Lease 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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirano (JP 7090784 B1) in view of Dorst (20230070101A1), Banker (US 4028096 A) and Hu (CN 107860222 A).
Regarding claim 1, Hirano teaches of:
A saggar (Fig. 6, 2a) for thermally treating powder of a lithium positive electrode material, the saggar being configured to accommodate the powder and to be disposed in a heat treatment furnace for heat treatment of the powder (¶ [0008], “the sagger disclosed herein is a sagger that contains lithium cathode material powder and is placed in a heat treatment furnace for heat treatment of the powder”), the saggar comprising:
a ceramic part (Fig. 6, 3a) constituted of ceramic (¶ [0055], “the body 3a of the sagger 2a is made of ceramic”) and having a box shape (¶ [0022], “The main body 3, when viewed from above, is a roughly rectangular box shape”), the ceramic part comprising an outer bottom surface (See horizontal flat bottom surface of 3a) and an outer side wall projecting upward from the outer bottom surface (3a has vertical outer side walls), the ceramic part being open at its top portion (3a has an open top); and
a metal part (3b; ¶ [0055], “forming the inner surface 3b of the saggar 2a from a nickel based alloy”) having a box shape (3b has a complementary shape to 3a), the metal part comprising an inner bottom surface and an inner side wall projecting upward from the inner bottom surface (3b has a bottom surface and a side wall like 3a), the metal part being open at its top portion (3b is open at its top portion)
Hirano fails to explicitly teach:
being removably disposed inside the ceramic part,
wherein
when the metal part is disposed inside the ceramic part at a room temperature, a clearance is defined between the outer side wall and the inner side wall,
the outer side wall comprises at least a pair of recesses recessed from an upper end toward a lower end of the outer side wall,
in a plan view of the metal part, the pair of recesses is disposed at positions facing each other across a center of the metal part,
the metal part comprises at least a pair of flanges extending outward from an upper end of the inner side wall, and
when the metal part is disposed inside the ceramic part, the pair of flanges is located within the pair of recesses.
Dorst teaches of:
being removably disposed inside the ceramic part (Figs. 3-4, 13 and 14 form an inner surface of the saggar 2 which is removably disposed within the saggar)
The primary reference can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
modify Hirano so that 3b is removably disposed within 3a
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would allow for the inner surface to be removed after firing, allowing for easy replacement of the liner if it is corroded (Dorst, ¶ [0082], “The lining 29 can be removed from the support structure 2 nondestructively and can, consequently, be replaced separately in a simple manner if it is corroded and can easily be recycled”)
Banker teaches of:
when the metal part (4 is metal) is disposed inside the ceramic part at a room temperature (3 is ceramic), a clearance is defined between the outer side wall and the inner side wall (see gap between 3 and 4)
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
size 3b of Hirano to be smaller than 3a, dimensioned so that there is a space between the sidewalls of 3b and 3a but the bottom surfaces are still in contact
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would allow for the thermal expansion of 3b which would have a different coefficient of thermal expansion than 3a as they are different materials, preventing cracking or deformation of 3b
Hu teaches of:
the outer side wall comprises at least a pair of recesses recessed from an upper end toward a lower end of the outer side wall (Fig. 1, 1 has three recesses 3),
(see combination made below, each of the recess are equally spaced from one another and at the same depth, positioning recesses on a box to achieve the same support purposed would require that the recess be disposed on each of the sidewalls facing across from one another; ¶ [0021], “The angle between two adjacent notches 3 is the same, and the depth of each notch 3 is the same”),
the metal part comprises at least a pair of flanges extending outward from an upper end of the inner side wall (Figs. 1-2, 2 has 3 flanges 4), and
when the metal part is disposed inside the ceramic part, the pair of flanges is located within the pair of recesses (4 is located within 3 when 2 is in 1).
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
position three recesses on the sidewalls of 3a and three flanges on the sidewalls of 3b, equally spaced from one another so that the flanges of 3b are aligned an interact with the recesses of 3a
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would ensure that 3b is centered within 3a and prevent it from shifting
While the combined teachings do not explicitly teach that the pair of recesses are disposed at positions facing each other across a center of the metal part, a person of ordinary skill in the art could have modified the combined teachings so that there are four flanges and four recesses, each of which facing each other across a center of the metal part 3b based on the following rationale:
It has been found that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new an unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04.VI.B). In the instant case, it would have been obvious to add a fourth recess to 3a and a fourth flange to 3b and to position the flanges equidistant from one another so that there are two pairs of flanges facing each other across a center of 3b because applicant has not disclosed that four recess and four flanges in such a position provide an advantage, is used for a particular purpose or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with three flanges and recesses or four flanges and recess, because both perform the functions of holding and centering the metal part in the ceramic part equally well.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach of the saggar according to claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the metal part comprises at least a surface constituted of metal containing aluminum (Hirano, ¶ [0024], “The nickel-based alloy of this embodiment contains 90 wt% or more of nickel and 1 wt% to 10 wt% or less of aluminum”)
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach of the saggar according to claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the metal part is constituted of a nickel-based alloy containing aluminum (Hirano, ¶ [0024], “The nickel-based alloy of this embodiment contains 90 wt% or more of nickel and 1 wt% to 10 wt% or less of aluminum”)
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teach of the saggar according to claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein when the metal part is disposed inside the ceramic part (Hirano, Fig. 6, 3b is within 3a), the inner bottom surface is in contact with the outer bottom surface (see combination made in the rejection of claim 1 above, the bottoms surfaces of 3b and 3a are in contact).
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach of the saggar according to claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein when the metal part is disposed inside the ceramic part (Hirano, Fig. 6, 3b is within 3a), upper surfaces of the flanges are located below the upper end of the outer side wall (See combination made in the rejection of claim 1 above and further see Fig. 1 of Hu, 4 is positioned in recess 3 which is below the upper end of 3).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirano (JP 7090784 B1) in view of Dorst (2023070101A1), Banker (US 4028096 A) and Hu (CN 107860222 A) and in further view of Hao (CN 219136898 U).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach of the saggar according to claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
the ceramic part and the metal part have a rectangular shape in a plan view (both 3a and 3b have complementary shapes; ¶ [0022], “The main body 3, when viewed from above, is a roughly rectangular box shape”),
the outer side wall comprises a pair of first outer side walls and a pair of second outer side walls orthogonal to the pair of first outer side walls (since 3a has a rectangular box shape 3a would inherently have a first pair of outers side walls and a second pair of outer side walls orthogonal to the first pair),
the inner side wall comprises a pair of first inner side walls and a pair of second inner side walls orthogonal to the pair of first inner side walls (since 3b has a rectangular box shape 3a would inherently have a first pair of outers side walls and a second pair of outer side walls orthogonal to the first pair),
when the metal part is disposed inside the ceramic part (3b is in 3a), the pair of first outer side walls are parallel to the pair of first inner side walls and the pair of second outer side walls are parallel to the pair of second inner side walls (the complementary rectangular box shapes of 3a and 3b would have parallel side walls), and
when a coefficient of thermal expansion of the ceramic part is a, a coefficient of thermal expansion of the metal part is b (3a and 3b are different materials and would have different coefficients of thermal expansion), and a maximum temperature during heat treatment of the powder in the saggar is T (saggar of Hirano is heated to a temperature T)
The combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
when an inner dimension between the first outer side walls is L1o and an outer dimension between the first inner side walls is L1i, a clearance defined between the first outer side walls and the first inner side walls is larger than (L1i x b x T) - (L1o x a x T), and
when an inner dimension between the second outer side walls is L2o and an outer dimension between the second inner side walls is L2i, a clearance defined between the second outer side walls and the second inner side walls is larger than (L2i x b x T) - (L2o x a x T).
Hao teaches of:
when an inner dimension between the first outer side walls is L1o and an outer dimension between the first inner side walls is L1i, a clearance defined between the first outer side walls and the first inner side walls is larger than (L1i x b x T) - (L1o x a x T), and
when an inner dimension between the second outer side walls is L2o and an outer dimension between the second inner side walls is L2i, a clearance defined between the second outer side walls and the second inner side walls is larger than (L2i x b x T) - (L2o x a x T) (the above listed equations are stating that the clearance between the inner and outer sidewalls is greater than the difference between the thermal expansion of the inner and outer sidewalls, while the system of Hao teaches of a cylindrical crucible the concept of maintaining a clearance greater than the difference in thermal expansion of the inner and outer side walls is clearly stated; ¶ [0025], “At the same time, since the inner and outer crucibles have different coefficients of thermal expansion during the heating and vapor deposition process, the gap between the inner and outer crucibles can accommodate the expansion difference between them, leaving sufficient expansion space for the inner crucible and avoiding the phenomenon of deformation and cracking of the vapor deposition crucible caused by the mutual compression of the inner and outer crucibles due to thermal expansion.”).
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
dimension 3a and 3b so that the clearance of between the side walls of 3a and 3b is greater than the difference of thermal expansion of the 3a and 3b so that when the saggar is heated 3a and 3b do not compress one another
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would stop 3a and 3b from compressing one another due to thermal expansion, preventing cracking and deformation
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J GIORDANO whose telephone number is (571)272-8940. The examiner can normally be reached M-Fr 8 AM - 5 PM EST.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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.
/MICHAEL JAMES GIORDANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/HELENA KOSANOVIC/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights