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 statement (IDS) submitted on 4/22/2024 and 4/7/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered and attached by the examiner.
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.
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 detection module in claim 1, 4, 5, and 11-16 described in ¶76.
a first image acquisition module in claim 1, 3, 6, and 16-17 described in ¶69.
a second image acquisition module in claim 4, 8, 18 described in ¶69.
a third image acquisition module in claim 5 and 19 described in ¶69.
a submodule in claim 8-9 described in ¶123.
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 § 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 1-11, 13, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover mental process (concept performed in a human mind, including as observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion, organizing human activity and mathematical concepts and calculations). The independent claim(s) 1 and 16 recite(s) an apparatus and method of detecting an electrode plate. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the steps do not add meaningful limitations to be considered specifically applied to a particular technological problem to be solved .The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the steps can be done mentally and no additional features in the claims would preclude them from being performed as such except for the generic computer elements as a high level of generality (i.e. processor, memory).
According to the USPTO guidelines, a claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter if:
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis:
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
Using the two-step inquiry, it is clear that claims 1 and 16 are directed to an abstract idea as shown below:
STEP 1: Do the claims fall within one of the statutory categories?
YES. Independent claim(s) 1 and 16 are directed to an apparatus and a process.
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon or an abstract idea?
YES , the claims are directed toward a mental process (i.e. abstract idea).
With regard to STEP 2A (PRONG 1), the guidelines provide three groupings of subject matter that are considered abstract ideas:
Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations;
Certain methods of organizing human activity – fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions); and
Mental processes – concepts that are practicably performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion).
The apparatus in claim 1 (and the method in claim 16) comprise a mental process that can be practicably performed in the human mind (or generic computers or components configured to perform the method) and, therefore, an abstract idea.
Regarding Claim(s) 1 and 16: the method recites the steps (functions) of:
acquire images of different coating regions on an electrode plate (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind);
send the images of the different coating regions to the detection module (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind);
detect the electrode plate according to the images of the different coating regions (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
These limitations, as drafted, is a simple process that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind or by a human. The Examiner notes that under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III), the courts consider a mental process (thinking) that “can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper" to be an abstract idea. CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As the Federal Circuit explained, "methods which can be performed mentally, or which are the equivalent of human mental work, are unpatentable abstract ideas the ‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ that are open to all.’" 654 F.3d at 1371, 99 USPQ2d at 1694 (citing Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673 (1972)). See also Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 71, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965 ("‘[M]ental processes and abstract intellectual concepts are not patentable, as they are the basic tools of scientific and technological work’" (quoting Benson, 409 U.S. at 67, 175 USPQ at 675)); Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 589, 198 USPQ 193, 197 (1978) (same).
As such, a person could simply receive images and look at them to determine the electrode plate and any defects on the plate if any, either mentally or using a pen and paper. The mere nominal recitation that the various steps are being executed by a device/in a device (e.g. processing unit) does not take the limitations out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claims recite a mental process.
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
NO, the claims do not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
With regard to STEP 2A (prong 2), whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, the guidelines provide the following exemplary considerations that are indicative that an additional element (or combination of elements) may have integrated the judicial exception into a practical application:
an additional element reflects an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field;
an additional element that applies or uses a judicial exception to affect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition;
an additional element implements a judicial exception with, or uses a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim;
an additional element effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and
an additional element applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
While the guidelines further state that the exemplary considerations are not an exhaustive list and that there may be other examples of integrating the exception into a practical application, the guidelines also list examples in which a judicial exception has not been integrated into a practical application:
an additional element merely recites the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea;
an additional element adds insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; and
an additional element does no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Claim(s) 1 and 16 do not recite any of the exemplary considerations that are indicative of an abstract idea having been integrated into a practical application. Claim(s) 1 recite(s) the further limitations of:
An electrode plate detection apparatus, comprising a detection module and a first image acquisition module (generic computers or components configured to perform the method);
the first image acquisition module is configured to acquire images of different coating regions on an electrode plate (insignificant pre extra activity of generating data);
send the images of the different coating regions to the detection module (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data);
These limitations are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general action or change being taken based on the results of the acquiring step) and amounts to mere post solution actions, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the claims are claimed generically and are operating in their ordinary capacity such that they do not use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
NO, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
With regard to STEP 2B, whether the claims recite additional elements that provide significantly more than the recited judicial exception, the guidelines specify that the pre-guideline procedure is still in effect. Specifically, that examiners should continue to consider whether an additional element or combination of elements:
adds a specific limitation or combination of limitations that are not well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, which is indicative that an inventive concept may be present; or
simply appends well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, which is indicative that an inventive concept may not be present.
Claim 1 does not recite any additional elements that are not well-understood, routine or conventional. The use of a computer to acquire, detect and send, as claimed in Claim(s) 1 is a routine, well-understood and conventional process that is performed by computers.
Thus, since Claims 1 and 16 are: (a) directed toward an abstract idea, (b) do not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, and (c) do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, it is clear that Claims 1 and 16 are not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C 101.
Regarding claim 2: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the images of the different coating regions comprise a first film area image and a first coating image of a first surface of the electrode plate (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
Regarding claim 3: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the first image acquisition module acquires the first film area image and the first coating image of the first surface of the electrode plate by means of a time-division exposure method; and wherein the time-division exposure method comprises performing image acquisition at different time points by using different exposure parameters (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data).
Regarding claim 4: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): a second image acquisition module in communication connection with the detection module (generic computers or components configured to perform the method) wherein the second image acquisition module is configured to acquire a second film area image and a second coating image of a second surface of the electrode plate by means of a time-division exposure method (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data) and sends the second film area image and the second coating image to the detection module (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data); and wherein the detection module is further configured to detect the second surface of the electrode plate according to the second film area image and the second coating image (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
Regarding claim 5: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): a third image acquisition module in communication connection with the detection module (generic computers or components configured to perform the method); wherein the third image acquisition module is configured to acquire a tab image, and send the tab image to the detection module (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data); and wherein the detection module is further configured to perform quality detection on a tab on the electrode plate according to the tab image. (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
Regarding claim 6: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the first image acquisition module comprises a first image collector and a first light source (generic computers or components configured to perform the method); the first light source is configured to perform exposure twice with different intensities according to a first exposure time and a first exposure time interval (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data); and the first image collector is configured to perform image acquisition on the electrode plate during exposure of the first light source, so as to obtain the first film area image and the first coating image (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data).
Regarding claim 7: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the first exposure time is shorter than a time for the first image collector to scan a line, and the first exposure time interval is determined according to a line frequency of a standard camera and a line frequency corresponding to the first image collector (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data).
Regarding claim 8: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the second image acquisition module comprises at least one submodule (generic computers or components configured to perform the method), and each of the submodules is configured to acquire a second film area image and a second coating image of a corresponding segmented electrode plate (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data).
Regarding claim 9: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein each of the submodules comprises a second image collector and a second light source (generic computers or components configured to perform the method); the second light source is configured to perform exposure twice with different intensities according to a second exposure time and a second exposure time interval; and the second image collector is configured to perform image acquisition on the electrode plate during exposure of the second light source, so as to obtain the second film area image and the second coating image of the corresponding segmented electrode plate (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data)
Regarding claim 10: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the second exposure time is shorter than a time for the second image collector to scan a line, and the second exposure time interval is determined according to a line frequency of a standard camera and a line frequency corresponding to the second image collector (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data).
Regarding claim 11: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the detection module is specifically configured to perform size measurement and defect detection on the first coating image and/or the second coating image respectively after receiving the first coating image and/or the second coating image (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
Regarding claim 13: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the detection module is specifically configured to perform size measurement and defect detection on the first film area image and/or the second film area image (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind) respectively after receiving the first film area image and/or the second film area image (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data), so as to obtain a first film area size corresponding to the first film area image and/or a second film area size corresponding to the second film area image and a defect position (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
Regarding claim 15: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the detection module is specifically configured to perform tab size measurement on the tab image after receiving the tab image, and/or detect a tab defect to mark the tab defect. (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
Regarding claim 17: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein receiving images of different coating regions of the electrode plate acquired by the first image acquisition module comprises: receiving a first film area image and a first coating image of a first surface of the electrode plate acquired by the first image acquisition module by means of a time-division exposure method (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data).
Regarding claim 18: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the electrode plate detection apparatus further comprises a second image acquisition module (generic computers or components configured to perform the method), and the method further comprises: receiving a second film area image and a second coating image of a second surface of the electrode plate acquired by the second image acquisition module, the second film area image and the second coating image being acquired by the second image acquisition module by means of a time-division exposure method (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data); and performing size measurement and defect detection on the second film area image and the second coating image, so as to obtain a second detection result of the electrode plate (mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
Regarding claim 19: the additional limitations do not integrate the mental process into practical application or add significantly more to the mental process. The limitation(s): wherein the electrode plate detection apparatus further comprises a third image acquisition module (generic computers or components configured to perform the method), and the method further comprises: receiving a tab image acquired by the third image acquisition module (insignificant pre/post-solution extra activity of generating data); and performing tab size measurement and tab defect detection on the tab image, so as to obtain a third detection result of the electrode plate(mental process including observation and evaluation, and can be done mentally in the human mind).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang (CN-113592845-A).
Regarding Claim 1, Yang teaches An electrode plate detection apparatus, comprising a detection module and a first image acquisition module, wherein (Fig. 1; ¶62 Referring to FIG. 1, the embodiment of the invention claims a defect detection device of battery coating, mainly comprising a rotating mechanism and a detecting mechanism; ¶65 the detecting mechanism further comprises a light source 131 and a camera 132, a light source 131 and a camera 132 is set on the other side of the battery coating L and close to the B position, the light source 131 on the battery coating L transmission path on the B position to irradiate)
the first image acquisition module is configured to acquire images of different coating regions on an electrode plate, and send the images of the different coating regions to the detection module; and (¶58 the coating defect detection work of the battery electrode plate is found out of the defect position and defect type from the coated battery plate, different battery plate production factories will generate different types of coating defects in the coating process, even if the same coating device under different production conditions; ¶68 a frame to-be-detected image generated by the camera 122 or camera 132 can refer to FIG. 2, which comprises a coating area 21, 23, and a substrate area 22, and the substrate area 22 is just as the interval between the coating area 21, 23. In FIG. 2, the naked eye can find that there is a loophole 211 on the coating area 21, and there are some scratches 221 on the substrate area 22. Then, the purpose of using the processor 14 is to accurately detect the to-be-detected image in the coating defect (such as vulnerability 211, scratch 221), and the processor 14 in the execution of the battery coating defect detection method will be described in the second embodiment of the specific description.)
the detection module is configured to detect the electrode plate according to the images of the different coating regions (¶71 step 100, obtaining the image to be detected of the battery coating. For example, in FIG. 1 processor 14 from the camera 122 and camera 132 receiving camera itself image to be detected generated by the image; ¶75 step 300, detecting the image characteristic of the coating area.)
Regarding claim 2, Yang teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the images of the different coating regions comprise a first film area image and a first coating image of a first surface of the electrode plate (Yang, ¶68 a frame to-be-detected image generated by the camera 122 or camera 132 can refer to FIG. 2, which comprises a coating area 21, 23, and a substrate area 22, and the substrate area 22 is just as the interval between the coating area 21, 23.)
Claim 16 recites limitations similar to claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN-113592845-A) in view of Soga (WO 2011/145210).
Regarding Claim 3, Yang teaches the apparatus according to claim 2.
Yang does not explicitly disclose wherein the first image acquisition module acquires the first film area image and the first coating image of the first surface of the electrode plate by means of a time-division exposure method; and wherein the time-division exposure method comprises performing image acquisition at different time points by using different exposure parameters.
Soga is in the same field of art of image analysis. Further, Soga teaches wherein the first image acquisition module acquires the first film area image and the first coating image of the first surface of the electrode plate by means of a time-division exposure method; and wherein the time-division exposure method comprises performing image acquisition at different time points by using different exposure parameters (¶20 In order to achieve the above object, the present invention provides a first region (510) having a first reflectance and a second region (520) having a second reflectance larger than the first reflectance. ) Having a first exposure time (T1) suitable for exposure of the first region (510). The first image (1081) in which the region (510) and the second region (520) are exposed, and the exposure of the second region (520) that is shorter than the first exposure time (T1). A second image (1082) in which the first region (510) and the second region (520) are exposed for a second exposure time (T2) suitable for the same time is generated during one image capture period.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yang by imaging with a time divisions exposure method that is taught by Soga; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references to generate images under the optimum conditions (Soga ¶11).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 4, Yang in view of Soga discloses the apparatus according to claim 2, further comprising:
a second image acquisition module in communication connection with the detection module; wherein the second image acquisition module is configured to acquire a second film area image and a second coating image of a second surface of the electrode plate (Yang, ¶71 step 100, obtaining the image to be detected of the battery coating. For example, in FIG. 1 processor 14 from the camera 122 and camera 132 receiving camera itself image to be detected generated by the image.)
wherein the detection module is further configured to detect the second surface of the electrode plate according to the second film area image and the second coating image (Yang, ¶75 step 300, detecting the image characteristic of the coating area, analyzing to obtain the first defect in the coating area; and/or, detecting the image characteristic of the substrate area, analyzing to obtain the second defect in the substrate area.)
wherein the second image acquisition module is configured to acquire a second film area image by means of a time-division exposure method (Soga, ¶20 In order to achieve the above object, the present invention provides a first region (510) having a first reflectance and a second region (520) having a second reflectance larger than the first reflectance. ) Having a first exposure time (T1) suitable for exposure of the first region (510). The first image (1081) in which the region (510) and the second region (520) are exposed, and the exposure of the second region (520) that is shorter than the first exposure time (T1). A second image (1082) in which the first region (510) and the second region (520) are exposed for a second exposure time (T2) suitable for the same time is generated during one image capture period.)
The reasons for combining Yang and Soga are similar to that stated in the rejection of claim 3. In addition, this same reasoning is pertinent and applicable to the rejections of claims 6 and 9 below.
Regarding Claim 6, Yang in view of Soga discloses the apparatus according to claim 2, wherein
the first image acquisition module comprises a first image collector and a first light source (Yang, ¶64 wherein the detecting mechanism comprises a light source 121 and a camera 122, a light source 121 and a camera 122 is set on one side of the battery coating L and close to the A position, the light source 121 to the battery coating L transmission path on the A position to irradiate;)
the first light source is configured to perform exposure twice with different intensities according to a first exposure time and a first exposure time interval; and (Soga, ¶87 The lengths of the exposure time T1 and the exposure time T2 vary depending on the reflectance of the first region 510 of the measurement object 500, the reflectance of the second region 520, and the intensity (light quantity) of the light source used.)
the first image collector is configured to perform image acquisition on the electrode plate during exposure of the first light source, so as to obtain the first film area image and the first coating image (Yang, ¶64 then the camera 122 images the one side surface coated by the battery at the position A through the camera; For example, A position is set on the side of the roller 102, camera 122 collects the battery coating L on one side of the image.)
Regarding Claim 8, Yang in view of Soga discloses the apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the second image acquisition module comprises at least one submodule, and each of the submodules is configured to acquire a second film area image and a second coating image of a corresponding segmented electrode plate (Yang, ¶14 the binarization image for morphological image processing and region profile segmentation processing to obtain at least one coating area and/or at least one substrate area, comprising: performing morphological transformation on the binarization image, and obtaining multiple first regions and corresponding profile data respectively connectivity analysis and characteristic filter the morphological transformation comprises one or more of expansion, corrosion, opening operation, closed operation and gradient operation.)
Regarding Claim 9, Yang in view of Soga discloses the apparatus according to claim 8, wherein
each of the submodules comprises a second image collector and a second light source; the second light source is configured to perform exposure twice with different intensities according to a second exposure time and a second exposure time interval; and the second image collector is configured to perform image acquisition on the electrode plate during exposure of the second light source, so as to obtain the second film area image and the second coating image of the corresponding segmented electrode plate (Soga, ¶102 Table 1 shows the measured values of the exposure time T [μsec], the luminance L1a of the coating unit 510 when an LED is used as a light source, and the luminance L2a of the coating unit 510 when a metal halide is used as a light source; ¶105 When an LED was used as the light source, the exposure time corresponding to luminance 30 was 30 μsec, and the exposure time corresponding to luminance 220 was 220 μsec. Therefore, it has been found that when the LED is used as the light source, the optimum exposure time for the coating portion 510 is 30 to 220 μsec; ¶106 When metal halide was used as the light source, the exposure time corresponding to luminance 30 was 10 μsec, and the exposure time corresponding to luminance 220 was 75 μsec. Therefore, it has been found that when a metal halide is used as the light source, the optimum exposure time for the coating portion 510 is 10 to 75 μsec.)
Regarding Claim 11, Yang in view of Soga discloses the apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the detection module is specifically configured to perform size measurement and defect detection on the first coating image and/or the second coating image respectively after receiving the first coating image and/or the second coating image (Yang, ¶74 It can be understood that the image to be detected is the imaging result of a section of coating on the battery coating, the size of the coating area and the aluminum foil area on the one section, the number is not fixed, then the result of the area positioning in the image to be detected is not unique, so as to obtain at least one coating area and/or at least one substrate area; ¶75 step 300, detecting the image characteristic of the coating area.)
Regarding Claim 13, Yang in view of Soga discloses the apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the detection module is specifically configured to perform size measurement and defect detection on the first film area image and/or the second film area image respectively after receiving the first film area image and/or the second film area image, so as to obtain a first film area size corresponding to the first film area image and/or a second film area size corresponding to the second film area image and a defect position (Yang, ¶74 It can be understood that the image to be detected is the imaging result of a section of coating on the battery coating, the size of the coating area and the aluminum foil area on the one section, the number is not fixed, then the result of the area positioning in the image to be detected is not unique, so as to obtain at least one coating area and/or at least one substrate area; ¶75 step 300, detecting the image characteristic of the coating area.)
Claim 17 recites limitations similar to claim 3 and is rejected under the same rationale and reasoning.
Claim 18 recites limitations similar to claim 11 and is rejected under the same rationale and reasoning.
Claims 5, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN-113592845-A) in view of Zheng (CN-113313711-A).
Regarding Claim 5, Yang teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising:
wherein the detection module is further configured to perform quality detection on a tab on the electrode plate according to the tab image (Yang, ¶156 as long as using the defect detection method disclosed in the embodiment of the battery coating to be detected image processing, can know the battery coating on which position has a type of defect; It provides convenience for the user to know the quality of the product of the battery coating and the repairing defect.)
Yang does not explicitly disclose a third image acquisition module in communication connection with the detection module; wherein the third image acquisition module is configured to acquire a tab image, and send the tab image to the detection module;
Zheng is in the same field of art of image analysis. Further, Zheng teaches a third image acquisition module in communication connection with the detection module (Zheng, ¶68 comprising at least one frame 200, each frame 200 is provided with at least one of the camera 100, each camera 100 the width information detected is insulating coating dressing width;)
wherein the third image acquisition module is configured to acquire a tab image, and send the tab image to the detection module; and (Zheng, ¶68 Referring to FIG. 3, in some embodiments, it further claims a lithium battery pole piece width detection system, comprising at least one frame 200, each frame 200 is provided with at least one of the camera 100, each camera 100 the width information detected is insulating coating dressing width, the tab white width; pole piece coating area width, one of the whole width of the current collector; ¶69 Specifically, referring to FIG. 4 and FIG. 5, the anode pole piece as shown in FIG. 4, A area is pole ear white area, B area is insulating coating dressing area, C area is coating area, D area is the whole current collector area; the negative pole piece is shown in FIG. 5, A area is tab white area, C area is coating area, D area is the whole current collector area.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yang by getting a tab image that is taught by Zheng; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references to improve accuracy of detection (Zheng ¶36).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 15, Yang in view of Zheng discloses the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the detection module is specifically configured to perform tab size measurement on the tab image after receiving the tab image, and/or detect a tab defect to mark the tab defect (Zheng, ¶68 Referring to FIG. 3, in some embodiments, it further claims a lithium battery pole piece width detection system, comprising at least one frame 200, each frame 200 is provided with at least one of the camera 100, each camera 100 the width information detected is insulating coating dressing width, the tab white width; pole piece coating area width, one of the whole width of the current collector;
¶69 Specifically, referring to FIG. 4 and FIG. 5, the anode pole piece as shown in FIG. 4, A area is pole ear white area, B area is insulating coating dressing area, C area is coating area, D area is the whole current collector area; the negative pole piece is shown in FIG. 5, A area is tab white area, C area is coating area, D area is the whole current collector area.)
Claim 19 recites limitations similar to claim 15 and is rejected under the same rationale and reasoning.
Claims 12, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN-113592845-A) in view of Soga (WO 2011/145210) in view of Bi (CN-216066050-U).
Regarding Claim 12, Yang in view of Soga teaches the apparatus according to claim 11.
Yang in view of Soga does not explicitly disclose wherein the detection module is further configured to send a die-cutting deviation correction signal to a die-cutting deviation correction apparatus in a die-cutting process system under a condition that it is determined that there is a coating deviation according to a first coating size and/or a second coating size.
Bi is in the same field of art of image analysis. Further, Bi teaches wherein the detection module is further configured to send a die-cutting deviation correction signal to a die-cutting deviation correction apparatus in a die-cutting process system under a condition that it is determined that there is a coating deviation according to a first coating size and/or a second coating size (Bi, ¶13 In the technical solution of the embodiment of the invention, the width of the die-cutting pole piece is detected by setting the die-cutting detection module, the width of the pole piece raw material is returned to the control module, the cutting position of the cutting machine is adjusted by the control module to adjust the width of the die-cutting pole piece so as to meet the preset width. the control module can pre-store the preset required width of the die-cutting pole piece, so that the die-cutting pole piece die-cutting width cannot accurately control the problem to be overcome.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yang in view of Soga by sending the information to a die-cutting apparatus that is taught by Bi; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references to accurately control die-cutting width (Bi ¶10).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 14, Yang in view of Soga in view of Bi discloses the apparatus according to claim 13, wherein the detection module is further configured to send a slitting deviation correction signal to a slitting deviation correction apparatus in a die-cutting process system when determining that there is a film area deviation according to the first film area size and the second film area size (Bi, ¶22 the cutting device comprises two cutting detection module, two cutting detection module respectively used for detecting the width of two cutting pole piece. setting two cutting detection module to detect the width of two cutting pole pieces, once the width of two cutting pole pieces is different, it can obtain timely feedback, using to adjust the position of cutting pole piece of cutting machine, ensuring the width of the two cutting pole pieces to be adjusted to be consistent; finally reaching the technical effect of improving the product consistency of the slitting pole piece.)
Claim 20 recites limitations similar to claim 12 and is rejected under the same rationale and reasoning.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 7, no prior art teaches wherein the first exposure time is shorter than a time for the first image collector to scan a line, and the first exposure time interval is determined according to a line frequency of a standard camera and a line frequency corresponding to the first image collector.
Regarding claim 10, no prior art teaches wherein the second exposure time is shorter than a time for the second image collector to scan a line, and the second exposure time interval is determined according to a line frequency of a standard camera and a line frequency corresponding to the second image collector.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUSTIN BILODEAU whose telephone number is (571)272-1032. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Jennifer Mehmood can be reached at (571) 272-2976. 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.
/DUSTIN BILODEAU/Examiner, Art Unit 2664
/JENNIFER MEHMOOD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2664