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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the words “size of” should be added after the “wherein” in the first line of the claim and after the “and” in the second line of the claim to make the claim read more clearly. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-8, 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2021-163688 A1 by Tadashi, hereinafter “Tadashi”.
Regarding claim 1, Tadashi discloses an electrode rolling apparatus for applying pressure to a non-coated portion of an electrode (electrode rolling apparatus stretching roller 103b in Figs. 4, 5 and 7; ¶[0025]) comprising a coated portion coated with an electrode active material and a non-coated portion not coated with an electrode active material, the non-coated portion comprising an insulating coating portion and a non-insulating coating portion(These limitations relate to the material worked upon such that they do not limit the apparatus claimed. See M.P.E.P. 2115.), the electrode rolling apparatus comprising:
a first rolling roller (the half of roller 103b in Fig. 7 to the left of centerline CL); and
a second rolling roller (the half of roller 103b in Fig. 7 to the right of centerline CL),
wherein the first rolling roller includes a first center portion (left side reduced diameter portion 111c and the portion of minimum diameter portion 111d to the left of CL in Fig. 7) and a first end portion located at one end of the first center portion in a longitudinal direction (left large diameter portion 110 in Fig. 7),
wherein the second rolling roller includes a second center portion (right side reduced diameter portion 111c and the portion of 111d to the right of CL in Fig. 7) and a second end portion located at one end of the second center portion in the longitudinal direction (right side large diameter portion 110 in Fig. 7),
wherein other end surface of the first center portion and other end surface of the second center portion are in contact with each other (the two halves of 111d contact each other at CL in Fig. 7),
wherein a first-first outer diameter of the first center portion connected to the first end portion is different from a first-second outer diameter of the first center portion abutting the other end surface of the second center portion (the outer diameter of the left side 111c in Fig. 7 is different from the outer diameter of minimum diameter portion 111d to the left of CL),
wherein a second-first outer diameter of the second center portion connected to the second end portion is different from a second-second outer diameter of the second center portion abutting the other end surface of the first center portion (the outer diameter of the right side 111c in Fig. 7 is different from the outer diameter of 111d to the right of CL), and
wherein the first-second outer diameter and second-second outer diameter are the same (the outer diameter of 111d is the same at centerline CL where the two halves of 111d contact one another), and wherein the first end portion or second end portion is adjacent to a boundary of the insulating coating portion and the non-insulating coating portion (This limitation is intended use of the apparatus claimed such that it does not limit the claim. See M.P.E.P. 2114,II.).
Regarding claim 2, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 1 as explained above. Tadashi further discloses wherein the first-first outer diameter (outer diameter of left side 111c in Fig. 7) is larger than the first-second outer diameter (outer diameter of 111d to the left of CL in Fig. 7) and the second-first outer diameter (outer diameter of right side 111c in Fig. 7) is larger than the second-second outer diameter (outer diameter of 111d to the right of CL in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 3, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 2 as explained above. Tadashi further discloses a length of the first center portion and a length of the second center portion are the same. The length of minimum diameter portion 111d on either side of CL in Fig. 7 is the same.
Regarding claim 4, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 3 as explained above. Tadashi further discloses wherein the length of the first center portion and the length of the second center portion are the same (the length of 111c and 111d together on either side of CL in Fig. 7 is the same), and the first-first outer diameter and the second-first outer diameter are the same or different from each other (the outer diameter of 111c on the left side in Fig. 7 is the same as the outer diameter of 111c on the right side in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 6, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 3 as explained above. Tadashi further discloses a length ratio of the first center portion and the second center portion is between 3:5 and 5:3. The length ratio of left side reduced diameter portion 111c and the portion of minimum diameter portion 111d to the left of CL in Fig. 7 to that of right side reduced diameter portion 111c and the portion of 111d to the right of CL in Fig. 7 is 4:4.
Regarding claim 7, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 1 as explained above. Tadashi further discloses size of the first-second outer diameter with respect to the first-first outer diameter is 0.8 to 0.99 times (D4 in Fig. 7 is approximately 0.81 times the size of D3), and size of the second-second outer diameter with respect to the second-first outer diameter is 0.8 to 0.99 times (D4 in Fig. 7 is approximately 0.81 times the size of D3).
Regarding claim 8, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 1 as explained above. Tadashi further discloses wherein the first end portion is tapered in shape with a gradually decreasing outer diameter from the first center portion toward an end thereof (left end large diameter portion 110 in Fig. 7 tapers in diameter at its leftmost end), and the second end portion is tapered in shape with a gradually decreasing outer diameter from the second center portion toward an end thereof (right end large diameter portion 110 in Fig. 7 tapers in diameter at its rightmost end).
Regarding claim 10, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 8 as explained above. Tadashi further discloses the first end portion (left end large diameter portion 110 in Fig. 7) and the second end portion (right end large diameter portion 110 in Fig. 7) have the same taper angles (the tapers at the leftmost end and rightmost end are the same and thus have the same taper angle).
Regarding claim 13, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 1 as explained above. Roller 103b in Fig. 7 is capable of applying pressure to an electrode having an insulating coating portion comprising at least an insulating polymer material or an insulating ceramic material.
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadashi in view of Korean Patent Publication No. KR 10-0660203 A by Jang, hereinafter “Jang”.
Regarding claim 9, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 8 as explained above. However, Tadashi does not disclose each of tapered surfaces of the first end portion and the second end portion includes a curved tapered surface and a linear tapered surface extending from the curved tapered surface.
In the same field of rolling apparatus, Jang teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to taper the end portions of a roll where the tapered surfaces include a curved tapered surface and a linear tapered surface extending from the curved tapered surface. See “Curved Taper” and “Linear Taper” annotations to Fig. 7(a) of Jang reproduced below.
PNG
media_image1.png
776
822
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to taper the ends of large diameter portions 110 of Tadashi’s roller 103b in the same way Jang teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Jang to Tadashi’s disclosed roller would achieve the predictable result of taper the ends of Tadashi’s roller 103b in the same way Jang teaches.
Claims 12, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadashi in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0293911 A1 by Haga et al., hereinafter “Haga”.
Regarding claim 12, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 1 as explained above. Tadashi is silent regarding the type of material used to make roller 103b in Fig. 7.
In the same field of electrode rolling apparatus, Haga teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use metal or polymers to make rollers of the apparatus. See Paragraph [0059] and paragraph [0069].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Tadashi’s disclosed roller 103b out of polymer elastic rubber or metal in the same way Haga teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Haga to the disclosure of Tadashi would yield the predictable result of making Tadashi’s roller 103b out of polymer or metal.
Regarding claim 14, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 1 as explained above. Tadashi is silent regarding the type of material used to make roller 103b in Fig. 7. The limitation of claim 14 regarding the coating portion relates to the material worked upon such that it does not limit the apparatus claimed. See M.P.E.P. 2115.
In the same field of electrode rolling apparatus, Haga teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use metal or polymers to make rollers of the apparatus. See Paragraph [0059] and paragraph [0069].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Tadashi’s disclosed roller 103b out of polymer elastic rubber or metal in the same way Haga teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Haga to the disclosure of Tadashi would yield the predictable result of making Tadashi’s roller 103b out of polymer or metal.
Regarding claim 15, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 1 as explained above. Tadashi is silent regarding the type of material used to make roller 103b in Fig. 7. The limitation of claim 15 regarding the coating portion relates to the material worked upon such that it does not limit the apparatus claimed. See M.P.E.P. 2115.
In the same field of electrode rolling apparatus, Haga teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use metal or polymers to make rollers of the apparatus. See Paragraph [0059] and paragraph [0069].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Tadashi’s disclosed roller 103b out of polymer elastic rubber or metal in the same way Haga teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Haga to the disclosure of Tadashi would yield the predictable result of making Tadashi’s roller 103b out of polymer or metal.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadashi in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0185698 A1 by Kim et al., hereinafter “Kim”.
Regarding claim 16, Tadashi anticipates the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 1 as explained above. Tadashi is silent regarding an outer peripheral surface of at least one of the first center portion, the first end portion, the second center portion, and the second end portion is formed with alternating grooves and protrusions for forming a plurality of corrugations in the non-coated portion thereof, parallel to each other from the coated portion toward an end of the non-coated portion.
In the same field of rolling apparatus for electrode manufacture, Kim teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange alternating grooves and projections on the center portion of a roller used to roll electrode material. See Figs. 1-2D and at least paragraphs [0047] and [0048].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange alternating grooves and protrusions on minimum diameter portion 111d of Tadashi’s roller 103b in the same way Kim teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Kim to the disclosure of Tadashi would achieve the predictable result of Tadashi’s roller 103b with alternating grooves and protrusions as taught by Kim.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art reference combination of Tadashi in view of Kim renders the electrode rolling apparatus of claim 16 unpatentable as explained above. Kim further teaches each of the grooves and protrusions has a tringle-like shape in cross-section. See Figs. 2A and 2C.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 11 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 5, the prior art of record does not teach nor suggest having first and second center portions of differing length where the first outer diameters are the same as claim 5 claims.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art of record does not teach nor suggest a rolling apparatus roller meeting the limitations of claims 1, 8 and 10 and also having taper angles within the range of 20 to 30 degrees as claim 11 claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2013/0074711 A1 by Uematsu et al.;
Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2014-120273 A by Hirakawa;
Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2022-139918 A by Haga et al.; and
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2023/0108451 A1 by Park et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL DEREK PRESSLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-6658. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 3:30pm Eastern.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/P DEREK PRESSLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3725