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 .
The amendment filed 1/7/26 has been considered and entered. Claims 21-24 have been added. Claims 1-24 remain in the application for prosecution thereof.
Considering the amendment and response filed 1/7/26, the 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections have been withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1,2,5,6,8,9,11,12,18 and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO2005/094147.
Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) teaches calendaring of electrode with enhanced edge quality. Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) teaches coating a first portion of the current collector with active material with a coating roller and also applying to the bare areas at a second portion of the current collector a supporting material whereby the supporting material aids in distributing stress across the active material and removing the supporting material after calendaring (abstract and [0004]-[0014]). Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) teaches this distribution of stress lead to reduced wrinkling of the active material from the calendaring step [0033]-[0034].
Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) fails to teach removing the supporting material by brushing, laser processing, etching, vacuum or any combination of these as it teaches removing by a rewind roller.
WO 2005/094147 teaches removing a layer by brushing or sucking (claimed vacuum) (pg. 6, lines 1-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) removal process to include brushing or vacuum as evidenced by WO 2005/094147 with the expectation of similar success, i.e. removal of unwanted layer.
Regarding claim 1, WO 2005/094147 teaches removing a layer by brushing or sucking (claimed vacuum) (pg. 6, lines 1-6).
Regarding claim 5, Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) teaches the thickens to be selected to even distribute the stress and mimics the coating thickness of the active layer which would have a thickness be within 10 microns [0004],[0009],[0015]
Regarding claims 6,8,18 and 20, Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) teaches coating the active material can include slot die coating [0040] which would also suggest that the supporting material could also be applied this way as well as a known coating process.
Regarding claim 7 and 19, Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) teaches cold spray for applying the supporting material [0049].
Regarding claims 9 and 15, Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) teaches using a heated roll press for calendaring which would meet the claimed drying step [0054].
Regarding claims 22 and 23, WO 2005/094147 teaches removing a layer by brushing or sucking (claimed vacuum) (pg. 6, lines 1-6). Etching and laser processing are known removal processes and one skilled in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of achieving similar success regardless of the removal process utilized absent a showing of criticality thereof.
Regarding claim 24, WO 2005/094147 teaches removing a layer by brushing or sucking (claimed vacuum) (pg. 6, lines 1-6).
Claims 3,4,10 and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO 2005/094147 further in combination with Nishiyama et al. (2024/0162432).
Features detailed above concerning the teachings of Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO 2005/094147 are incorporated here.
Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO2005/094147 fails to teach slitting the coated web into electrodes.
Nishiyama et al. (2024/0162432) teaches electrode forming produces whereby an electrode slurry is applied to a foil at a thickness of 20 microns, dried, rolled and then cut out into a shape having the coated portion [0226].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art to have modified Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO2005/094147 process to include a cutting step (claimed slitting) as evidenced by Nishiyama et al. (2024/0162432) with the expectation of producing the proper sized electrodes for battery manufacturing thereof.
Regarding claims 9 and 15, Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) teaches using a heated roll press which would dry the coatings as well as Nishiyama et al. (2024/0162432) teaching drying before rolling and cutting.
Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO2005/094147 in combination with Zhang et al. (2022/0384772).
Features detailed above concerning the teachings of Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO2005/094147 are incorporated here.
Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO2005/094147 fails to teach coating the current collector with the electrode material by spraying.
Zhang et al. (2022/0384772) teaches a coating device for applying an electrode using a die head (252) and spraying the electrode material onto the collector (10) ([0048],[0089]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ellison et al. (2025/0096225) in combination with WO2005/094147 process to applying the electrode material to the collector by spraying as evidenced by Zhang et al. (2022/0384772) with the expectation of producing the electrode layer thereon.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argued the prior art fails to teach the removing the supporting layer by brushing, etching, laser processing, vacuum or any combination of these methods of removal.
WO2005/094147 teaches these removal processing steps as detailed above.
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 BRIAN K TALBOT whose telephone number is (571)272-1428. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 7-4PM.
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, MICHAEL CLEVELAND can be reached on 571-272-1418. 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.
/BRIAN K TALBOT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712