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 .
Claims 1-11 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/12/2024 is considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
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(s) 1 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016115569A (see IDS, henceforth referred as JP’569) in view of JPH09245776A (see IDS, henceforth referred as JP’776).
Re: 1, JP’569 reference teaches of a production apparatus of an electrode active material layer [0001-0002, see active material layer 24], comprising:
a support unit (see 22A);
a feeding unit (18) that feeds granulated particles (powder 16) on or above the support unit, the granulated particles containing an electrode active material and a binder;
a first conveying unit (22A) that conveys the granulated particles that have been fed on or above the support unit (22A matching the teaching concerning the roll acting as both support unit and first conveying unit, see applicant’s US2025/00230101A1, [0088] regarding forming roll 101);
a squeegee device (20) that levels the granulated particles which are conveyed to form a granulated particle layer (electrode substrate S); and
a rolling unit ( 22b) that rolls the granulated particle layer to form an electrode active material layer, wherein:
the squeegee device includes
at least one cylindrical squeegee roll (squeegee roll 20),
two or more stock guides (jigs 30a, 32a, Fig. 7)
the stock guides and the at least one squeegee roll are alternately disposed along the axial direction of the rotation shaft, and the stock guides are disposed at both ends of the at least one squeegee roll in the axial direction one each (wherein, the JP’569 reference teaches of the concept of stock guides in relation to the squeegee roll, see Fig. 7, see 20 and jigs 30, 32);
the at least one squeegee roll is fixed to the rotation shaft; and the rotation shaft is freely rotatable with respect to the stock guides (see Fig. 3, wherein the squeegee roll 20 is freely rotatable with respect to the guides 12, 19, 21).
JP’569 does not specifically teach of “two or more stock guides that are in a plate shape and have a shaft hole, a rotation shaft that is inserted into the shaft hole of the stock guide that penetrates the at least one squeegee roll in an axial direction of the squeegee roll”, and “a fixing member that restricts movement of the stock guides in an axial direction of the rotation shaft; “
Wherein, in the reference of JP’776 which is in the same field of endeavor, directs towards to the teaching of filling rollers 3a, 3b that are to provide the paste material upon the substrate S, the rollers being positioned within the plate like structures, see 1c, Fig. 2. And as seen the roller 3A are arranged to rotate within the shaft hole of the sides of the hopper, 1c, see thee shafts as designated in the marked up drawing of Figure 2 below, wherein, the shafts are the rotation shaft that would penetrate the roll in the axial direction and further the sides of the hopper being plate shaped having the shaft hole to accommodate the shaft. Here, the sides of the hopper correspond to the claimed stock guides, and wherein, the rest of the hopper structure acts as the fixing member for the stock guides.
PNG
media_image1.png
197
331
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, the JP’776 reference teaches of a structure that would allow for fixing and allowing for the rotation of the squeegee roller in relation to the substrate and conveyance system that one skilled in the art would be able to incorporate into the squeegee roller of JP’569
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the squeegee device of JP’569 with the arrangement taught by JP’776 in allowing for support for a roller structure above the substrate as material is applied to a substrate. This can be seen as combination under KSR, see MPEP 2143, as a known alternate structure of arrangement for a roller structure, with the incorporation of the arrangement taught by JP’776 to the squeegee device of JP’569 to yield predictable results.
Re: 6 (upon 1), wherein a single roll serves as the support unit and the first conveying unit.
See the configuration taught by JP’569, 22A, wherein the roll that can also be seen as acting as both support and conveying.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016115569A in view of JPH09245776A as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 2016-115432A.
Re: 2 (upon 1), wherein the number of the at least one squeegee roll included in the squeegee device is n, the number of the stock guides included in the squeegee device is (n+1) and n is 2 or more.
The JP’569 reference does not specifically state of the number of squeegee rolls and stock guides. However, see in the teaching of JP’432, see additional cutting rollers that also would remove material the side. In this case the plural rollers would allow for a multiplied effect including rolls that affect at different locations. Thereby, the additional number of squeegee rolls provided would be considered a multiplication of the parts, which it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified JP’569 with the plural parts can allow for a multiplied effect such as that in JP’432.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016115569A in view of JPH09245776A as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP2016062654A.
Re: 3 (upon 1), further comprising a second conveying unit that conveys a substrate to the rolling unit, wherein the rolling unit rolls the granulated particle layer that has been overlaid on the conveyed substrate .
The JP’569 does not specifically teach of the additional conveying unit. Further, as seen in JP2016062654, see the plural conveying units, see Fig. 1. This arrangement is known in the arts, and further the additional conveying units are also seen as a duplication of the first conveying unit already taught of JP’569.
Thereby, the additional number of conveying units rolls provided would be considered a multiplication of the parts, which it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified JP’569 with the plural conveying units can allow for a multiplied effect such as that in JP’654 as a known alternate arrangement. See also KSR, MPEP 2143, as this is can be seen as a applying a known technique (of the plural conveying units taught by JP’015 to a known device (method or product, see JP569) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Re: 4 (upon 1), further comprising a third conveying unit that conveys a substrate to the support unit, wherein the support unit supports the substrate, and the feeding unit feeds the granulated particles on the substrate that has been supported by the support unit.
Similar in regards to the limitation for claim 3 above. See JP2016-062654A, see the plural conveying units, see Fig. 1.
Claim(s) 5 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016115569A in view of JPH09245776A (and further in view of JP2016-062654A for claim 5) as applied to claims 4 and 10 above.
Re: 5 (upon 4), wherein a distance between main surfaces of the stock guides that are disposed at both ends in a longitudinal direction of the squeegee device is larger than a width of the substrate, the main surfaces being opposite to main surfaces that face the squeegee roll.
Wherein, this can be dependent upon the substrate that is worked upon by the apparatus and is not a specific structural limitation to the apparatus. Here, the relative sizing for the distance between the surfaces of the stock guides are noted but can be varied by the substrate worked upon. Whereby, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the teachings of the JP’569 reference would be capable of the claimed features as these can varied by the substrates fed by the operator and not a limitation of the production apparatus itself.
Re: 10 (upon 1), having the same limitations as claim 5.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016115569A in view of JPH09245776A as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 2016-119207 A.
Re: 11 (upon 1), further comprising position measurement units fixed to the respective stock guides, a gap amount adjustment unit, and a control unit, wherein: each of the stock guides has a first surface facing the support unit; the position measurement unit is capable of measuring distance D1 between the position measurement unit and a surface that faces the first surface of the stock guide and to which the granulated particles are fed; the gap amount adjustment unit adjusts a gap amount G1 between the first surface of the stock guide and the surface to which the granulated particles are fed; and the control unit causes the gap amount adjustment unit to adjust the gap amount G1 based on a difference between the gap amount G1 obtained based on the distance D1 and a gap amount threshold T1 that has been set to be greater than 0 µm.
Regarding the position measurement and controls, the JP’569 reference does not teach of this feature.
However, the JP’207 reference teaches in Fig. 1-3, paragraphs [0043], [0044], wherein, a manufacturing device 1 for a lithium ion secondary battery electrode, in which a height sensor 34 is provided on the upstream side of an adjustment unit 32, a control unit 24 is provided in a supply unit 20, and a supply amount of granulated particles is controlled in accordance with the height of the granulated particles 130 measured by the sensor. Wherein, the regarding the adjustment gaps and thresholds, the JP’207 teaching can be considered as being capable of such operations particularly with any threshold set greater than 0 micrometers (of any sort of measurements) would be encompassed.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the JP’569 reference with the controls and adjustment structures as taught by the JP’207 reference as it would allow for control of the desired material of the granulated particles deposited.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016115569A in view of JPH09245776A as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of GLEASON US2020/0365335A1.
Re: 7 (upon 1), wherein both end faces of the at least one squeegee roll are subjected to a low friction treatment.
Regarding the low friction treatment, JP’569 does not specifically teach this feature.
However, as seen in GLEASON regarding the use of Teflon roller that are used to roll CNT arrays, see [0113], Fig. 3A. The Teflon roller encompassing the low friction treatment for the claimed roll.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the roll of JP’569 with the low friction treatment as taught by GLEASON as this is a known type of roll that ensure that materials will not stick to the roll during use.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016115569A in view of JPH09245776A as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of HONJOU US 2013/0228082 A1.
Re: 8 (upon 1), wherein an area of both end faces of the at least one squeegee roll is smaller than an area of a cross-section that is perpendicular to the axial direction of the squeegee roll and that passes through a center in the axial direction of the squeegee roll.
The JP’569 reference does not specifically teach of this roll design.
Wherein, this is a change in the shape regarding the roll, see HONJOU of this roll design.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the roll of JP’569 with the design as taught by HONJOU as known alternate designs for rolls. This is seen under KSR, see MPEP 2143 as applying a known technique of a roll design of HONJOU to a known device (that of JP’569 regarding the roll) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016115569A in view of JPH09245776A as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WILMS US 11383464 B2.
Re: 9 (upon 1), wherein each of both end portions of the at least one squeegee roll has a depression.
Regarding the shape of the roll, which JP’569 does not specifically teach.
This is a change in the shape of the roll for the desired pressure by the roll, see also teaching by WILMS, see Fig. 2.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the roll of JP’569 with the design as taught by WILMS as known alternate designs for rolls. This is seen under KSR, see MPEP 2143 as applying a known technique of a roll design of WILMS to a known device (that of JP’569 regarding the roll) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 form, of particular note:
US 12327857 B2 and US 11059083 B2 teaching of rolls with different shapes.
US 2024/0055574 A1 teaches coating process.
US 2017/0179465 A1 teaches of coating process.
US 2020/0161711 A1 of an alternate feed of material onto a substrate.
US 2016/0181651 A1 teaches of plural conveying units 10.
US 2016/0043382 A1 teaches of squeegee rollers 30 over press rollers 10, see Fig 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMMANUEL S LUK whose telephone number is (571)272-1134. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 to 5.
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, Xiao S Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/EMMANUEL S LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744