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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on 01/16/2024, 11/20/2024, 05/21/2025, 08/25/2025, and 11/26/2025 have been acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-4 and 6-8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
· “wherein the determining, based on a first electrode plate, a conveying order of a plurality of second electrode plates comprising” in Claim 3 line 1-2 should read as -- wherein the determining, based on the first electrode plate, the conveying order of the plurality of second electrode plates comprising --; see suggested amendment provided below.
· “wherein the generating an identifier sequence for the plurality of second electrode plates based on the conveying order comprises” in Claim 6 line 1-2 should read as -- wherein the generating the identifier sequence for the plurality of second electrode plates based on the conveying order comprises --; see suggested amendment provided below.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a processing unit configured to determine…” in claim 12 line 2.
“a generation unit configured to generate…” in claim 12 line 8.
“a collection unit configured to collect…” in claim 12 line 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is directed to “An electrode plate stacking method”. However, none of the recited steps recited in claim 1, i.e. determining a conveying order…, generating an identifier sequence…, and collecting first image data…, completely or even partially accomplish the task of electrode plate stacking as claimed; therefore it is unclear from the claim language how these claimed steps would perform electrode plate stacking as claimed in the preamble or if these claimed steps are even related to electrode plate stacking or are simply background tasks to be completed by a generic computer, thereby rendering the claim indefinite because it is not sufficiently clear from the claim language whether the claims are intended to be directed towards an electrode plate stacking method, computer tasks to be performed in preparation for an electrode plate stacking method, or both. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets claim 1 to recite specific steps of alternatively conveying the at least one upper electrode plates and the at least one lower electrode plates to the first electrode plate and stacking the first electrode plate and the plurality of second electrode plates by folding as hinted at in the determining step of claim 1 and discussed in the specification; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 1 line 2 recites the limitation “determining, based on a first electrode plate, a conveying order…”. It is not sufficiently clear from the claim language how the conveying order is determined “based on a first electrode” because there is no details provided on how this is accomplished, for example is the conveying order determined based on the simple presence of a first electrode plate?, is stored data regarding the first electrode plate checked?, are physical properties of the first electrode plate examined?, etc., thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation such that data of the first electrode plate is collected, and based on the collected data of the first electrode plate, the conveying order is determined; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 4 line 1-8 recites the limitation “if the fold information is used to indicate that a first fold of the at least one fold is located on the upper surface of the first electrode plate, one of the plurality of second electrode plates that is to be first conveyed is a first upper electrode plate of the at least one upper electrode plate; or if the fold information is used to indicate that the first fold of the at least one fold is located on the lower surface of the first electrode plate, one of the plurality of second electrode plates that is to be first conveyed is a first lower electrode plate of the at least one lower electrode plate.”. These limitations are confusing and it would appear that the applicants wish to indicate that if a first fold is on an upper surface the first second electrode plate to be conveyed is one of a first upper electrode plate and vice versa for the fold being on a lower surface of the first electrode plate; however, this is not what claim 4 recite. Claim 4 actually only defines an upper electrode plate that is first conveyed as a “first upper electrode plate” and a lower electrode plate that is first conveyed as a “first lower electrode plate” which does not affect the claimed method, thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation such that if the fold information indicates a first fold on an upper surface of the first electrode plate, the conveying order is determined such that the first of the second electrode plates that is to be conveyed is a first upper electrode plate and vice versa for the fold being on a lower surface of the first electrode plate; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 5 recites “generating a first identifier for the at least one upper electrode plate and a second identifier for the at least one lower electrode plate when the continuous second electrode plate is cut into the at least one upper electrode plate and the at least one lower electrode plate; and storing the first identifier in a first stack list and storing the second identifier in a second stack list”. “the continuous second electrode plate” lacks antecedent basis in the claim, and it is not sufficiently clear from the claim language if a single first identifier is generated for each of the upper electrode plates in the instance that there are more than one, or if each of the upper electrode plates has its own first identifier generated, and the same thing for the second identifiers of the lower electrode plates, thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets “the continuous second electrode plate” to read as “a continuous second electrode plate” and interprets this limitation such that the first identifiers are generated for each of the at least one upper electrode plates and the second identifiers are generated for each of the at least one lower electrode plates; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 6 line 3-8 recites the limitation “popping the first identifier in the first stack list and the second identifier in the second stack list alternately based on the conveying order, wherein identifiers in a same stack list are popped in a first-in first-out order; and storing the popped first identifier and the popped second identifier in a third stack list based on the order of popping the first identifier and the second identifier alternately, a sequence in the third stack list being the identifier sequence”. Further, Claim 7 line 5-6 recites the limitation “sequentially popping the identifier sequence in the third stack list when the second electrode plates are conveyed” and Claim 8 line 5-8 recites the limitation “if the popped identifier is the first identifier in the identifier sequence, triggering the first image obtaining sub-apparatus to collect the first image data; or if the popped identifier is the second identifier in the identifier sequence, triggering the second image obtaining sub-apparatus to collect the first image data”. It is not sufficiently clear from the language what “popping” or “popped” means and/or what the metes and bounds of these terms are meant to be, thereby rendering the claims indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claims are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets these claims such that “popping” and “popped” are replaced with “stored” such that identifiers are stored in the stack lists as recited; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 9 line 1-2 recites “wherein the obtaining fold information of the first electrode plate comprises” and Claim 10 line 1 recites “when the at least one fold reaches a conveying position of the plurality of second electrode plates”. However, the fold information of the folds of the first electrode plate and the obtaining of the fold information is introduced in claim 3 which claims 9 and 10 are not dependent upon, therefore claims 9 and 10 lack antecedent basis for the obtaining fold information and the folds of the first electrode plate, thereby rendering the claim indefinite. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets claims 9 and 10 to be dependent upon claim 3 to provide support for the obtaining fold information and the folds of the first electrode plate respectively; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 11 line 2-4 recites “the second electrode plate is a positive electrode plate, the upper electrode plate is an upper positive electrode plate, and the lower electrode plate is a lower positive electrode plate”. However, claim 1 which claim 11 depends upon recites that there are a “plurality of second electrode plates” and “at least one upper electrode plate” and “at least one lower electrode plate”, therefore it is not sufficiently clear if the “second electrode plate” as recited in claim 11 is directed to one of the plurality of second electrode plates introduced in claim 1 or a different second electrode plate, and similarly for the upper electrode plate and the lower electrode plate, thereby rendering the claim indefinite as the metes and bounds of the claim is not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation to read as “wherein the first electrode plate is a negative electrode plate, and the plurality of second electrode plates are positive electrode plates”; see suggested amendment provided below (it is noted by the examiner that the claimed already recite that the plurality of second electrode plates include the upper electrode plate(s) and the lower electrode plate(s) and therefore the upper and lower electrode plates being positive electrode plates does not need to be repeated).
Claim 12 is directed to “An electrode plate stacking apparatus”. However, none of the recited elements recited in claim 1, i.e. a processing unit…, a generation unit…, and a collection unit…, completely or even partially accomplish the task of electrode plate stacking as claimed; therefore it is unclear from the claim language how these claimed elements would perform electrode plate stacking as claimed in the preamble or if these claimed elements are even related to electrode plate stacking or are simply elements of a generic computer used by the electrode plate stacking apparatus, thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim as recited are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets claim 12 to recite a conveying apparatus configured to convey alternatively convey the second electrode plates and a folding apparatus configured to stack the first and second electrodes; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 12 line 2 recites the limitation “a processing unit configured to determine, based on a first electrode plate, a conveying order…”. It is not sufficiently clear from the claim language how the conveying order is determined “based on a first electrode” because there is no details provided on how this is accomplished, for example is the conveying order determined based on the simple presence of a first electrode plate?, is stored data regarding the first electrode plate checked?, are physical properties of the first electrode plate examined?, etc., thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation such that the processing unit collects data of the first electrode plate fed to the stacking apparatus, and based on the collected data of the first electrode plate, the conveying order is determined; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 12 line 3-7 recites the limitation “the plurality of second electrode plates comprising at least one upper electrode plate and at least one lower electrode plate…and the conveying order being used for conveying the at least one upper electrode plate and the at least one lower electrode plate alternately”. It is not sufficiently clear from the claim language what the difference between an upper electrode plate and a lower electrode plate are because no details regarding the plates are provided in the claims, and it is not sufficiently clear from the claim language what the conveying order “being used for conveying” means, thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation such that the upper electrode plates are conveyed to an upper surface of the first electrode plate and the lower electrode plates are conveyed to a lower surface of the first electrode plate alternatively, the conveying order indicating an order for conveying the upper and lower electrode plates; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 12 line 8-9 recites the limitation “a generation unit configured to generate an identifier sequence for the plurality of second electrode plates based on the conveying order”. It is not sufficiently clear what an “identifier sequence” is or how it would be generated because there is no description in the claim of the identifiers, how the identifier sequence is generated based on the conveying order, or what form a resultant identifier sequence takes, thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation such that identifiers are generated for each of the plurality of second electrode plates and the identifier sequence represents the identifiers arranged in the conveying order as discussed in the specification; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 14 line 1-8 recites the limitation “if the fold information is used to indicate that a first fold of the at least one fold is located on the upper surface of the first electrode plate, one of the plurality of second electrode plates that is to be first conveyed is a first upper electrode plate of the at least one upper electrode plate; or if the fold information is used to indicate that the first fold of the at least one fold is located on the lower surface of the first electrode plate, one of the plurality of second electrode plates that is to be first conveyed is a first lower electrode plate of the at least one lower electrode plate.”. These limitations are confusing and it would appear that the applicants wish to indicate that if a first fold is on an upper surface the first second electrode plate to be conveyed is one of a first upper electrode plate and vice versa for the fold being on a lower surface of the first electrode plate; however, this is not what claim 4 recite. Claim 4 actually only defines an upper electrode plate that is first conveyed as a “first upper electrode plate” and a lower electrode plate that is first conveyed as a “first lower electrode plate” which does not affect the claimed method, thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation such that if the fold information indicates a first fold on an upper surface of the first electrode plate, the conveying order is determined such that the first of the second electrode plates that is to be conveyed is a first upper electrode plate and vice versa for the fold being on a lower surface of the first electrode plate; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 15 line 1-8 recites “generate a first identifier for the at least one upper electrode plate and a second identifier for the at least one lower electrode plate when the continuous second electrode plate is cut into the at least one upper electrode plate and the at least one lower electrode plate; and the processing unit is further configured to: store the first identifier in a first stack list and store the second identifier in a second stack list”. “the continuous second electrode plate” lacks antecedent basis in the claim, and it is not sufficiently clear from the claim language if a single first identifier is generated for each of the upper electrode plates in the instance that there are more than one, or if each of the upper electrode plates has its own first identifier generated, and the same thing for the second identifiers of the lower electrode plates, thereby rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets “the continuous second electrode plate” to read as “a continuous second electrode plate” and interprets this limitation such that the first identifiers are generated for each of the at least one upper electrode plates and the second identifiers are generated for each of the at least one lower electrode plates; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 15 line 9-14 recites the limitation “pop the first identifier in the first stack list and the second identifier in the second stack list alternately based on the conveying order, wherein identifiers in a same stack list are popped in a first-in first-out order; and store the popped first identifier and the popped second identifier in a third stack list based on the order of popping the first identifier and the second identifier alternately, a sequence in the third stack list being the identifier sequence.”. Further, Claim 16 line 3-4 recites the limitation “sequentially popping the identifier sequence in the third stack list when the second electrode plates are conveyed” and Claim 17 line 4-7 recites the limitation “if the popped identifier is the first identifier in the identifier sequence, triggering the first image obtaining sub-apparatus to collect the first image data; or if the popped identifier is the second identifier in the identifier sequence, triggering the second image obtaining sub-apparatus to collect the first image data”. It is not sufficiently clear from the language what “popping” or “popped” means and/or what the metes and bounds of these terms are meant to be, thereby rendering the claims indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claims are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets these claims such that “popping” and “popped” are replaced with “stored” such that identifiers are stored in the stack lists as recited; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 18 line 1-2 recites “wherein the obtaining fold information of the first electrode plate comprises” and Claim 19 line 2-2 recites “when the at least one fold reaches a conveying position of the plurality of second electrode plates”. However, the fold information of the folds of the first electrode plate and the obtaining of the fold information is introduced in claim 13 which claims 18 and 19 are not dependent upon, therefore claims 18 and 19 lack antecedent basis for the obtaining fold information and the folds of the first electrode plate, thereby rendering the claim indefinite. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets claims 18 and 19 to be dependent upon claim 13 to provide support for the obtaining fold information and the folds of the first electrode plate respectively; see suggested amendment provided below.
Claim 19 line 5-7 recites “the second electrode plate is a positive electrode plate, the upper electrode plate is an upper positive electrode plate, and the lower electrode plate is a lower positive electrode plate”. However, claim 12 which claim 19 depends upon recites that there are a “plurality of second electrode plates” and “at least one upper electrode plate” and “at least one lower electrode plate”, therefore it is not sufficiently clear if the “second electrode plate” as recited in claim 19 is directed to one of the plurality of second electrode plates introduced in claim 12 or a different second electrode plate, and similarly for the upper electrode plate and the lower electrode plate, thereby rendering the claim indefinite as the metes and bounds of the claim is not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation to read as “wherein the first electrode plate is a negative electrode plate, and the plurality of second electrode plates are positive electrode plates”; see suggested amendment provided below (it is noted by the examiner that the claimed already recite that the plurality of second electrode plates include the upper electrode plate(s) and the lower electrode plate(s) and therefore the upper and lower electrode plates being positive electrode plates does not need to be repeated).
Claims 2-3, 13, and 20 are rejected based on their dependence on rejected claims.
Claim limitations “a generation unit configured to generate…” and “a collection unit configured to collect…” in claim 12 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. For example, there is no disclosure in the specification or the claims of a specific structure that would perform the functions of “generation unit” and the “collection unit” as claimed. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to the abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) an abstract idea of an electrode plate stacking method and an associated electrode plate stacking apparatus and electrode plate stacking machine that do not actually perform any electrode plate stacking, but rather only manipulate data with or without the use of a generic computer because the recited steps/elements simply recite steps to perform or generic computer elements configured to perform the steps that can be either performed using mental processes or metal processes that can be aided with the use of a generic computer. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the recited steps and/or elements configured to perform the steps as claimed, e.g. determining a conveying order, generating an identifier sequence, and collecting first image data can all be performed by mental process and/or mental process performed on a generic computer because there is nothing being done other than the manipulation of data. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claimed steps/elements configured to perform the steps, as summarized above, are only directed to the manipulation of data without any actually performing any specific actions to stack electrode plates or doing anything “significantly more” than the manipulation of data that could be performed as a mental process or metal process performed on a generic computer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph and 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections set forth in this Office action.
The following is a suggested amendment to the claims aimed at overcoming the pending 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph and 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections discussed above:
1. An electrode plate stacking method, comprising:
collecting data of a first electrode plate fed to a stacking apparatus, the first electrode plate being a continuous electrode plate;
determining, based on the data of the [[a]] first electrode plate, a conveying order of a plurality of second electrode plates, s and at least one lower electrode plates, the plurality of second electrode plates being discontinuous electrode plates, and the conveying order indicating an order [[being used]] for conveying the at least one upper electrode plates to an upper surface of the first electrode plate and the at least one lower electrode plates to a lower surface of the first electrode plate alternately;
generating an identifier sequence for the plurality of second electrode plates based on the conveying order that represents identifiers generated for each of the plurality of second electrode plates arranged in the conveying order; [[and]]
collecting first image data of each of the plurality of second electrode plates based on the identifier sequence and storing the first image data with the identifiers of the second electrode plates in a process of conveying the plurality of second electrode plates in the conveying order;[[.]]
alternatively conveying the at least one upper electrode plates to the upper surface of the first electrode plate and the at least one lower electrode plates to the lower surface of the first electrode plate; and
stacking the first electrode plate and the plurality of second electrode plates by folding the first electrode plate using the stacking apparatus.
2. The stacking method according to claim 1, further comprising:
storing the identifier sequence and the first image data, wherein the identifier sequence is in a one-to-one correspondence with the first image data.
3. The stacking method according to claim 1, wherein the determining, based on [[a]] the data of the first electrode plate, [[a]] the conveying order of [[a]] the plurality of second electrode plates comprising:
obtaining fold information of the first electrode plate based on the data of the first electrode plate, the fold information being used to indicate whether at least one folds on the first electrode plate is located on [[an]] the upper surface or [[a]] the lower surface of the first electrode plate; and
determining the conveying order based on the fold information.
4. The stacking method according to claim 3, wherein
if the fold information [[is used to indicate]] indicates that a first fold of the at least one folds is located on the upper surface of the first electrode plate, the conveying order is determined such that the first of the second electrode plates that is to be conveyed is
if the fold information [[is used to indicate]] indicates that the first fold of the at least one folds is located on the lower surface of the first electrode plate, the conveying order is determined such that the first of the second electrode plates that is to be conveyed is
5. The stacking method according to claim 1, further comprising:
generating a first identifier for each of the at least one upper electrode plates and a second identifier for each of the at least one lower electrode plates when [[the]] a continuous second electrode plate is cut into the at least one upper electrode plates and the at least one lower electrode plates; and
storing the first identifiers in a first stack list and storing the second identifiers in a second stack list.
6. The stacking method according to claim 5, wherein the generating [[an]] the identifier sequence for the plurality of second electrode plates based on the conveying order comprises:
[[popping]] storing the first identifiers [[in]] from the first stack list and the second identifiers [[in]] from the second stack list alternately into a third stack list based on the conveying order, wherein identifiers in a same stack list are [[popped]] stored in a first-in first-out order, a sequence of the third stack list being the identifier sequence
7. The stacking method according to claim 6, wherein collecting the first image data of each of the plurality of second electrode plates based on the identifier sequence comprises:
sequentially based on the identifier sequence such that the image obtaining apparatus collects the first image data in the order of the identifier sequence.
8. The stacking method according to claim 7, wherein the first image obtaining apparatus comprises a first image obtaining sub-apparatus and a second image obtaining sub-apparatus, and the sequentially triggering the first image obtaining apparatus based on the identifier sequence such that the image obtaining apparatus collects the first image data comprises:
if the [[popped]] identifier is the first identifier in the identifier sequence, triggering the first image obtaining sub-apparatus to collect the first image data; or
if the [[popped]] identifier is the second identifier in the identifier sequence, triggering the second image obtaining sub-apparatus to collect the first image data.
9. The stacking method according to claim [[1]] 3, wherein the obtaining the fold information of the first electrode plate comprises:
performing cut hole detection on the first electrode plate; and
after a cut hole in the first electrode plate is detected, triggering a second image obtaining apparatus to collect second image data of the first electrode plate, the second image data being used to obtain the fold information.
10. The stacking method according to claim [[1]] 3, further comprising:
when the at least one folds reaches a conveying position of the plurality of second electrode plates, conveying the at least one upper electrode plates and the at least one lower electrode plates alternately in the conveying order.
11. The stacking method according to claim 1, wherein the first electrode plate is a negative electrode plate, and the plurality of second electrode plates [[is a]] are positive electrode plates
12. An electrode plate stacking apparatus, comprising:
a processing unit configured to collect data of a first electrode plate fed to the stacking apparatus, the first electrode plate being a continuous electrode plate, and determine, based on [[a]] the first electrode plate, a conveying order of a plurality of second electrode plates, s and at least one lower electrode plates, the plurality of second electrode plates being discontinuous electrode plates, and the conveying order indicating an order s to an upper surface of the first electrode plate and the at least one lower electrode plates to a lower surface of the first electrode plate alternately;
a generation unit configured to generate an identifier sequence for the plurality of second electrode plates based on the conveying order that represents identifiers generated for each of the plurality of second electrode plates arranged in the conveying order; and
a collection unit configured to collect first image data of each of the plurality of second electrode plates based on the identifier sequence and storing the first image data with the identifiers of the second electrode plates in a process of conveying the plurality of second electrode plates in the conveying order; [[.]]
a conveying apparatus configured to alternatively convey the at least one upper electrode plates to the upper surface of the first electrode plate and the at least one lower electrode plates to the lower surface of the first electrode plate; and
a folding apparatus configured to stack the first electrode plate and the plurality of second electrode plates by folding the first electrode plate.
13. The stacking apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the processing unit is further configured to:
store the identifier sequence and the first image data, wherein the identifier sequence is in a one-to-one correspondence with the first image data;
obtain fold information of the first electrode plate based on the data of the first electrode plate, the fold information being used to indicate whether at least one folds on the first electrode plate is located on [[an]] the upper surface or [[a]] the lower surface of the first electrode plate; and
determine the conveying order based on the fold information.
14. The stacking apparatus according to claim 13, wherein
if the fold information [[is used to indicate]] indicates that a first fold of the at least one folds is located on the upper surface of the first electrode plate, the conveying order is determined such that the first of the second electrode plates that is to be conveyed is
if the fold information [[is used to indicate]] indicates that the first fold of the at least one folds is located on the lower surface of the first electrode plate, the conveying order is determined such that the first of the second electrode plates that is to be conveyed is
15. The stacking apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the generation unit is further configured to:
generate a first identifier for each of the at least one upper electrode plates and a second identifier for each of the at least one lower electrode plates when [[the]] a continuous second electrode plate is cut into the at least one upper electrode plates and the at least one lower electrode plates; and
the processing unit is further configured to:
store the first identifiers in a first stack list and store the second identifiers in a second stack list;
[[pop]] store the first identifiers [[in]] from the first stack list and the second identifiers [[in]] from the second stack list alternately into a third stack list based on the conveying order, wherein identifiers in a same stack list are [[popped]] stored in a first-in first-out order, a sequence of the third stack list being the identifier sequence
16. The stacking apparatus according to claim 15, further comprising a first image obtaining apparatus, and the processing unit is further configured to:
sequentially based on the identifier sequence such that the image obtaining apparatus collects the first image data in the order of the identifier sequence.
17. The stacking apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the first image obtaining apparatus comprises a first image obtaining sub-apparatus and a second image obtaining sub-apparatus, and the processing unit is specifically configured to:
if the [[popped]] identifier is the first identifier in the identifier sequence, trigger the first image obtaining sub-apparatus to collect the first image data; or
if the [[popped]] identifier is the second identifier in the identifier sequence, trigger the second image obtaining sub-apparatus to collect the first image data.
18. The stacking apparatus according to claim [[12]] 13, wherein the processing unit is specifically configured to:
perform cut hole detection on the first electrode plate; and
after a cut hole in the first electrode plate is detected, trigger a second image obtaining apparatus to collect second image data of the first electrode plate, the second image data being used to obtain the fold information.
19. The stacking apparatus according to claim [[12]] 13, further comprising:
a conveying unit configured to: when the at least one folds reaches a conveying position of the plurality of second electrode plates, convey the at least one upper electrode plates and the at least one lower electrode plates alternately in the conveying order,
wherein the first electrode plate is a negative electrode plate, the second electrode plates [[is a]] are positive electrode plates
20. An electrode plate stacking machine, comprising:
the electrode plate stacking apparatus according to claim 12.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 1, 12, and 20 are directed towards an electrode plate stacking method and an associated electrode plate stacking apparatus and machine respectively. The prior art fails to disclose or render obvious all of the limitations of claims 1, 12, and 20 respectively (as interpreted by the examiner due to 112(b) clarify issues as discussed above), specifically the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious the following combination of limitations from claim 1, 12, and 20 respectively:
an electrode plate stacking method or apparatus in which information is collected regarding a first electrode plate being a continuous electrode plate, then based on the data, a conveying order of second electrode plates alternatively to the top and bottom of the first electrode plate is determined, and generating an identifier sequence for the second electrode plates arranged in the conveying order, and collecting and storing first image data of each of the second electrode plates along with the identifier data while conveying the second electrode plates in the conveying order, followed by the steps of actually stacking the electrode plates (alternatively conveying and stacking as added).
The closest prior art to the claimed invention are the following that do not disclose or render obvious the claimed limitations as recited in the above suggested amendment provided by the examiner:
US 8870977 discloses a similar method and apparatus for stacking electrodes for making a battery including continuously supplying a first electrode plate (10, Fig 2) and supplying discontinuous second electrode plates (20, Fig 2) to either side of the first electrode plate during folding of the first electrode plate to stack the electrodes, but this reference does not disclose or render obvious: collecting data (e.g. an image) of the continuous first electrode plate, determining a conveying order of second electrode plates alternatively to the upper and lower surfaces of the first electrode plate based on the collected data of the first electrode plate, and collecting first image data of each of the second electrode plates as they are conveyed and storing the first image data with identifiers generated for each second electrode plate in accordance of an identifier sequence arranged in the conveying order.
JP 2020068050 discloses a stacked battery wherein the electrodes are marked with bar codes containing identifying information, but does not disclose or render obvious: collecting data of the continuous first electrode plate, determining a conveying order of second electrode plates alternatively to upper and lower surfaces of the first electrode plate based on the collected data of the first electrode plate, and collecting first image data of each of the second electrode plates as they are conveyed and storing the first image data with identifiers generated for each second electrode plate in accordance of an identifier sequence arranged in the conveying order.
CN 112310487 discloses a method and apparatus for forming a stacked battery by laminating metal plates alternatively on opposite sides of a separator followed by folding the separator to stack the metal plates, but does not disclose or render obvious: collecting data of the continuous first electrode plate, determining a conveying order of second electrode plates alternatively to upper and lower surfaces of the first electrode plate based on the collected data of the first electrode plate, and collecting first image data of each of the second electrode plates as they are conveyed and storing the first image data with identifiers generated for each second electrode plate in accordance of an identifier sequence arranged in the conveying order.
US 20100015529, US 20220021016, US 20110274960, US 20140050957, US 20220336840, disclose methods and apparatuses for folding metal plates together to form a stack for a battery wherein the folded portions of the metal plates include holes or other markings that indicate where the metal plates are to be folded, but none of these references disclose or render obvious: collecting data of the continuous first electrode plate, determining a conveying order of second electrode plates alternatively to upper and lower surfaces of the first electrode plate based on the collected data of the first electrode plate, and collecting first image data of each of the second electrode plates as they are conveyed and storing the first image data with identifiers generated for each second electrode plate in accordance of an identifier sequence arranged in the conveying order.
US 20200235433, US 20230411669, US 20190341658, KR 20200058956, KR 20130124098, KR 20190051624, KR 20120105211 disclose methods for manufacturing stacked batteries wherein an inspection is performed on the metal plates before stacking to determine if they are defective and/or misaligned before or after stacking, but none of these references disclose or render obvious: determining a conveying order of second electrode plates alternatively to upper and lower surfaces of the first electrode plate based on collected data of the first electrode plate, and collecting first image data of each of the second electrode plates as they are conveyed and storing the first image data with identifiers generated for each second electrode plate in accordance of an identifier sequence arranged in the conveying order.
US 20140272537, US 20190237797, US 20230261249, US 20150162638, US 20190334158, US 20190229360, US 20210408609, US 20220384851, US 20140230239, US 20060088759, KR 20170059740, CN 208622872 also disclose methods and apparatuses for folding metal plates together to form a stack for a battery, but none of these references disclose or render obvious: collecting data of the continuous first electrode plate, determining a conveying order of second electrode plates alternatively to upper and lower surfaces of the first electrode plate based on the collected data of the first electrode plate, and collecting first image data of each of the second electrode plates as they are conveyed and storing the first image data with identifiers generated for each second electrode plate in accordance of an identifier sequence arranged in the conveying order.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joshua D. Anderson, whose telephone number is (571) 270-0157. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 7 AM and 1 PM Arizona time.
If any attempt to reach the examiner by telephone is unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hong, can be reached at (571) 272-0993.
Another resource that is available to applicants is the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR). Information regarding the status of an application can be obtained from the (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAX. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, please feel free to contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Applicants are invited to contact the Office to schedule an in-person interview to discuss and resolve the issues set forth in this Office Action. Although an interview is not required, the Office believes that an interview can be of use to resolve any issues related to a patent application in an efficient and prompt manner.
/JOSHUA D ANDERSON/
Examiner, Art Unit 3729
/THOMAS J HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3729