Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 4, 2023, and the IDS submitted on December 11, 2024, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, both IDS forms are being considered by Examiner.
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.
3. Claim 11 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "a wavy edge" in line 8 of page 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As written, it is unclear if “a wavy edge” is referring to the wavy edge limitation recited in independent claim 1, or a second, new wavy edge. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret “a wavy edge” to mean the wavy edge of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
4. Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kondo (JP 2014-78448 A; Kondo, Y.; hereinafter "Kondo") .
In regard to claim 12, Kondo discloses an apparatus for detecting a wavy edge of an electrode sheet [edge detector, page 2 paras. 2-3; capable of differentiating thickness of electrode sheets (page 3 paras. 1-4), and therefore capable of detecting a wavy edge], comprising: a supporting member [support member 56]; and a first detecting assembly [edge detection sensor 54], the first detecting assembly comprising a movable assembly [contact 55; page 8 para. 8 - page 9 para. 1 describe the contact moving in the vertical direction, shown in Figs. 5a-5b] and a detecting member [piezoelectric sensor 61], the movable assembly being coupled to the supporting member [shown in Fig. 4] and being configured to be in contact with the electrode sheet [shown in Fig. 4]; wherein the detecting member comprises a pressure sensor [piezoelectric element 58 (piezoelectric compression, page 8 para. 8 - page 9 para. 1)], and the pressure sensor is mounted on the movable assembly [shown in Fig. 4] and is capable of detecting an applied force between the electrode sheet and the movable assembly [voltage detected based on compression; page 3 paras. 1-4].
When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation “a wavy edge” is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention' s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
In regard to claim 13, Kondo discloses that the movable assembly comprises a power mechanism [voltage sensor 61] and a connector [contact 55] configured to be in contact with the electrode sheet [shown in Figs. 5a-5b], the power mechanism is coupled to the connector [shown in Figs. 5a-5b]; the pressure sensor is coupled between the power mechanism and the connector [shown in Figs. 5a-5b] and is configured to detect an applied force between the connector and the electrode sheet [page 8 para. 8 - page 9 para. 1]; and the power mechanism is coupled to the supporting member [shown in Figs. 5a-5b].
In regard to claim 14, Kondo discloses a detecting part of the pressure sensor is in contact with the power mechanism or the connector [contact 55 of the edge detection sensor 54 in contact with the electrode sheet, shown in Figs. 5a-5b].
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.
5. Claims 1-11 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo in view of Kurosu (JP 6186847 B2; Kurosu, S.; hereinafter "Kurosu").
In regard to claim 1, Kondo teaches an apparatus for detecting a wavy edge of an electrode sheet [edge detector, page 2 paras. 2-3; capable of differentiating thickness of electrode sheets (page 3 paras. 1-4), and therefore capable of detecting a wavy edge], comprising: a supporting member [support member 56]; and a first detecting assembly [edge detection sensor 54], the first detecting assembly comprising a movable assembly [contact 55; page 8 para. 8 - page 9 para. 1 describe the contact moving in the vertical direction, shown in Figs. 5a-5b] and a detecting member [piezoelectric sensor 61]; wherein the movable assembly is movably coupled to the supporting member [shown in Figs. 5a-5b], and the movable assembly is configured to move along the supporting member in a direction close to an electrode sheet, to be in contact with the electrode sheet [shown in Figs. 5a-5b, the contact 55 moves up and down based on contact with the electrode sheet; metal foil sheet 40a described as an electrode base material page 8 para. 3]; and the detecting member is fixed on the movable assembly [shown in Fig. 4], and the detecting member is configured to detect an edge of the electrode sheet based on movement of the movable assembly [page 9 paras. 1-4].
Although Kondo teaches that an apparatus capable of detecting a wavy edge of an electrode sheet, Kondo is not explicit that the apparatus does detect said wavy edge.
However, gauging waviness of a belt or sheet with a sensor is a well-known engineering practice in the art, as exemplified by Kurosu. Kurosu teaches a waviness detection unit [plurality of displacement sensors 442] with a control unit for detecting the waviness of a belt stretched between two rollers [abstract, page 2 para. 6; waviness detected by comparing displacement sensor output over time, page 14 paras. 4-12].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to have used Kurosu's method of using two displacement sensors in order to better monitor waviness and make adjustments so that a sheet can be more uniform, as taught by Kurosu [page 4 paras. 1-4].
In regard to claim 2, Kondo further teaches a power mechanism [voltage sensor 61], movably coupled to the supporting member[shown in Figs. 5a-5b; electrode 59 of voltage sensor moves vertically in response to compression/displacement of the contact 55]; and a connector [contact 55], coupled to the power mechanism [shown in Fig. 4], the connector being configured to move with the power mechanism toward a position close to the electrode sheet [movement shown in Figs. 5a-5b], to be in contact with the electrode sheet [contact shown in Figs. 4 and 5a-5b].
In regard to claim 3, Kondo further teaches that the detecting member comprises a pressure sensor [piezoelectric element 58 (piezoelectric compression, page 8 para. 8 - page 9 para. 1)] coupled between the power mechanism and the connector[shown in Fig. 4], the pressure sensor is configured to sense an applied force between the connector and the electrode sheet [voltage detected based on compression; page 3 paras. 1-4], and the movable assembly moves with a variation of the applied force [page 9 paras. 1-4 describe the displacement based upon the size of the compression force, shown in Figs. 5a-5b].
In regard to claim 4, Kondo further teaches that the detecting member further comprises a displacement detecting member coupled to the power mechanism [piezoelectric element 58 measures the displacement of the contact 55 by the force applied to the sensor; page 8 para. 9 - page 9 para. 1], and the displacement detecting member is configured to detect displacement of the movable assembly [page 8 para. 9 - page 9 para. 1].
In regard to claim 5, Kondo further teaches that the supporting member is provided with a measuring tool [electrode 60], the measuring tool is opposite to the displacement detecting member in terms of position [electrode 60 is on the opposite side of the piezoelectric element 58 compared to electrode 59], and the displacement detecting member reads the displacement of the movable assembly through the measuring tool [page 8 para. 9 - page 9 para. 1].
It should be noted that the above prior art rejection may be overcome if the claim were amended to include more specific claim limitations regarding the position of the measuring tool, its structure, or how the displacement detecting member reads the displacement of the moveable assembly through the measuring tool.
In regard to claim 6, Kondo further teaches a controller [page 2 para. 4 describes a control unit in communication with the sensor], the controller being electrically connected to the pressure sensor and the power mechanism page 2 para. 4 describes a control unit in communication with the sensor], and the controller being configured to receive an applied force value sent by the pressure sensor and control movement of the power mechanism according to the applied force value [page 2 para. 4 describes comparing voltage, the voltages being relational to the force applied on the piezoelectric sensor].
In regard to claim 7, Kondo teaches controller is further coupled to the displacement detecting member [in electrical communication, page 2 para. 4] the controller is further configured to receive displacement sent by the displacement detecting member [voltage values monitored by controller, page 9 paras. 1-4] and determine an edge level of the electrode sheet according to the displacement [page 8 para. 8 describes detecting the edge 40d], and the edge level is a ratio of the displacement to a distance between two passing rollers supporting the electrode sheet [page 8 para. 8 describes that the once the edge is found (displacement is compared), that the sheet is rotated a preset amount, and the distance of that rotation is determined based on dimensions such as A1, A2, and L1 (which are distances between the two rollers shown in Fig. 4); thus the edge level is a ratio of the vertical displacement of the contact 55 and a distance between the rollers].
Kondo is not explicit that the edge level is a wavy edge level.
However, Kurosu teaches determining a wavy edge level of the electrode sheet according to the displacement [page 11 para. 4 describes detecting the wave/undulation level; page 14 para. 1 describes monitoring the undulation level against a predetermined threshold to avoid unnecessary adjustments].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Kurosu’s method of monitoring a wavy edge level with Kondo’s method of measuring an edge level in order to better avoid unnecessary adjustments, as taught by Kurosu [page 14 para. 1].
In regard to claim 8, Kondo is not explicit in the use of a second detecting assembly with the same structure as the first detecting assembly, such that the second detecting assembly is movably in contact with a midline portion of the electrode sheet and coupled to the supporting member.
However, Kurosu teaches a second detecting assembly, the second detecting assembly having a same structure as the first detecting assembly [page 14 paras. 4-6 describe using a first and second displacement sensors with the same configuration]; the movable assembly in the second detecting assembly is configured to be in contact with a midline portion of a length direction of the electrode sheet [Fig. 9 shows that the sensors can be at any point along a length direction of the sheet, therefore conceivably at a midline portion] and be coupled to the supporting member [coupled to rails 4411 and 4412].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Kurosu’s method of using two detecting assemblies with Kondo’s edge detecting apparatus in order to better monitor waviness and make adjustments so that a sheet can be more uniform, as taught by Kurosu [page 4 paras. 1-4].
In regard to claim 9, Kondo does not teach that the first detecting assembly and the second detecting assembly are arranged side by side in a width direction of the electrode sheet.
However, Kurosu teaches that the first detecting assembly and the second detecting assembly are arranged side by side in a width direction of the electrode sheet [Fig. 9 shows an embodiment where the two displacement sensors 442 are arranged along the same axis].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Kurosu’s method of using two detecting assemblies along a same axis with Kondo’s edge detecting apparatus in order to better monitor waviness and make adjustments so that a sheet can be more uniform, as taught by Kurosu [page 4 paras. 1-4].
In regard to claim 10, Kondo further teaches that the connector is provided with a flexible member [contact tip surface 55a described as being made with polytetrafluoroethylene, a material that can be flexible] , and the flexible member is configured to be in contact with the electrode sheet [shown in Fig. 4].
In regard to claim 11, Kondo teaches providing an electrode sheet [metal foil sheet 40a described as an electrode base material page 8 para. 3] and two passing rollers [supply roller 51 and winding roller 52; stretched over two separate rollers (Fig. 4)] and placing the electrode sheet on the two passing rollers for conveying [shown in Fig. 4]; and bringing the movable assembly into contact with the electrode sheet [shown in Fig. 4] and detecting, by the pressure sensor, a variation of an applied force between the movable assembly and the electrode sheet [page 2 para. 4 describes comparing voltage, the voltages being relational to the force applied on the piezoelectric sensor; page 8 para. 8 describes the rotation of the winding roller 52 is determined by the edge detection sensor 54 detecting the edge 40d - thus the power mechanism is moved vertically (compressed or uncompressed) based on the voltage sent to the control unit], to detect an edge of the electrode sheet [page 9 paras. 1-4].
Although Kondo teaches that an apparatus capable of detecting a wavy edge of an electrode sheet, Kondo is not explicit that the apparatus does detect said wavy edge.
However, gauging waviness of a belt or sheet with a sensor is a well-known engineering practice in the art, as exemplified by Kurosu. Kurosu teaches a waviness detection unit [plurality of displacement sensors 442] with a control unit for detecting the waviness of a belt stretched between two rollers [abstract, page 2 para. 6; waviness detected by comparing displacement sensor output over time, page 14 paras. 4-12].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to have used Kurosu's method of using two displacement sensors in order to better monitor waviness and make adjustments so that a sheet can be more uniform, as taught by Kurosu [page 4 paras. 1-4].
In regard to claim 15, Kurosu teaches a controller [page 2 para. 4 describes a control unit in communication with the sensor], the controller being electrically connected to the pressure sensor [page 2 para. 4 describes a control unit in communication with the sensor], the controller being configured to receive an applied force value sent by the pressure sensor [page 2 para. 4 describes comparing voltage, the voltages being relational to the force applied on the piezoelectric sensor] and determine whether the electrode sheet has an edge according to the applied force value [page 9 paras. 1-4].
Although Kondo teaches that an apparatus capable of detecting a wavy edge of an electrode sheet, Kondo is not explicit that the apparatus determines that the edge of the electrode sheet is wavy.
However, gauging waviness of a belt or sheet with a sensor is a well-known engineering practice in the art, as exemplified by Kurosu. Kurosu teaches a waviness detection unit [plurality of displacement sensors 442] with a control unit for detecting the waviness of a belt stretched between two rollers [abstract, page 2 para. 6; waviness detected by comparing displacement sensor output over time, page 14 paras. 4-12].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to have used Kurosu's method of using two displacement sensors in order to better monitor waviness and make adjustments so that a sheet can be more uniform, as taught by Kurosu [page 4 paras. 1-4].
In regard to claim 16, Kondo teaches that the power mechanism is movably coupled to the supporting member [electrode 59 of voltage sensor moves vertically in response to compression/displacement of the contact 55], such that the power mechanism is capable of moving toward a position close to the electrode sheet relative to the supporting member [electrode 59 and contact 55 moving closer to electrode sheet relative to support 56]; the controller is electrically connected to the power mechanism [page 2 para. 4 describes a control unit in communication with the sensor; voltage sensor is part of the power mechanism], and the controller is configured to receive an applied force value sent by the pressure sensor and control movement of the power mechanism according to the applied force value [page 2 para. 4 describes comparing voltage, the voltages being relational to the force applied on the piezoelectric sensor; page 8 para. 8 describes the rotation of the winding roller 52 is determined by the edge detection sensor 54 detecting the edge 40d - thus the power mechanism is moved vertically (compressed or uncompressed) based on the voltage sent to the control unit]; the detecting member further comprises a displacement detecting member coupled to the power mechanism [piezoelectric element 58 measures the displacement of the contact 55 by the force applied to the sensor; page 8 para. 9 - page 9 para. 1], and the displacement detecting member is configured to detect displacement of the power mechanism [page 8 para. 9 - page 9 para. 1]; and
the controller is further electrically connected to the displacement detecting member [voltage values monitored by controller, page 9 paras. 1-4], the controller is further configured to receive displacement sent by the displacement detecting member [voltage values monitored by controller, page 9 paras. 1-4]and determine an edge level of the electrode sheet according to the displacement [page 8 para. 8 describes detecting the edge 40d], and the edge level is a ratio of the displacement to a distance between two passing rollers supporting the electrode sheet [page 8 para. 8 describes that the once the edge is found (displacement is compared), that the sheet is rotated a preset amount, and the distance of that rotation is determined based on dimensions such as A1, A2, and L1 (which are distances between the two rollers shown in Fig. 4); thus the edge level is a ratio of the vertical displacement of the contact 55 and a distance between the rollers].
Kondo is not explicit that the edge level is a wavy edge level.
However, Kurosu teaches determining a wavy edge level of the electrode sheet according to the displacement [page 11 para. 4 describes detecting the wave/undulation level; page 14 para. 1 describes monitoring the undulation level against a predetermined threshold to avoid unnecessary adjustments].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Kurosu’s method of monitoring a wavy edge level with Kondo’s method of measuring an edge level in order to better avoid unnecessary adjustments, as taught by Kurosu [page 14 para. 1].
In regard to claim 17, Kondo further teaches that one end of the connector that is configured to be in contact with the electrode sheet is provided with a smooth rigid member [page 8 para. 4 describes the tip surface 55a as a smooth curved surface contact tip described as being made with polytetrafluoroethylene, a material that can be rigid; seen in contact in Figs. 5a-5b].
In regard to claim 18, Kondo is not explicit in the use of a second detecting assembly with the same structure as the first detecting assembly, such that the second detecting assembly is movably in contact with a midline portion of the electrode sheet and coupled to the supporting member.
However, Kurosu teaches a second detecting assembly, the second detecting assembly having a same structure as the first detecting assembly [page 14 paras. 4-6 describe using a first and second displacement sensors with the same configuration]; the movable assembly in the second detecting assembly is configured to be in contact with a midline portion of a width direction of the electrode sheet [Fig. 9 shows that the sensors can be at any point along a width direction of the sheet, therefore conceivably at a midline portion] and be coupled to the supporting member [coupled to rails 4411 and 4412].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Kurosu’s method of using two detecting assemblies with Kondo’s edge detecting apparatus in order to better monitor waviness and make adjustments so that a sheet can be more uniform, as taught by Kurosu [page 4 paras. 1-4].
In regard to claim 19, Kondo teaches a controller [control unit], and the controller being coupled to the pressure sensor [page 2 para. 4 describes a control unit in communication with the sensor].
Kondo is not explicit as to a second detecting assembly in communication with the controller.
However, Kurosu teaches a controller [control unit] in contact with both the first and second detecting assemblies [page 14 paras. 4-12 describe the displacement of the two sensors being compared to each other via the control unit].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Kurosu’s method of communicating both a first and second detecting assemblies to a control unit with Kondo’s edge detecting unit in order to better monitor waviness, as taught by Kurosu [page 14 paras. 10-12].
In regard to claim 20, Kondo teaches providing an electrode sheet [metal foil sheet 40a described as an electrode base material page 8 para. 3] and two passing rollers [supply roller 51 and winding roller 52; stretched over two separate rollers (Fig. 4)] and placing the electrode sheet on the two passing rollers for conveying [shown in Fig. 4]; and bringing the movable assembly into contact with the electrode sheet [shown in Fig. 4] and detecting, by the pressure sensor, a variation of an applied force between the movable assembly and the electrode sheet [page 2 para. 4 describes comparing voltage, the voltages being relational to the force applied on the piezoelectric sensor; page 8 para. 8 describes the rotation of the winding roller 52 is determined by the edge detection sensor 54 detecting the edge 40d - thus the power mechanism is moved vertically (compressed or uncompressed) based on the voltage sent to the control unit], to detect an edge of the electrode sheet [page 9 paras. 1-4].
Although Kondo teaches that an apparatus capable of detecting a wavy edge of an electrode sheet, Kondo is not explicit that the apparatus does detect said wavy edge.
However, gauging waviness of a belt or sheet with a sensor is a well-known engineering practice in the art, as exemplified by Kurosu. Kurosu teaches a waviness detection unit [plurality of displacement sensors 442] with a control unit for detecting the waviness of a belt stretched between two rollers [abstract, page 2 para. 6; waviness detected by comparing displacement sensor output over time, page 14 paras. 4-12].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to have used Kurosu's method of using two displacement sensors in order to better monitor waviness and make adjustments so that a sheet can be more uniform, as taught by Kurosu [page 4 paras. 1-4].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL QUINN whose telephone number is (571)272-2690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30 PST.
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, JOHN BREENE can be reached at (571)272-4107. 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.
/DANIEL M QUINN/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855