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 .
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 12-20 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.
Claims 1 and 20 have been amended to recite “circuitry configured to… collect data…determine, based on the first electrode plate a conveying order…generate an identifier sequence…collect first image data… alternatively convey the at least one upper electrode plate among the plurality of second electrode plates to the upper surface of the first electrode plate and the at least one lower electrode plate among the plurality of second 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”. It is not sufficiently clear how the general structure of “circuitry”, which is interpreted to be a structural component of a general computer, would be capable of conveying electrode plates or performing stacking of the electrode plates; thereby rendering the claims indefinite as the metes and bounds of the claim are not sufficiently clear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets that there are an additional structural elements of: a conveying apparatus that performs the alternative conveying as claimed, and a folding apparatus that performs the stacking as claimed, for example see the proposed examiner amendment provided in the office action dated 02/05/2026.
Claims 13-19 are rejected based on their dependence on rejected claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 1-11 have been amended in accordance with the proposed examiner amendment for allowance as discussed in the office action dated 02/05/2026, therefore claims 1-11 are in condition for allowance.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 12-20 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, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 12-20 have been amended similarly to the proposed examiner amendment for allowance as discussed in the office action dated 02/05/2026, therefore claims 12-20 are in allowable over the prior art. However, the claims have been amended to add the structure of “circuitry” that performs the claimed functions, and does not include the structure of the conveying apparatus that performs the alternative conveying as claimed and the folding apparatus that performs the stacking as claimed; therefore rendering the claims indefinite as it is not sufficiently clear how generic “circuitry” is capable of specifically performing these functions (see above 112b rejection of claims 12 and 20).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 Joshua D. Anderson, whose telephone number is (571) 270-0157. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 6 AM and 10 AM 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
Prosecution Insights