located between the lower die block and the upper die block to form at least one slot communicating with the discharge port (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, shim member #430 which includes first shim #431 and second shim #432), wherein the shim plate comprises: a first concave portion disposed in a first surface of the shim plate, the first concave portion located to cover the first manifold of the lower die block (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, first hollow portions #431a in first shim plate #431); and a second concave portion disposed in a second surface of the shim plate, the second concave portion located to cover the second manifold of the upper die block (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, second hollow portions #432b in second shim plate #432), wherein the second concave portion is located adjacent to the first concave portion in a width direction of the shim plate (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, first hollow portions #431a adjacent to second hollow portions #432b).
Min does not disclose that the shim plate is integrally formed. Moreover, Min discloses a two-piece stacked shim plate (FIG. 3 of Min). Kimura, however, discloses a shim plate for a slot die coater which is a two-piece stacked structure wherein each layer has cut-outs that, when stacked form concave areas in the stacked structure (FIGS. 2-3 of Kimura). According to Kimura, the shim plate can also be made as a one-piece integrated structure (FIG. 7, [0024] of Kimura). 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 make the stacked shim plate structure of Min as a one-piece integrally formed structure since Kimura establishes that it was known to form such shim plates. Moreover, as set forth in the MPEP, the rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP § 2143 I A). The prior art included each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. In addition, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. One of ordinary skill in the art also would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 2, Min discloses that the first concave portion extends from an end of the shim plate facing the discharge port in a direction away from the discharge port by a length sufficient to communicate with the first manifold (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, first hollow portions #431a in first shim plate #431 communicate with first storage unit #412), and the second concave portion extends from the end of the shim plate in a direction away from the discharge port by a length sufficient to communicate with the second manifold (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, second hollow portions #432b in second shim plate #432 communicate with second storage unit #422).
Regarding claim 3, Min discloses that the first concave portion is recessed by a certain thickness compared to other portions of the first surface, and the second concave portion is recessed by a certain thickness compared to other portions of the second surface (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, first hollow portions #431a and second hollow portions #432b have a thickness defined by the thickness of the shim plates).
Regarding claim 4, Min discloses that the at least one slot comprises: a slurry slot disposed between the lower die block and the first concave portion of the first surface, and a coating solution slot disposed between the upper die block and the second concave portion of the second surface ([0066] of Min, electrode slurry and insulating material discharged from slot die).
Regarding claim 5, Min discloses that the first concave portion includes a plurality of first concave portions at spaced apart intervals along the width direction of the shim plate (FIGS. 12-13 of Min).
Regarding claim 6, Min discloses that the plurality of first concave portions communicate with the first manifold to form a plurality of slurry slots so that the electrode active material slurry moves along the plurality of slurry slots to be applied to the current collector through the discharge port (FIGS. 12-13 of Min).
Regarding claim 7, Min discloses that the second concave portion includes a plurality of second concave portions located on opposite sides of each of the plurality of first concave portions, wherein the plurality of second concave portions communicate with the second manifold to form a plurality of coating solution slots so that the coating solution moves along the plurality of coating solution slots to be applied to the current collector through the discharge port (FIGS. 12-13 of Min).
Regarding claim 12, Min discloses that the coating solution is an insulating coating solution ([0066] of Min, insulating material discharged from slot die).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min in view of Kimura as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Miyazawa et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2004-305955 A, machine language translation provided in previous Office Action and cited below).
Regarding claim 8, Min does not specifically disclose that at least one of edge portions of the first concave portion or the second concave portion is chamfered. Miyazawa, however, discloses a slot die coater comprising a shim having slots with tapered or chamfered sides (Abstract of Miyazawa). According to Miyazawa, the tapered sides of the slots prevent bulges from being formed at the edges of the coating film ([0004], [0008]-[0012] of Miyazawa). 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 use shims having hollow portions with tapered edges in the apparatus of Min. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to prevent bulges from being formed at the edges of the coating film as taught by Miyazawa ([0004], [0008]-[0012] of Miyazawa).
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min in view of Kimura as applied to claims 1 and 6 above above and further in view of Horinouchi et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0374971 A1, cited in IDS submitted September 6, 2023).
Regarding claim 9, Min does not specifically disclose that the lower die block comprises a first feed unit configured to form a first path for supplying the electrode active material slurry to the first manifold, and the upper die block comprises a second feed unit configured to form a second path for supplying the coating solution to the second manifold. Horinouchi, however, discloses a slot-die coater for coating two different layers simultaneously comprising pumps #7 #10 for pressure feeding two different coating liquids to the upper and lower dies (FIG. 1 of Horinouchi). 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 provide the apparatus of Min with pumps for the coating liquids. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to pressure feed the two different coating materials to the upper and lower dies as taught by Horinouchi (FIG. 1 of Horinouchi).
Regarding claim 10, Min discloses a multi-lane double coating device (Abstract, FIG. 1 of Min, apparatus for simultaneously coating components having different properties) comprising: the slot die coater according to claim 1 (see analysis of claim 1 above).
Min does not specifically disclose an electrode slurry storage tank in which the electrode active material slurry is stored; one slurry supply pipe connected to the lower die block of the slot die coater from the electrode slurry storage tank; a coating solution storage tank in which the coating solution is stored; and one coating solution supply pipe connected to the upper die block of the slot die coater from the coating solution storage tank. Horinouchi, however, discloses a slot-die coater for coating two different layers simultaneously comprising pumps #7 #10 for pressure feeding two different coating liquids to the upper and lower dies via feeding tubes #8 #11 (FIG. 1 of Horinouchi). 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 provide the apparatus of Min with pumps feeding tubes for the coating liquids. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to pressure feed the two different coating materials to the upper and lower dies as taught by Horinouchi (FIG. 1 of Horinouchi).
Regarding claim 11, Min discloses a multi-lane double coating device (Abstract, FIG. 1 of Min, apparatus for simultaneously coating components having different properties) comprising: the slot die coater according to claim 6 (see analysis of claim 6 above).
Min does not specifically disclose an electrode slurry storage tank in which the electrode active material slurry is stored; one slurry supply pipe connected to the lower die block of the slot die coater from the electrode slurry storage tank; a coating solution storage tank in which the coating solution is stored; and one coating solution supply pipe connected to the upper die block of the slot die coater from the coating solution storage tank. Horinouchi, however, discloses a slot-die coater for coating two different layers simultaneously comprising pumps #7 #10 for pressure feeding two different coating liquids to the upper and lower dies via feeding tubes #8 #11 (FIG. 1 of Horinouchi). 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 provide the apparatus of Min with pumps feeding tubes for the coating liquids. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to pressure feed the two different coating materials to the upper and lower dies as taught by Horinouchi (FIG. 1 of Horinouchi).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is allowed.
Regarding claim 13, the closest prior art is to Min. Min discloses a slot die coater for discharging and applying an electrode active material slurry to a current collector through a discharge port (Abstract, FIG. 3 of Min, apparatus for coating electrode components; FIG. 1, [0008] of Min, apparatus #10 is composed of a slot die #20), the slot die coater comprising: a lower die block comprising a first manifold in which the electrode active material slurry is accommodated (FIG. 3 of Min, lower die #110); an upper die block comprising a second manifold in which an coating solution is accommodated (FIG. 3 of Min, upper die #130); and a shim plate located between the lower die block and the upper die block to form at least one slot communicating with the discharge port (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, shim member #430 which includes first shim #431 and second shim #432), wherein the shim plate comprises: a first concave portion disposed in a first surface of the shim plate, the first concave portion located to cover the first manifold of the lower die block (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, first hollow portions #431a in first shim plate #431); and a second concave portion disposed in a second surface of the shim plate, the second concave portion located to cover the second manifold of the upper die block (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, second hollow portions #432b in second shim plate #432), wherein the second concave portion is located adjacent to the first concave portion in a width direction of the shim plate (FIGS. 12-13 of Min, first hollow portions #431a adjacent to second hollow portions #432b). Neither Min, however, nor any of the other prior art references of record teach or reasonably suggest a slot die coater as recited in claim 13 wherein the first concave portion and the second concave portion are not coplanar.
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 Min fails to disclose an integrally formed shim plate (pg. 7 of the amendment). The Office Action is relying upon the newly cited Kimura 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