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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 13-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/4/2025.
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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hyun Yeo et al. (KR 102492313 B1 – hereinafter Yeo) in view of Mi Lee et al. (KR 102475580 B1 – hereinafter Lee) and Hyeok Ahn et al. (KR 20180014560 A – hereinafter Ahn).
Regarding claim 1, Yeo teaches an electrode substrate notching device comprising: a first base (Fig. 4, Punch Holder 132) comprising a first holder (Fig. 4, Punch Plate 142); a second holder (Fig. 4, Punch Positioning Block 144) in the first holder; a punch (Fig. 4, Punch 138) in the second holder; a second base (Fig. 4, Die Holder 112); and a die (Fig. 4, Die 122) on the second base positioned towards the punch, wherein a through-hole (Fig. 4, Holes 136) of the first base provides space for a fastener (Fig. 4, Bolt 134) for moving the fastener by a distance in the through-hole.
Yeo does not teach a back plate in the first holder and assembled with a fastener passing through a through-hole of the first base, that the second holder is assembled on the back plate, that the punch is assembled on the back plate, and wherein the distance is greater than an adjustment range of the punch.
However, Lee teaches a back plate (Fig. 2, Punch Plate 34) which is assembled with a first base (Fig. 2, Punch Holder 32), with a second holder (Fig. 2, Stripper 38) assembled on the back plate, and a punch (Fig. 2, Punch 36) assembled on the back plate. In combining Lee with Yeo, this would place the back plate between the first base and the second holder as well as the punch, assuming at least partially the position of the second holder (as it is currently flush with the base), placing it adjacent to and therefore “in” the first holder of Yeo. Further, the existing fastening method between the first base and the punch would now be between the first base and the back plate, and therefore the combination of Lee and Yeo teaches the back plate assembled with a fastener passing through a through-hole of the first base (Fig. 4, Yeo).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yeo to include the limitations of claim 1 above as taught by Lee. Doing so is beneficial as it is well known in the art that the use of a punch backplate can protect the first base or equivalent from undue pressure or damage.
Additionally, Ahn teaches wherein the distance (Fig. 6, distance in either direction between the head of Bolt 113 and the inner walls of Upper Mold 110) is greater than an adjustment range (Fig. 6, distance in either direction between the shank of Bolt 113 and the inner walls of holes 113a) of the punch.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yeo and Lee to include the limitations of claim 1 above as taught by Ahn. Doing so is beneficial as it allows for the size of the workpiece to be further reduced, thus minimizing manufacturing costs (Ahn; Page 5 Para 1).
Regarding claim 2, Yeo further teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 1, wherein the through-hole of the first base comprises: a first opening (Fig. 4, the bottom, lower portion of the Holes 136) at a first portion of the first base, the first opening having a first area (Fig. 4, area defined by a horizontal cross-section of the bottom, lower portion of the Holes 136); and a second opening (Fig. 4, the top, wider portion of the Holes 136) at a second portion of the first opening, the second opening having a second area (Fig. 4, area defined by a horizontal cross-section of the top, wider portion of the Holes 136) that is larger than the first area.
Regarding claim 3, Yeo further teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 2, wherein the through-hole is a slit (Fig. 3, Holes 136).
Regarding claim 4, Yeo further teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 3, wherein the first opening is a first slit of a first length (Fig. 4, length of the first opening in the horizontal direction), and the second opening is a second slit of a second length (Fig. 4, length of the second opening in the horizontal direction) that is longer than the first length.
Regarding claim 5, Yeo further teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 2, wherein the fastener comprises: a fastening portion (Fig. 4, shank of Bolt 134) positioned at the first opening (Fig. 4, the bottom, lower portion of the Holes 136); and a head portion (Fig. 4, head of Bolt 134) positioned at the second opening (Fig. 4, the top, wider portion of the Holes 136) and connected to the fastening portion. The existing combination of Yeo, Lee, and Ahn already teaches the first base attached to the back plate via the fastener, and therefore the fastening portion of Bolt 134 of Yeo would be fastened to the back plate of Lee.
Regarding claim 6, the existing combination of Yeo, Lee, and Ahn already teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 1, wherein the back plate, the second holder, and the punch form a unit (the back plate, second holder, and punch are all connected, and therefore considered by the examiner to be a unit – see the rejection of claim 1 above), and the back plate, the second holder, and the punch are integrally adjusted in the first holder (the second holder and punch are connected only to the back plate, which is adjusted via connected to first base while being in the first holder. As they are all a unit, they are integrally adjusted according to the examiner – See the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 7, the existing combination of Yeo, Lee, and Ahn does not teach the electrode substrate notching device of claim 6, wherein an exterior side of the back plate and the second holder forms a gap with an inner side of the first holder, and wherein the adjustment range of the punch is defined by the gap.
However, Ahn teaches a gap (Fig. 6, gap between Bolt 113 and inside surfaces of Hole 113a) which defines the adjustment range of the punch (Fig. 6, Punch 111). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location of this gap to be between the exterior side of the back plate and the holder and an inner side of the first holder as it has been held that the position of a feature may be in a different location as an obvious matter of design choice as long as it does not modify the operation of the device In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the existing combination of Yeo, Lee, and Ahn to include the limitations of claim 7 above as taught by Ahn. Doing so is beneficial as it allows for movement of the bolt within the confines of the defined gap (Ahn; Page 6 Para 10).
Regarding claim 8, the existing combination of Yeo, Lee, and Ahn already teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 7, wherein the distance is greater than the gap (the distance is greater than the adjustment range (rejection of claim 1) and the adjustment range is defined by the gap (rejection of claim 7), so therefore the distance is greater than the gap).
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hyun Yeo et al. (KR 102492313 B1 – hereinafter Yeo) in view of Mi Lee et al. (KR 102475580 B1 – hereinafter Lee) and Hyeok Ahn et al. (KR 20180014560 A – hereinafter Ahn) as applied to claims 9-12 above, and further in view of Jae Hong (KR 102343200 B1 – hereinafter Hong).
Regarding claim 9, Yeo further teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 1, wherein the second base comprises: a die holder (Fig. 2, Die Plate 116) holding the die (Fig. 2, Die 122); a jig (Fig. 2, Adjustment Unit 160); and an adjusting member (Fig. 2, Bolt 162) configured to adjust a position of the punch inserted into the die (Fig. 4).
The existing combination of Yeo, Lee, and Hyeok does not teach that the jig is in the die holder.
However, Hong teaches a jig (Fig. 14, Support Bar 76) which is in a die holder (Fig. 14, Lower Plate 71a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the existing combination of Yeo, Lee, and Ahn to include the limitations of claim 9 above as taught by Hong as it has been held that the position of a feature may be in a different location as an obvious matter of design choice as long as it does not modify the operation of the device In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding claim 10, Yeo further teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 9, wherein the jig (Fig. 2, Adjustment Unit 160) is in a groove (Fig. 2, groove defined as the space between the offsets at the bottom of Punch Holder 132), and is fastened to the groove with a fastener (Fig. 2; Page 6 Para 10) having a fastening force in a lifting direction of the punch (Fig. 2, it can be seen that holes to secure the jig with fasteners are provided at the bottom of Support Blocks 166, which would result in a fastening force in the lifting direction of the punch). The existing combination of Yeo, Lee, Ahn, and Hong already teaches that the jig is located in the die holder (see the rejection of claim 9 above).
Regarding claim 11, Yeo further teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 10, wherein the adjusting member (Fig. 2, Bolt 162) is screwed to the jig for forward or backward operation on a side of the punch in a direction configured to provide repulsive force to the punch (Fig. 4; Page 7 Para 1).
Regarding claim 12, Yeo further teaches the electrode substrate notching device of claim 11, wherein the adjusting member is arranged in pairs at set intervals in the jig to provide repulsive force to two positions of the punch (Fig. 2, any two of the Bolts 162).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLA LORRAINE KEENA whose telephone number is (571)272-1806. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
/ELLA L KEENA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724