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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 05/09/2024, 03/07/2025, and 01/08/2026 are being considered by the examiner. For IDS submitted on 05/09/2013, the foreign patent document listed as “10910472” from the European Patent Office, with the publication date of 2020-06-21 and the Assignee as Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. LTD. appears to be incorrect. For examination purposes, examiner is using the document with the number “1010472” from the European Patent Office with the publication date 2020-06-21 and the Assignee as Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. LTD.
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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: “driving assemblies” in claim 8.
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. The specification discloses in paragraphs 22-24 that the “driving assemblies” configured to drive the regulators to move include a mounting piece connected to the die head body and a driving piece that can be rotatably threaded through a mounting hole. The language in claim 8 will be interpreted as requiring the disclosed structure in paragraphs 22-24 or their equivalents.
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 § 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.
Claim 11, 18, and 20 is/are 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.
Regarding claim 11, the term “close” recited in claim 11, line 6, describes the relative position of the first end of the driving piece to the regulator renders the claim ambiguous and uncertain. Furthermore, the specification fails to provide an objective description (such as dimensions or relative proportions) to define what the structural size of “close” is intended to be. For examination purposes, close is being interpreted to be of any distance between the respective elements. Clarification and/or correction is/are required.
Similarly, the term “away” recited in claim 11, line 7, describes the relative position of the second end of the driving piece to the regulator and renders the claim ambiguous and uncertain. Furthermore, the specification fails to provide an objective description (such as dimensions or relative proportions) to define what the structural dimension of what “away” is intended to be. As such, one skilled in the art could not determine with reasonable certainty the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. For examination purposes, examiner is interpreting away as being distance in any direction from the regulator. Clarification and/or correction is/are required.
Regarding claim 18, the term “away” recited in claim 18, line 18, describes the relative position of an end of the connecting piece to the regulator and renders the claim ambiguous and uncertain. Furthermore, the specification fails to provide an objective description (such as dimensions or relative proportions) to define what the structural dimension of what “away” is intended to be. As such, one skilled in the art could not determine with reasonable certainty the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. For examination purposes, examiner is interpreting away as being a distance in any direction from the regulator. Clarification and/or correction is/are required.
Regarding claim 20, the term “away” recited in claim 20, line 7, describes the relative position of the outlet section and the body section of the discharge channel. Furthermore, the specification fails to provide an objective description (such as dimensions or relative proportions) to define what the structural dimension of what “away” is intended to be. As such, one skilled in the art could not determine with reasonable certainty the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. For examination purposes, examiner is interpreting away as being a distance in any direction from the regulator. Clarification and/or correction is/are required.
Claim Rejections
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang (CN 207823317U).
Regarding claim 1, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10), wherein a discharge channel (S) communicating with an external environment (implicitly understood to be where the fluid flows out of the discharge channel (S) into environment) is disposed on the die head body (10), the discharge channel (S) comprises a discharge port (edge of discharge channel) that extends along a first direction (length of the die head body 10), and the first direction intersects a discharge direction of the discharge channel (S); and at least two regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) are disposed on the die head body (10) and distributed along the first direction (length of the die head body 10), at least a part of each regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) is movable in the discharge channel (S) along a second direction (vertical direction in Annotated Figure 2A) that is perpendicular to the discharge direction (see Annotated Figure 2A) and the first direction (length of the die head body 10), and a dimension along the first direction differs between the at least two regulators (width between the regulators along the first direction can differ). (See [AltContent: textbox (Annotated Figure 2A from CN207823317U)][AltContent: textbox (Die head body 10)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First direction)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Discharge direction)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Second direction)]Yang paragraphs 27-29, 33; Figure 2A; Annotated Figure 2A shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
255
363
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Width between regulators can differ)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Main coating region)][AltContent: textbox (Edge coating region)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Regulators in main coating region)][AltContent: textbox (Regulators in edge coating region)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Annotated Figure 2B from CN207823317U)]Regarding claim 2, Yang teaches the apparatus as discussed above. Furthermore, Yang teaches the discharge channel (S) comprises a main coating region (towards center as shown in Annotated Figure 2B) and an edge region (towards the ends as shown in Annotated Figure 2B) in the first direction (length of the die head body 10), the edge region is located at an edge of the main coating region, and the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) is disposed in both the main coating region and the edge region. (See Yang paragraphs 33-34; Figure 2B; Annotated Figure 2B shown below).
Regarding claim 3, Yang teaches the apparatus as discussed above. Furthermore, Yang teaches that in the first direction (length of the die head body 10), a length value (width between) of the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) located in the main coating region (towards center as shown in Annotated Figure 3B) is set to be different from a length value of the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) located in the edge region (towards the ends as shown in Annotated Figure 3B where the width between regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) at the end regions is smaller than the width of those in the main region). (See Yang paragraphs 33-34; Figure 3B: Annotated Figure 3B shown below).
PNG
media_image5.png
298
524
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Regulators in main region)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Regulators in edge region)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Width between regulators can differ)][AltContent: textbox (Main coating region)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Edge coating region)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 3: Annotated Figure 3B from CN207823317U)]
Regarding claim 4, Yang teaches the apparatus as discussed above and that in the first direction, the length value of the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) located in the main coating region is greater than the length value (width between) of the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16)located in the edge region (see Annotated Figure 3B shown above). (See Yang paragraphs 33-34; Figure 3B; Annotated Figure 3B shown above).
Regarding claim 5, Yang teaches the apparatus as discussed above. Furthermore, Yang teaches an embodiment where the number of regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) located in the main coating region is less than the number of the regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) located in the edge region. As shown in Annotated Figure 3B above, there are two regulators in the main region and nine regulators in each of the end regions. (See Yang paragraphs 34-37; Figure 3B; Annotated Figure 3B shown above).
Regarding claim 6, Yang teaches the apparatus as discussed above and an embodiment where the regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) disposed in the main coating region along the first direction (length of the die head body 10) have length values (width between) where at least some of the regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) located in the main coating region are set to be identical (where the widths between all the regulators are equal as shown in Annotated Figure 4A below). (See Yang paragraph 38; Figure 4A; Annotated Figure 4A shown below).
PNG
media_image7.png
287
355
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Width between all regulators are equal)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Annotated Figure 4A from CN207823317U)]Regarding claim 7, Yang teaches the apparatus as discussed above and an embodiment where the regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) disposed in the edge coating region along the first direction (length of the die head body 10) have length values (width between) where at least some of the regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) located in the edge coating region are set to be identical (where the widths between all the regulators are equal). (See Yang paragraph 38; Figure 4A; Annotated Figure 4A shown below).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 8-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN 207823317U) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hu (CN 112007824A).
Regarding claim 8, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not disclose at least two driving assemblies disposed on the outer surface of the die head body (10) where the drive assemblies are configured to drive the regulators (adjustment mechanism 16) to move. (See Yang paragraphs 27-29).
Hu teaches a coating die head for coating battery pole pieces where at least two driving assemblies (with a micrometer head 12 and a coupling 14) are disposed on an outer surface of the die head body (upper die head 1), and the driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) are configured to drive the regulators (flow throttling block 9) to move. Hu further teaches that this design allows for one-to-one positioning and these [driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and a coupling 14)] can match slight differences between different brands and models making this invention more adaptable (These components are shown in Annotated Figure 3 and Annotated Figure 5 shown below). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a coating die head (upper die head 1) with at least two driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14), on the outer surface, configured to drive the regulators (flow throttling block 9) to move. (See Hu paragraphs 39-41; Figure 3, Figure 5; Annotated Figure 3,
PNG
media_image9.png
194
459
media_image9.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox ( Annotated Figure 3 from CN 112007824A)][AltContent: textbox (Regulators (flow throttling blocks 9))][AltContent: textbox (Die head body (Upper die head 1))][AltContent: textbox (Driving assemblies with driving piece (micrometer head 12) and mounting piece (coupling 14))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]and Annotated Figure 5 shown below).
[AltContent: textbox (Mounting groove (adjusting groove 8))]
PNG
media_image11.png
328
316
media_image11.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox ( Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A)]
Regarding claim 9, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a connecting piece, wherein the connecting piece connects the driving assembly and the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16), the die head body with a communicating hole that communicates with the discharge channel (S), and the connecting piece that passes through the communicating hole and is connected to the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16). (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a coating die head for coating battery pole pieces where the connecting piece (adjustment rod 13) connects the driving assembly (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) and the regulator (flow throttling block 9), the die head body (upper die head 1) with a communicating hole (illustrated by a dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 2 shown below) that communicates with the discharge channel (slot 41), and the connecting piece (adjustment rod 13) that passes through the communicating hole (illustrated by a dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 2 shown below) and is connected to the regulator (flow throttling block 9). As mentioned above, Hu teaches that this design allows for one-to-one positioning and can match slight differences between brands and models making the invention more adaptable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a coating die head (upper die head 1) with a connecting piece (adjustment rod 13) connected to the regulator (flow throttling block 9). (See Hu paragraphs 39-42; Figure 2; Annotated Figure 2 shown below).
[AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Communicating hole)]
Regarding claim 10, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach driving assemblies that comprise a mounting piece that is disposed on the die head body, a driving piece that is connected to the mounting piece and a connecting piece, and the driving piece is able to drive the connecting piece to move, so as to cause the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) to move. (See Yang paragraphs 27-29).
Hu teaches a coating die head for coating battery pole pieces where the driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) comprise a mounting piece (coupling 14) that is disposed on the die head body (upper die head 1), a driving piece (micrometer head 12) that is connected to the mounting piece (coupling 14) and a connecting piece (adjusting rod 13), and the driving piece (micrometer head 12) is able to drive the connecting piece (adjusting rod 13) to move, so as to cause the regulator (flow throttling block 9) to move. Hu teaches that this allows the height of each [regulator (flow throttling block 9)] to be different, thereby allowing the thickness of the output slurry to be adjusted according to actual needs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a coating die head (upper die head 1) with drive assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) that have a driving piece (micrometer head 12) connected to a mounting piece (coupling 14) and a connecting piece (adjusting rod 13) that causes the regulator (flow throttling block 9) to move. (See Hu paragraph 38-42; Figure 3, Figure 5; Annotated Figure 3, and Annotated Figure 5 from above).
Regarding claim 11, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a mounting hole on the mounting piece, and the driving piece is rotatably threaded through the mounting hole with one of a threaded section or a threaded hole is formed at a first end of the driving piece, the first end being close to the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16), and the other of the threaded section or the threaded hole is formed at a second end of the connecting piece, the second end being away from the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16); and the threaded section is inserted in the threaded hole so that, when rotating, the driving piece drives the connecting piece to move. (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a mounting hole (15) on the mounting piece (coupling 14), and the driving piece (micrometer head 12) is rotatably threaded (described as notches) through the mounting hole (15) with one of a threaded section (described as notches) or a threaded hole is formed at a first end (illustrated in Annotated Figure 5 shown below) of the driving piece (micrometer head 12), the first end being close to the regulator (flow throttling block 9), and the other of the threaded section (described as notches) or the threaded hole is formed at a second end (illustrated in Annotated Figure 5 shown below) of the connecting piece (adjusting rod 13), the second end (connected to the micrometer head 12) being away from the regulator (flow throttling block 9); and the threaded section (described as notches) is inserted in the threaded hole so that, when rotating, the driving piece (micrometer head 12) drives the connecting piece (adjusting rod 13) to move. As mentioned above, Hu teaches that this allows the height of each [regulator (flow throttling block 9)] to be different, thereby allowing the thickness of the output slurry to be adjusted according to actual needs. Additionally, Hu teaches that adjusting each [regulator (flow throttling block 9)] individually provides for high adjustment efficiency and good precision. Although Hu does not explicitly teach a mounting hole with a threaded section allowing for the driving piece to move, Hu teaches the sidewalls of the mounting hole are provided with notches to adjust the tightness of the micrometer heads which then in turn moves the adjustment rods vertically and is considered to be functionally equivalent to a threaded section with the micrometer head and in the mounting hole. (See Kemco Sales, Inc. v. Control Papers Co., 208 F.3d 1352, 1364, 54 USPQ2d 1308, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2000)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a coating die head (upper die head 1) where the mounting hole (15) is rotatably threaded (or its equivalent) and the driving piece (micrometer head 12) drives the connecting piece (adjusting rod) to move. (See Hu paragraphs 17-18, 38-42; Figure 5; Annotated Figure 5 shown below).
PNG
media_image15.png
519
618
media_image15.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A)]
Regarding claim 12, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a driving piece comprises the threaded section, and the connecting piece comprises the threaded hole; and the mounting piece further comprises a guide hole, wherein the guide hole communicates with the mounting hole and is coaxial with the mounting hole, and an end of the connecting piece, at which the threaded hole is created, is inserted in the guide hole. (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a coating die head for coating battery pole pieces where the driving piece (micrometer head 12) comprises the threaded section (notches), and the connecting piece (adjusting rod 13) comprises the threaded hole; and the mounting piece (coupling 14) further comprises a guide hole (vertical through holes shown as dashed oval in Annotated Figure 5 below) that communicates with the mounting hole (15) and is coaxial with the mounting hole (shown in Figure 6), and an end of the connecting piece (adjusting rod 13), at which the threaded hole is created, is inserted in the guide hole (dashed oval in Annotated Figure 5 below). (See Hu paragraphs 9-11, 40; Figure 5; Annotated Figure 5 from 112007824A shown below). Hu teaches that this design allows for stable installation and avoids any loosening. Although Hu does not explicitly teach a mounting hole with a threaded section allowing for the driving piece to move, Hu teaches the sidewalls of the mounting hole are provided with notches to adjust the tightness of the micrometer heads which then in turn moves the adjustment rods vertically and is considered to be functionally equivalent to a threaded section with the micrometer head and in the mounting hole. (See Kemco Sales, Inc. v. Control Papers Co., 208 F.3d 1352, 1364, 54 USPQ2d 1308, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2000)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a coating die head (upper die head 1) where the guide hole is coaxial to the mounting hole (15) with an end of the connecting piece (adjusting rod 13), at which the threaded hole is created, is inserted in the guide hole (vertical through holes) for a stable installation.
PNG
media_image16.png
545
581
media_image16.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A)]
Regarding claim 13, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a first direction, where the length value of the mounting piece in each of the driving assemblies is identical to a length value of a corresponding regulator (adjustment mechanism 16). (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
PNG
media_image17.png
432
311
media_image17.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 8: Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A-length)][AltContent: textbox (Mounting piece (Coupling 14))][AltContent: textbox (Length of Regulators (flow throttling blocks 9))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First direction)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Length of mounting piece (coupling 14))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Connecting piece (adjusting rod 13))]Hu teaches a coating die head (upper die head 1) for coating battery pole pieces. Although Hu does not explicitly state that the length value of the mounting piece is identical to the length of the corresponding regulator (flow throttling block 9), the annotated figure below illustrates the length value of the mounting piece (coupling 14), in a first direction (across as illustrated in annotated figure below) of each of the driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14), is almost identical to a length value of a corresponding regulator (flow throttling block 9). Hu teaches that this design allows each regulator (flow throttling block 9) to be adjusted individually without affecting each other. (See Hu paragraph 18, 39; Figure 5; Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A-length). Furthermore, it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. (See Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a coating die head (upper die head 1) where the length value (width) of the mounting piece (coupling 14) in each of the driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) is identical to the length value (width) of a corresponding regulator (flow throttling block 9) so that adjustments
PNG
media_image19.png
514
528
media_image19.png
Greyscale
can be made without affecting one another.
[AltContent: textbox (Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A-length)]
Regarding claim 14, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a mounting groove created on an inner wall of the discharge channel, the mounting groove communicates with the communicating hole, and the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) is disposed in the mounting groove. (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a coating die head (upper die head 1) for coating battery pole pieces where a mounting groove (adjusting groove 8) is created on an inner wall (inside of discharge channel as illustrated in Annotated Figure 2 shown below) of the discharge channel (slot 41), the mounting groove (adjusting groove 8) communicates with the communicating hole (illustrated by a dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 2 shown below), and the regulator (flow throttling block 9) is disposed in the mounting groove (adjusting groove 8). Hu teaches that this design allows for the thickness of the output slurry to be adjusted according to actual needs. (See Hu paragraph 38, 47; Figure 2; Annotated Figure 2 shown below). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a mounting groove (adjusting groove 8) on the inner wall of the discharge channel (slot 41), and the regulator (flow throttling block 9) is disposed in the mounting groove (adjusting groove 8) to allow for the output slurry to be adjusted accordingly.
[AltContent: textbox ( Annotated Figure 2 from CN 112007824A)][AltContent: textbox (Sealing element (upper gasket 4))][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Communicating hole)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval]
Regarding claim 15, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a sealing element is disposed between the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) and a wall of the mounting groove, and the wall communicates with the communicating hole. (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a coating die head for coating battery pole pieces where a sealing element (upper gasket 4) disposed between the regulator (flow throttling block 9) and a wall of the mounting groove (adjusting groove 8), and the wall communicates with the communicating hole (illustrated by a dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 2 shown above). Hu teaches an embodiment that improves the structural strength of the sealing element (upper gasket 4) in order to prevent leakage. (See Hu paragraphs 38, 47; Figure 2; Annotated Figure 2 CN 112007824A shown above). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a sealing element (upper gasket 4) disposed between the regulator and a wall of the mounting groove (adjusting groove 8) to prevent leakage.
Regarding claim 16, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a mounting piece in each of the driving assemblies that is detachably disposed on the die head body (10). (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu discloses a coating die head (upper die head 1) for coating battery pole pieces where mounting piece (coupling 14) in each of the driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) is detachably disposed on the die head body (1) by way of a fixed plate connected to the die head body (upper die head 1). Within Hu’s disclosure it states, “…unless otherwise stated, a fixed connection can be understood as: a detachable fixed connection (e.g., using bolts or screws)…”. (See Hu paragraph 11, 39-40). Hu teaches that this design (where a mounting piece (coupling 14) is connected to a regulator (flow throttling block 9)) allows for one-to-one positioning that can match slight differences in brands and models making the invention more adaptable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have the mounting piece (coupling 14) detachably disposed on the die head body (upper die head 1).
Regarding claim 17, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a fixing bracket, wherein the fixing bracket comprises: a fixed base disposed on the die head body (10); a press plate detachably connected to the fixed base, and coordinates with the fixed base to clamp and fix the mounting piece in each of the driving assemblies. (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a fixing bracket, wherein the fixing bracket comprises: a fixed base (overflow plate 18) disposed on the die head body (upper die head 1); a press plate (bracket/support plate 11) detachably connected (with a positioning pin hole 20) to the fixed base (overflow plate 18), and coordinates with the fixed base (overflow plate 18) to clamp and fix the mounting piece (coupling 14) in each of the driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14). Hu teaches that having a press plate (bracket/support plate 11) connected (with a positioning pin hole 20) to the fixed base (overflow plate 18) ensures installation accuracy. (See Hu paragraphs 11, 18, 43; Figure 5; Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A-plates shown below). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a fixing bracket (overflow plate 18, bracket/support plate 11, positioning pin hole 20) that fixes the mounting pieces in each of the driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) to ensure installation accuracy.
PNG
media_image20.png
440
318
media_image20.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A-plates)][AltContent: textbox ()][AltContent: textbox (Regulators (flow throttling blocks 9))][AltContent: textbox (Driving piece (micrometer head 12) away from connecting piece (adjustment rod 13) and extends to external environment)][AltContent: textbox (First relief hole)][AltContent: textbox (Second relief hole)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Press plate (bracket/support plate 11))][AltContent: textbox ((Positioning pin hole 20))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Fixed base (overflow plate 18))]
[AltContent: textbox (Accommodation cavity with the Mounting piece (coupling 14))]
[AltContent: arrow]
Regarding claim 18, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a fixed base and the press plate close in to form an accommodation cavity, and the mounting piece is accommodated in the accommodation cavity; the fixed base comprises a first relief hole that communicates with the accommodation cavity, and an end of the connecting piece, away from the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16), passes through the first relief hole, so as to be connected to a driving piece; and the press plate comprises a second relief hole that communicates with the accommodation cavity, and an end of the driving piece, away from the connecting piece, passes through the second relief hole, so as to extend to the external environment. (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a fixed base (overflow plate 18) and the press plate (bracket/support plate 11) close in to form an accommodation cavity (illustrated in Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A-plates shown above), and the mounting piece (coupling 14) is accommodated in the accommodation cavity (see Annotated Figure 5 above); the fixed base (overflow plate 18) comprises a first relief hole (see Annotated Figure 5 above) that communicates (sit adjacent to) with the accommodation cavity (see Annotated Figure 5 above), and an end of the connecting piece (adjustment rod 13), away from the regulator (flow throttling block 9), passes through the first relief hole (see Annotated Figure 5 above), so as to be connected to a driving piece (micrometer head 12); and the press plate (bracket/support plate 11) comprises a second relief hole (see Annotated Figure 5 above) that communicates (sit adjacent to) with the accommodation cavity (see Annotated Figure 5 above), and an end of the driving piece (micrometer head 12), away from the connecting piece (adjustment rod 13), passes through the second relief hole, so as to extend to the external environment (implicitly understood to be the surrounding space). Hu teaches that this design allows for one-to-one positioning that can match slight differences in brands and models making the invention more adaptable. (See Hu paragraphs 11, 18, 39-42; Figure 5; Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A-plates shown above). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a fixed base (overflow plate 18) and the press plate (bracket/support plate 11) close in to form an accommodation cavity (illustrated in Annotated Figure 5 from CN 112007824A-plates shown above), and the mounting piece (coupling 14) is accommodated in the accommodation cavity (see Annotated Figure 5 above); the fixed base (overflow plate 18) comprises a first relief hole (see Annotated Figure 5 above) that communicates (sit adjacent to) with the accommodation cavity (see Annotated Figure 5 above), and an end of the connecting piece (adjustment rod 13), away from the regulator (flow throttling block 9), passes through the first relief hole (see Annotated Figure 5 above), so as to be connected to a driving piece (micrometer head 12); and the press plate (bracket/support plate 11) comprises a second relief hole (see Annotated Figure 5 above) that communicates (sit adjacent to) with the accommodation cavity (see Annotated Figure 5 above), and an end of the driving piece (micrometer head 12), away from the connecting piece (adjustment rod 13), passes through the second relief hole, so as to extend to the external environment (implicitly understood to be the surrounding space) to have a more adaptable invention.
Regarding claim 19, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a first die head; a second die head detachably connected to the first die head, with the second die head and the first die head form the discharge channel (S), and the driving assemblies and the communicating hole are disposed on the first die head and/or the second die head. (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a first die head (upper die head 1); and a second die (middle die head 2) head detachably connected (base 35, adjusting bolts 39) to the first die head (upper die head 1), with the second die head (middle die head 2) and the first die head (upper die head 1) close in to form the discharge channel (slot 41), and the driving assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) and the communicating hole (illustrated by a dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 4 shown below) are disposed on the first die head (upper die head 1). Hu teaches that this allows for small and controllable adjustments by simply turning a bolt. (See Hu paragraphs 11, 47-49; Figure 4; Annotated Figure 4 from CN 112007824A shown below). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu to have a first die head (upper die head 1) and a second die head (middle die head 2) detachably connected (base 35, adjusting bolts 39) to form a discharge channel (slot 41) with drive assemblies (micrometer head 12 and coupling 14) disposed on the first die head (upper die head 1) and/or the second die head (middle die head 3) where small and controlled adjustments can be performed.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Drive assembly
(micrometer head 12 and coupling 14))][AltContent: textbox (Discharge channel (Slot 41))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox ( Annotated Figure 4 from CN 112007824A)]
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Communicating hole)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval]
Regarding claim 20, Yang teaches a battery electrode coating mold comprising of a die head body (10). Yang does not teach a discharge direction of the discharge channel (S), the discharge channel (S) comprises a body section and an outlet section that communicate with each other, and the discharge port is created at an end of the outlet section, the end being away from the body section; and a cross-sectional area of the outlet section of the discharge channel (S) is less than a cross-sectional area of the body section of the discharge channel, and at least a part of the regulator (adjustment mechanism 16) is movable within the outlet section. (See Yang paragraphs 27-30).
Hu teaches a discharge direction (in the direction towards the discharge port as illustrated in Annotated Figure 2 shown below) of the discharge channel (slot 41), the discharge channel (slot 41) comprises a body section (upper die head 1) and an outlet section (illustrated in Annotated Figure 2 shown below by the solid oval line) that communicate (sit adjacent) with each other, and the discharge port (at edge of apparatus) is created at an end of the outlet section (solid oval line in Annotated Figure 2 below), the end being away (downstream) from the body section (dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 2); and a cross-sectional area of the outlet section (solid oval line in Annotated Figure 2 below) of the discharge channel (slot 41) is less than a cross-sectional area (see Annotated Figure 2 where the area in the solid oval line is less than the area in the dashed oval line) of the body section (represented by the dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 2 shown below) of the discharge channel (slot 41), and at least a part of the regulator (flow throttling block 9) is movable within the outlet section (solid oval line in Annotated Figure 2 below). Hu teaches that the height of the regulators (flow throttling block 9) can be different thereby allowing the thickness of the output slurry to be adjusted according to actual needs (see Hu paragraphs 8, 12, 38-42; Figure 2; Annotated Figure 2 from CN 112007824A-Discharge portion shown below). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yang to incorporate the teachings of Hu where the discharge direction (in the direction towards the discharge port as illustrated in Annotated Figure 2 shown below) of the discharge channel (slot 41) with a body section (dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 2) and an outlet section (solid oval line in Annotated Figure 2) that communicate (sit adjacent) with each other, and the discharge port (at edge of apparatus) is created at an end of the outlet section (solid oval line in Annotated Figure 2 below) that is away from the body section (dashed oval line in Annotated Figure 2), and a cross-sectional area of the outlet section of the discharge channel (slot 41) is less than a cross-sectional area of the body section of the discharge channel, and at least a part of the regulator (flow throttling block 9) is movable within the outlet section (solid oval line in Annotated Figure 2) to adjust the thickness of the output slurry as needed.
[AltContent: textbox (Discharge direction)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image24.png
433
414
media_image24.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Annotated Figure 2 from CN 112007824A-Discharge portion)][AltContent: textbox (Discharge channel (Slot 41))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First die head (Upper die head 1))][AltContent: oval][AltContent: textbox (Discharge port)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Regulators (flow throttling blocks 9))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Outlet section of discharge channel )][AltContent: oval][AltContent: textbox (Body section of discharge channel )][AltContent: arrow]
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: all references cited on the attached PTO-892 Notices of References Cited excluding the above relied upon references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUZANNE C CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3177. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/SUZANNE C CHANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 1716
/JETHRO M. PENCE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights