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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A (claims 6, 8, 14, and 16) in the reply filed on 05/13/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the subject matter of the claims are related and that it would not be burdensome.
This is not found persuasive because regardless of search method, inventions of different limitations will require different search strategies, and times to consider the relevancy of collective references would increase proportionally as well. In this case, the materials and processes needed to form an anode would not necessarily be the same materials and processes needed to form a cathode, therefore, each species would need its own distinct and unique search.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 7, 9, 15, and 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 05/13/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
128
150
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because
In Fig. 4B, “110” is the reference numeral pointing to the current collector, however, it is believed this should be reference numeral “134” such as shown in Fig 4A and described in Applicant’s specification at P40.
In Figs. 5A-5B, “144” is the reference numeral pointing to the current collector, however, it is believed this should be reference numeral “148” such as described in Applicant’s specification at P41. Reference numeral “144” is drawn to heaters not a wire mesh current collector (see Applicant’s Specification at P34, 36).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
P41 notes Figs. 5A and 5B refers to wire mesh current collector 148 after coating an annealing. However, the paragraph goes onto refer to the wire mesh current collector as “wire mesh current collector 134” not “wire mesh current collector 148”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mao discloses a method for manufacturing a current collector for an electrode of a battery cell, comprising: providing a wire mesh current collector including a plurality of first wires and a plurality of second wires that overlap to form a plurality of mesh joints (first mesh sheet 25 and second mesh sheet 26 of current collector 24 in Figs. 2A-2B; the mesh sheets include a plurality of metal strands 37 that overlap to form mesh joints in Fig. 2A-2B; see entire disclosure and especially P47),
wherein a diameter of the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires is in a range from 4 µm to 100 µm (the diameter of the metal strands 27 ranges between 10 micron and 500 micron, which overlap the claimed range of 4 micron to 100 micron, and in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05)).
Mao discloses the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires can be from stainless steel, copper, or a copper alloy (see entire disclosure and especially P48). Mao discloses the wire mesh current collector (first and second mesh sheets 25, 26) can have a coating applied thereon (see entire disclosure and especially P51). Mao discloses the coating can include tin, nickel, or alloys thereof (see entire disclosure and especially P51).
Mao teaches the coating can be formed by a coating process utilizing a bath in which the wire mesh current collector is immersed in tin, nickel, or alloys thereof (see entire disclosure and especially P58). Mao teaches electro-deposition can be used (see entire disclosure and especially P58).
However, Mao does not disclose coating the wire mesh current collector with a metal coating by immersing the wire mesh current collector in a bath including a metal salt.
In a similar field of endeavor, Dai teaches a bimetallic current collector includes depositing an electrically conductive material (e.g. metal) on a electrically conductive surface to form a continuous and thin coating of the electrically conductive material (metal) (P74). Dai teaches the process includes electrolytic deposition of a metal to electroplate a layer of metal onto a surface to be coated (P80). Dai teaches a method includes contacting a surface of a metal structure with a liquid medium comprising another metal compound (P80). Dai teaches the liquid medium can be provided as a bath in which the surface to be coated is immersed (P80).
Dai teaches an example in which copper or nickel is deposited onto a surface comprising aluminum. Dai teaches the process includes disposing or contacting the surface comprising aluminum with a copper-containing compound, such as a complexed copper salt solution, or a nickel-containing compound, such as nickel sulfate, nickel chloride, nickel fluoroborate, and combinations thereof (P80).
While Dai’s specific example uses aluminum coated with copper or nickel, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the process of Dai can be used with a plethora of other metals to form bimetallic current collectors, such the process being used with the wire metals and coating metals disclosed by Mao, given Dai’s method is a known process to form a metal coating on a metal base layer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Dai and chosen the method of coating the wire mesh current collector of Mao with the metal coating of Mao to include immersing the wire mesh current collector in a bath including a metal salt, such as utilizing the electrolytic deposition method as taught by Dai, given Dai teaches this method as a known method to deposit a metal coating layer onto a metal base layer and the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Regarding claim 2, Mao discloses wherein the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires of the wire mesh current collector are made of one or more metals selected from a group consisting of copper, stainless steel, brass, bronze, zinc, aluminum, and alloys thereof (see entire disclosure and especially P48).
Regarding claim 3, Mao discloses wherein the metal coating includes a metal selected from a group consisting of tin (Sn), nickel (Ni), and alloys thereof (see entire disclosure and especially P51).
Regarding claim 6, Mao discloses arranging an anode active material layer adjacent to the wire mesh current collector (first active material 22 in Fig. 2A-2B; see entire disclosure and especially P37).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Jiang (US 20210376306 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Mao does not meet the limitation annealing the wire mesh current collector after coating the wire mesh current collector to increase physical and electrical contact at the plurality of mesh joints.
In a similar field of endeavor, Jiang teaches current collectors tend to be frequently supplied by an outside vendor that manufactures the current collectors and/or coated current collectors using proprietary technology (P36). Jiang teaches it has been found that the conductive coating applied to current collectors exhibits microscopic cracks and pin holes (P36). Jiang teaches, further, the coatings in these current collectors may not be fully cured as received from the supplier, and may include solvent remnants distributed therein (P36). Jiang subjecting the current collectors to an annealing process can drive off any remnant solvents and reflow the coating to fill any cracks and pin holes therein, and thus may improve the long-term performance of battery (P36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Jiang and annealed the wire mesh current collector of modified Mao after coating the wire mesh current collector, given Jiang teaches this can drive off any remnant solvents and reflow the coating to fill any cracks and pin holes therein, and thus may improve the long-term performance of battery the current collector is used within.
Regarding the limitation “to increase physical and electrical contact at the plurality of mesh joints”, given the method of modified Mao is the same method as claimed, and Jiang teaches their annealing can reflow coatings to fill any cracks/pinholes therein, the physical and electrical contact at the plurality of mesh joints would necessarily be increased by the annealing/reflowing method step recited in modified Mao. Therefore, modified Mao would meet the limitation “annealing the wire mesh current collector after coating the wire mesh current collector to increase physical and electrical contact at the plurality of mesh joints”.
Regarding claim 5, modified Mao meets the limitation wherein the annealing is performed at a temperature greater than a melting temperature of a metal of the metal coating and less than a melting temperature of a metal of the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires of the wire mesh current collector (Jiang teaches the current collector is annealed causing the coating to be “reflow”-ed; reflowing is a process one of ordinary skill in the art would know/understand that melts the coating on a metal base to provide benefits (such as the filling of cracks and pin holes as taught by Jiang); given the method of Jiang inside modified Mao “reflow”s the coating, it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that the annealing is performed at a temperature that would melt the metal coating but not melt the first wire and second wires of the wire mesh current collector).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Liu et al (Advanced electrode processing of lithium ion batteries: A review of powder technology in battery fabrication) and Choi et al (US 20150318570 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Mao discloses arranging an anode active material layer adjacent to the wire mesh current collector (first active material 22 in Fig. 2A-2B) in order to form a anode / negative electrode (see entire disclosure and especially P37). However, Mao does not disclose / modified Mao does not meet the limitation wherein the anode active material layer is formed by coating the wire mesh current collector with a slurry including anode active material.
In a similar field of endeavor, Liu teaches liquid slurry is the most frequently used platform to fabricate electrode materials mainly owing to its low cost and high processibility (Page 57, Left Column).
Further, also in a similar field of endeavor, Choi teaches a method that is generally used in a conventional lithium ion battery includes a negative electrode obtained by preparing a slurry including at least an active material, casting the prepared slurry on a negative electrode current collector, which can be metal mesh, and performing drying and rolling processes (P46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Liu and Choi and provided wherein the anode active material layer is formed by coating the wire mesh current collector with a slurry including anode active material, given Liu teaches liquid slurry is the most frequently used platform to fabricate electrode materials mainly owing to its low cost and high processibility and Choi teaches utilizing a slurry to fabricate a active material on a current collector is a method generally used in conventional lithium ion batteries.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Aubert et al (US 20210171350 A1) and Badding et al (US 20200266442 A1).
Regarding claim 10, modified Mao does not meet the limitation wherein the wire mesh current collector is immersed in the bath in discrete sections.
In a similar field of endeavor, Aubert teaches an electrochemical deposition process can be industrialized by means of a batch-to-batch technique with a substrate immersed in a solution (P92).
Further, Badding teaches a substrate can be coated in either a batch or roll-to-roll processing (P47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Aubert and Badding and selected the coating (immersion in the bath) of the wire mesh current collector to be done in in discrete sections, such as utilizing a batch technique, given Aubert teaches an electrochemical deposition process can be industrialized by means of a batch-to-batch technique with a substrate immersed in a solution and Badding teaches a substrate can be coated in a batch process. Further, the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Dolan et al (US 20170145580 A1).
Regarding claim 11, modified Mao does not meet the limitation wherein the wire mesh current collector is continuously immersed in the bath from a roll.
In a similar field of endeavor, Dolan teaches metal coils and wire are generally manufactured using continuous treatment methods wherein the material is unwound and passed through treatment stations and rewound (P7). Dolan teaches batch coating without unwinding often creates flaws in the coating (P7).
Dolan teaches a first spool containing bare wire is placed in or on a coating apparatus (P60). Dolan teaches the bare wire is fed through a coating apparatus and connected to a second spool (P60). Dolan teaches the wire from the first spool is fed through the coating apparatus into a bath such that the wire is provided with a coating (P60-64). Dolan teaches after the wire leaves the bath, the coated wire is collected onto the second spool (P67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Dolan and provided wherein the wire mesh current collector is continuously immersed in the bath from a roll, such as utilizing the spools and bath manufacturing method as taught by Dolan to continuously immerse the wire mesh current collector, given Dolan teaches using continuous treatment method are how metal wires are generally manufactured, Dolan teaches their manufacturing machine and method as a known way to manufacture coatings onto wires, and the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1) in view of Jiang (US 20210376306 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Mao discloses a method for manufacturing a current collector for an electrode of a battery cell, comprising: providing a wire mesh current collector including a plurality of first wires and a plurality of second wires that overlap to form a plurality of mesh joints (first mesh sheet 25 and second mesh sheet 26 of current collector 24 in Figs. 2A-2B; the mesh sheets include a plurality of metal strands 37 that overlap to form mesh joints in Fig. 2A-2B; see entire disclosure and especially P47),
wherein a diameter of the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires is in a range from 4 µm to 100 µm (the diameter of the metal strands 27 ranges between 10 micron and 500 micron, which overlap the claimed range of 4 micron to 100 micron, and in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05)).
Mao discloses the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires of the wire mesh current collector are made of a metal selected from stainless steel, copper, or a copper alloy (see entire disclosure and especially P48).
Mao discloses the wire mesh current collector (first and second mesh sheets 25, 26) can have a coating applied thereon (see entire disclosure and especially P51). Mao discloses the coating can include tin, nickel, or silver, or alloys thereof (P51).
Mao teaches the coating can be formed by a coating process utilizing a bath in which the wire mesh current collector is immersed in tin or nickel (see entire disclosure and especially P58). Mao teaches electro-deposition can be used (see entire disclosure and especially P58).
However, Mao does not disclose coating the wire mesh current collector with a metal coating by immersing the wire mesh current collector in a bath including a metal salt.
In a similar field of endeavor, Dai teaches a bimetallic current collector includes depositing an electrically conductive material (e.g. metal) on an electrically conductive surface to form a continuous and thin coating of the electrically conductive material (metal) (P74). Dai teaches the process includes electrolytic deposition of a metal to electroplate a layer of metal onto a surface to be coated (P80). Dai teaches a method includes contacting a surface of a metal structure with a liquid medium comprising another metal compound (P80). Dai teaches the liquid medium can be provided as a bath in which the surface to be coated is immersed (P80).
Dai teaches an example in which copper or nickel is deposited onto a surface comprising aluminum. Dai teaches the process includes disposing or contacting the surface comprising aluminum with a copper-containing compound, such as a complexed copper salt solution, or a nickel-containing compound, such as nickel sulfate, nickel chloride, nickel fluoroborate, and combinations thereof (P80).
While Dai’s specific example uses aluminum coated with copper or nickel, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the process of Dai can be used with a plethora of other metals to form bimetallic current collectors, such the process being used with the wire metals and coating metals disclosed by Mao, given Dai’s method is a known process to form a metal coating on a metal base layer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Dai and chosen the method of coating the wire mesh current collector of Mao with the metal coating of Mao to include immersing the wire mesh current collector in a bath including a metal salt, such as utilizing the electrolytic deposition method as taught by Dai, given Dai teaches this method as a known method to deposit a metal coating layer onto a metal base layer and the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Given Mao discloses the coating can include tin or alloys thereof (P51), the metal salt of modified Mao would include tin or alloys of tin in order to be coated thereon utilizing the method taught by Dai.
However, modified Mao does not meet the limitation wherein the wire mesh current collector is annealed after passing through the bath.
In a similar field of endeavor, Jiang teaches current collectors tend to be frequently supplied by an outside vendor that manufactures the current collectors and/or coated current collectors using proprietary technology (P36). Jiang teaches it has been found that the conductive coating applied to current collectors exhibits microscopic cracks and pin holes (P36). Jiang teaches, further, the coatings in these current collectors may not be fully cured as received from the supplier, and may include solvent remnants distributed therein (P36). Jiang subjecting the current collectors to an annealing process can drive off any remnant solvents and reflow the coating to fill any cracks and pin holes therein, and thus may improve the long-term performance of battery (P36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Jiang and annealed the wire mesh current collector of modified Mao after coating the wire mesh current collector, given Jiang teaches this can drive off any remnant solvents and reflow the coating to fill any cracks and pin holes therein, and thus may improve the long-term performance of battery the current collector is used within.
Regarding claim 13, modified Mao meets the limitation wherein the annealing is performed at a temperature greater than a melting temperature of a metal of the metal coating and less than a melting temperature of a metal of the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires of the wire mesh current collector (Jiang teaches the current collector is annealed causing the coating to be “reflow”-ed; reflowing is a process one of ordinary skill in the art would know/understand that melts the coating on a metal base to provide benefits (such as the filling of cracks and pin holes as taught by Jiang); given the method of Jiang inside modified Mao “reflow”s the coating, it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that the annealing is performed at a temperature that would melt the metal coating but not melt the first wire and second wires of the wire mesh current collector).
Regarding claim 14, Mao discloses arranging an anode active material layer adjacent to the wire mesh current collector (first active material 22 in Fig. 2A-2B; see entire disclosure and especially P37).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1) in view of Jiang (US 20210376306 A1) as applied to claim 12, further in view of Liu et al (Advanced electrode processing of lithium ion batteries: A review of powder technology in battery fabrication) and Choi et al (US 20150318570 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Mao discloses arranging an anode active material layer adjacent to the wire mesh current collector (first active material 22 in Fig. 2A-2B) in order to form a anode / negative electrode (see entire disclosure and especially P37). However, Mao does not disclose / modified Mao does not meet the limitation wherein the anode active material layer is formed by coating the wire mesh current collector with a slurry including anode active material.
In a similar field of endeavor, Liu teaches liquid slurry is the most frequently used platform to fabricate electrode materials mainly owing to its low cost and high processibility (Page 57, Left Column).
Further, also in a similar field of endeavor, Choi teaches a method that is generally used in a conventional lithium ion battery includes a negative electrode obtained by preparing a slurry including at least an active material, casting the prepared slurry on a negative electrode current collector, which can be metal mesh, and performing drying and rolling processes (P46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Liu and Choi and provided wherein the anode active material layer is formed by coating the wire mesh current collector with a slurry including anode active material, given Liu teaches liquid slurry is the most frequently used platform to fabricate electrode materials mainly owing to its low cost and high processibility and Choi teaches utilizing a slurry to fabricate an active material on a current collector is a method generally used in conventional lithium ion batteries.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1) in view of Jiang (US 20210376306 A1) as applied to claim 12, further in view of Aubert et al (US 20210171350 A1) and Badding et al (US 20200266442 A1).
Regarding claim 18, modified Mao does not meet the limitation wherein the wire mesh current collector is immersed in the bath in discrete sections.
In a similar field of endeavor, Aubert teaches an electrochemical deposition process can be industrialized by means of a batch-to-batch technique with a substrate immersed in a solution (P92).
Further, Badding teaches a substrate can be coated in either a batch or roll-to-roll processing (P47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Aubert and Badding and selected the coating (immersion in the bath) of the wire mesh current collector to be done in in discrete sections, such as utilizing a batch technique, given Aubert teaches an electrochemical deposition process can be industrialized by means of a batch-to-batch technique with a substrate immersed in a solution and Badding teaches a substrate can be coated in a batch process. Further, the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al (US 20220352496 A1) in view of Dai et al (US 20180138513 A1) in view of Jiang (US 20210376306 A1) as applied to claim 12, further in view of Dolan et al (US 20170145580 A1).
Regarding claim 19, modified Mao does not meet the limitation wherein the wire mesh current collector is continuously immersed in the bath from a roll.
In a similar field of endeavor, Dolan teaches metal coils and wire are generally manufactured using continuous treatment methods wherein the material is unwound and passed through treatment stations and rewound (P7). Dolan teaches batch coating without unwinding often creates flaws in the coating (P7).
Dolan teaches a first spool containing bare wire is placed in or on a coating apparatus (P60). Dolan teaches the bare wire is fed through a coating apparatus and connected to a second spool (P60). Dolan teaches the wire from the first spool is fed through the coating apparatus into a bath such that the wire is provided with a coating (P60-64). Dolan teaches after the wire leaves the bath, the coated wire is collected onto the second spool (P67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Dolan and provided wherein the wire mesh current collector is continuously immersed in the bath from a roll, such as utilizing the spools and bath manufacturing method as taught by Dolan to continuously immerse the wire mesh current collector, given Dolan teaches using continuous treatment method are how metal wires are generally manufactured, Dolan teaches their manufacturing machine and method as a known way to manufacture coatings onto wires, and the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mary Harris whose telephone number is (571)272-0690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/MARY GRACE HARRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights