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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1 or 2) as being anticipated by Suzuki (JP 2018-125246 A, cited in IDS, using applicant’s provided machine translation).
In regard to claim 1, Suzuki teaches a method of manufacturing a battery (abstract), comprising the steps of: weighing a plurality of electrode materials 101, 102, 103 to respective predetermined weights and placing the plurality of electrode materials into a container (metering sections 10, 20, 30 including container 15 – paragraph [0011-0015] of machine translation, annotated figure 1 below); placing the plurality of electrode materials having been placed in the container into a feeder machine (powder feeder section 40 including addition container 15, crushing and mixing section 50 – paragraph [0016-0017]); feeding the plurality of electrode materials from the feeder machine 40 to a multi-screw kneader (kneading section 80 including twin screw extrusion kneader – paragraph [0019]); and kneading the plurality of electrode materials with the multi-screw kneader (to form active material paste 100 - paragraphs [0011-0032]).
PNG
media_image1.png
443
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 2, Suzuki teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the feeder machine comprises a circle feeder including an impeller (blades 53) and a drive device (motor 51) rotatively driving the impeller (figure 1 above, paragraph [0017]).
In regard to claim 3, Suzuki teaches the method according to claim 2 wherein: the feeder machine further includes an agitating member (rotating shaft 52); and the step of feeding includes agitating the plurality of materials (mixed powder 105) placed in the feeder machine (figure 1 above, paragraph [0017], paragraph [0018] also describes a screw (not shown) within the powder feeding section 60).
In regard to claim 4, Suzuki teaches the method according to claim 3, wherein the agitating member 52 is attached to the impeller 53 of the feeder machine (figure 1 above, paragraph [0017]).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (JP 2018-125246 A, cited in IDS, using applicant’s provided machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above.
In regard to claim 5, Suzuki teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein: the plurality of electrode materials include a first electrode material and a second electrode material having a higher density than the first electrode material (see various electrode materials discussed including graphite, CMC, boehmite, SBR – paragraph [0012] which necessarily have different densities); and the step of weighing and placing the plurality of electrode materials includes placing a portion of the first and second electrode material into various container 15 (figure 1 above, paragraph [0014] discusses three meter sections 10, 20 and 30 for different material combinations).
Therefore, while Suzuki does not specifically disclose placing the first electrode material into the container, and further placing a remainder of the second electrode material into the container, the Examiner notes that the prior art appreciates that the order and sequences of adding the ingredients can affect the resultant different material characteristics and the agglomeration characteristics that are formed (see paragraph [0022]) and therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the order of adding the electrode materials in the absence of new or unexpected results.
Per MPEP 2144.05 Part IV - C. Changes in Sequence of Adding Ingredients
Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. App. 1959) (Prior art reference disclosing a process of making a laminated sheet wherein a base sheet is first coated with a metallic film and thereafter impregnated with a thermosetting material was held to render prima facie obvious claims directed to a process of making a laminated sheet by reversing the order of the prior art process steps.). See also In reBurhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results); In reGibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930) (Selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant’s own publications including US PG Pubs 2015/0239151 and 2025/0288964 newly cited, are considered relevant to the instant disclosure.
US Pub 2017/0348652 newly cited, teaches multiple supply sections in an electrode material extruder (figures, abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS P D'ANIELLO whose telephone number is (571)270-3635. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9am to 5pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NICHOLAS P D'ANIELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights