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 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a first measurement device,” “a second measurement device,” and “a controller” in claims 1-11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With respect to claim 1, the limitations “a first measurement device” and “a second measurement device” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. P.0062-P.0067 disclose possibilities for structure that may be part of the measurement devices however fails to concretely define the terms. Therefore, the claim is indefinite.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Likewise, all claims dependent upon claim 1 fail to correct the deficiency and are rejected in the same.
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.
Claims 1-19 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.
Claim limitation “a first measurement device” and “a second measurement device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. See explanation above with respect to 35 USC 112(a). Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
With respect to claim 1, the controller is configured to acquire “a third distance” however there is no explanation of where the “third distance” is acquired from. It seems there are missing steps or elements. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 1, the limitation beginning in line 8, “in a width direction of the secondary battery” is unclear. First, the second battery is not part of the claimed device and therefore cannot structurally limit the device itself. Elements outside of the claimed invention cannot limit the device since their presence is intended use and varies by user. Additionally, “in a width direction” is unspecified, since there is no particular dimension of the battery that is understood at the “width” direction and lacks a structural relationship with the rest of the claimed device. This limitation is ambiguous as to which direction is intended. Furthermore, the same issue applies elsewhere in the claim where “the width direction” is specified. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 1, “a first reference origin point” is unclearly structurally defined. There is an origin point structure that has a point, O2, on the structure somewhere that is supposedly spaced apart from another point O1. However, the first reference origin point O1 is not defined as located on the origin point structure or any other claimed structures. It is unclear how and what the first origin point is defined as. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 1, the limitation “a first measurement device configured to acquire an inner start point of the sealing part and an outer end point of the sealing part” is indefinite. It is unclear from the claim language how exactly a first measurement device acquires the measurement points and interprets those points to the be indicators of the sealing part. There seems to be missing steps or elements. Further explanation is required.
With respect to claims 3, 6, and 9, the limitations “so as to” is an intended use limitation and is unclear if it structurally limits the claim. It suggests an intended result rather than positively claims the structure. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 6, the limitation “irradiate a third beam toward the vertical reference surface so as to set the second reference origin point” is unclear. With respect to claim 1, the second reference origin point O2 is on the origin point structure. The relationship between the O2 of claim 1 and the O2 of claim 6 is unclear. Additionally, “as to set” is ambiguous as to what is actually happening and how that is structurally limiting on the device.
With respect to claim 12, the limitations “in a first measurement process” and “in a second measurement process” is unclear. The specification provides many possibly steps that may be part of a measurement process (P.0062-67) however fails to define what “a measurement process” actually entails. Without understanding a definition of “a measurement process” the claimed method is unclear. Correction is required.
With respect to claim 12, the preamble is unclear. The preamble states “A method for measuring a sealing gap for a secondary battery disposed between an electrode assembly accommodation part and a sealing part of a pouch is measured.” The “is measured” part creates the confusion since it is unclear what this refers to and how it relates to “a method for measuring”. The phrase also makes the preamble grammatically ambiguous with respect to the following phrase “the method comprising” since it is unclear if “is measured” is a step in the method or a side note. Correction is required.
With respect to claim 12, “to be spaced away from a first origin reference point (O1)” is unclear if this is part of the method step of “setting a vertical reference surface” or an intended desire. Method limitations should be positively and actively claimed. The examiner recommends rewording the claim to read “setting a vertical reference surface spaced away from a first origin reference point.”
With respect to claim 12, the limitation “in an origin point setting process” is unclear if it is part of the method steps being claimed, a separate process to be performed, or a separate process that is not part of the claimed method. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 12, the limitation “the first reference origin point (O1) is disposed in the width direction….” is unclear if it is a step in the claimed method or a commentary on outside method steps not claimed. Method steps should be positively recited (i.e. set the first reference origin point in the width direction) rather than the passive voice. Correction is required.
With respect to claim 6, the controller is configured to acquire “a third distance” however there is no explanation of where the “third distance” is acquired from. It seems there are missing steps or elements. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 6, the limitation, “in a width direction of the secondary battery” is unclear. “In a width direction” is unspecified, since there is no particular dimension of the battery that is understood at the “width” direction and lacks a structural relationship with the rest of the claimed method. This limitation is ambiguous as to which direction is intended. Furthermore, the same issue applies elsewhere in the claim where “the width direction” is specified. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 12, the limitation “acquiring an inner start point of the sealing part and an outer end point of the sealing part” is indefinite. It is unclear from the claim language how exactly the measurement points are acquired and interpreted such that those points are indicators of the sealing part. The specification does not provide additional support. There seems to be missing steps or elements. Furthermore, claim 14 discloses “irradiating a first beam to one surface of the pouch to measure a first inner start point.” Claim 14 seems to be missing steps or elements as well since irradiating a beam to a surface cannot in itself measure a point. There is no sensing or detecting present. Additionally, it is unclear if the irradiating in claim 14 is the same as the acquiring in claim 12. Further explanation and clarification is required.
With respect to claim 14, the limitations disclose measuring a first inner start point, a first outer end point, a second inner start point, and a second outer end point. Then the claim discloses “setting the inner start point and outer end points.” It is unclear if the measured points move, if the setting happens prior to measurement, or how the first inner start point, second inner start point and inner start point are related. Likewise for the outer end points. Clarification is required.
With respect to claim 19, the limitation “after the sealing gap measurement process is completed in an inspection process” is unclear. It is unclear what the “sealing gap measurement process” is and what the “inspection process” is. The method itself is for measuring a sealing gap however it wouldn’t make grammatical sense to then claim the determining step as part of the method after the method is complete. Correction is required.
Any claims dependent upon above rejected claims failing to correct the deficiencies described above are likewise rejected.
It should be noted that these claims are so replete with clarity issues that the examiner has done her best to spell out all of the deficiencies. However, the applicant bears the burden to ensure that all claim limitations are grammatically correct, positively recited, and clearly claiming the applicant’s invention.
Citation
There is no rejection under 35 USC 102 or 103 made in this case. The claims are so replete with errors and deficiencies that the examiner could not properly apply any art without an unacceptable amount of conjecture. However, a search has been made and the prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Park U.S. Patent #11,835,468 discloses a method of inspecting an air void at a battery lead.
Yasooka et al. U.S. Publication 2013/0141571 discloses imaging sealed batteries and analyzing the seal around the battery.
Futase U.S. Patent #10,839,501 uses imaging for judging the seal on a package body including measuring the width of the seal and determining distance of features from that seal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REBECCA CAROLE BRYANT whose telephone number is (571)272-9787. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 12-4 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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 5712723995. 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.
/REBECCA C BRYANT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877