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 .
Status of Claims
The Amendment filed 02/18/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-24 are currently pending in the application. Claims 1, 5-9, 11-12, 16-17, and 19-24 have been amended. No new claims have been added.
Response to Amendment
Objection. The amendments to claim 16 have overcome the objection as set forth in the Office Action mailed 11/18/2025. The objection is withdrawn.
35 USC 112(b). The amendments to claims 5-9, 17, and 19 have overcome the rejection of claims 5-9, 17, and 19 under 35 USC 112(b) as being indefinite set forth in the Office Action mailed 11/18/2025. The rejection is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks regarding the rejection of claims 1-2, 8-12, 15, and 20-24 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided) are moot as they rely upon amended claim limitations not previously considered. Applicant' s arguments that prior art cited in the rejection of dependent claims 3-7, 13-14, and 16-19 do not make up for the deficiencies of the prior art cited in the rejection of independent claim 1 is not persuasive. The rejection of amended claims 1-24 is provided below.
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.
Claims 5-6 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the first roller or the first barrel roller.” Claims must particularly point out and distinctly define the metes and bounds of the subject matter. A claim is indefinite if the scope of the claim is not clear to a hypothetical person possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent art. One cannot ascertain whether “the first roller or the first barrel roller” recited in claim 5 are the same or different structural element since “the first roller comprises a first barrel roller” as previously recited in claim 4. For compact prosecution, the limitation has been examined as if it read --the first roller--.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the second roller or the second barrel roller.” Claims must particularly point out and distinctly define the metes and bounds of the subject matter. A claim is indefinite if the scope of the claim is not clear to a hypothetical person possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent art. One cannot ascertain whether “the second roller or the second barrel roller” recited in claim 6 are the same or different structural element in light of “the second roller comprises a second barrel roller” as previously recited in claim 4. For compact prosecution, the limitation has been examined as if it read --the second roller--.
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 1-2, 8-12, 15, 20-21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided).
Regarding claims 1-2, 8-12, and 15, Cui teaches a system for compressing graphite, the system comprising at least one feeder element or hopper configured to supply graphite (frame element 215, guide plate 216 and fan 17; during work, graphite powder is fed between the lower frame 215 and the upper side of the guide plate 216 through the discharge shut-off fan 17, and the graphite powder can be discharged slowly and uniformly between the lower side of the guide plate 216 and the rear side of the lower frame 215); a first roller and a second roller configured to compress graphite as the graphite passes between the first roller and the second roller and wherein the first roller and the second roller are configured to pre-compact the graphite (see rollers pertaining to belts 212 and 225; see additional rolling assembly 3 that further presses the pre-compressed graphite; belt 212 rotates in synchronization with the upper pressing belt 225, so that the graphite powder on the upper side of the conveyor belt 212 cooperates with the conveying of the conveyor belt 212 and the upper pressing belt 225 to extrude the graphite powder into a graphite coil); wherein the distance between the first roller, the first barrel roller, the second roller, or the second barrel roller is adjustable (adjusting slider 222); and at least one vacuum pump, wherein the vacuum pump is configured to create a vacuum around the roller, the first barrel roller, the second roller, or the second barrel roller (vacuum 3163); wherein the system further comprises a first belt and a second belt being configured to direct the graphite from the hopper to the first roller and the second roller, a first guide roller and a second guide roller, wherein the first belt is attached to the first guide roller and the first roller, the second belt is attached to the second guide roller and the second roller, and wherein the first roller comprises at least one nip roller or the second roller comprises at least one second nip roller (see belt elements 212, 225; Fig 3-4); and a plurality of first rollers and second rollers, wherein at least two rollers have surfaces with different friction coefficients or roughness coefficients or at least two rollers have different rotational speeds or have different surface velocities (see assembly 3 and calendar drum 312; Fig 1); wherein the distance between the first roller and the second roller is adjustable and wherein adjusting the distance between the first roller and the second roller alters the angle between a first belt in communication with the first roller and a second belt in communication with the second roller (drive roll adjustment slider 222 along the motion of vertical direction as needs roll adjustment screw 223 to can drive the riser 22 and keep away from transfer roller 221 of backplate 213 one side and rotate along the motion of vertical direction, thereby can adjust the interval between upper pressure belt 225 and the conveyer belt 212) (Fig 1, 3-5, 8-10 and Translation Pg 6-7, 9-12).
Regarding claim 20, Cui teaches a method for compressing graphite, the method comprising: providing a system, wherein the system comprises at least one feeder element or hopper, a first roller, and a second roller; providing graphite into the at least one feeder element or hopper; inserting the graphite between the first roller and the second roller using the at least one feeder element or hopper; and compressing the graphite using the first roller and the second roller; wherein the distance between the first roller and the second roller is adjustable (drive roll adjustment slider 222 along the motion of vertical direction as needs roll adjustment screw 223 to can drive the riser 22 and keep away from transfer roller 221 of backplate 213 one side and rotate along the motion of vertical direction, thereby can adjust the interval between upper pressure belt 225 and the conveyer belt 212) (Fig 1, 3-5, 8-10 and Translation Pg 6-7, 9-12; see also the rejection claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 21, Cui teaches a processed graphite web (Fig 1, 3-5, 8-10 and Translation Pg 6-7, 11-12; see also the rejection claims 1 and 20 above). Examiner notes that “wherein the processed graphite web is produced by: providing a system, wherein the system comprises at least one feeder element or hopper, a first roller, and a second roller; wherein the distance between the first roller and the second roller is adjustable; providing graphite into the at least one feeder element or hopper; inserting the graphite between the first roller and the second roller using the at least one feeder element or hopper; and compressing the graphite using the first roller and the second roller” is a recitation of a product-by-process claim. Product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 23, Cui teaches a method of compressing graphite, the method comprising: providing a system, wherein the system comprises at least one hopper, a first guide roller, a second guide roller, a first nip roller, a second nip roller, a first belt attached to the first guide roller and the first nip roller, and a second belt attached to the second guide roller and the second nip roller; and at least one vacuum pump, wherein the vacuum pump is configured to create a vacuum around the roller, the first barrel roller, the second roller, or the second barrel roller (vacuum 3163); providing graphite into the at least one hopper; inserting the graphite between the first guide roller and the second guide roller using the at least one hopper; guiding the graphite towards the first nip roller and second nip roller using the first belt and the second belt; and compressing the graphite using the first nip roller and the second nip roller (Fig 1, 3-5, 8-10 and Translation Pg 6-7, 11-12; see also the rejection claim 22 above).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 3-7 and 18-19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided), as applied to claim 1, and in view of Zhang (CN-115556401-A).
Regarding claims 3-7 and 18-19, as applied to claim 1, Cui does not specify a system wherein the first roller and the second roller are configured to emboss the graphite; wherein the first roller comprises a first barrel roller or is configured as a first barrel roller and the second roller comprises a second barrel roller or is configured as a second barrel roller; wherein the first roller or the first barrel roller has a surface which has a flow field geometry; wherein the second roller or the second barrel roller has a surface which has a flow field geometry; wherein the first roller or the second roller have a surface; nor further comprising multiple embossing rollers, wherein the embossing rollers are configured to emboss the graphite after the graphite is compressed or pre-compacted, wherein the first roller or the second roller comprises at least one embossing roller.
However, reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned (embossing rollers; see MPEP 2141.01(a)), ART discloses a single-direction multi-pass continuous rolling unit, each mill support is matched with a pair of embossing rollers printed with the pattern of the plate to be formed, and a row of pressure rolls to prevent the plate from warping is arranged between the rolling mill supports (wherein the first roller and the second roller are configured to emboss the graphite; wherein the first roller or the first barrel roller has a surface which has a flow field geometry; wherein the second roller or the second barrel roller has a surface which has a flow field geometry) (Fig 1 and Translation Pg 1; the pattern of the embossing rollers inherently have a flow field geometry). Each set of embossing rollers and anti-warping rollers keep counter-rotating, and the gradual thinning of flexible graphite slabs is realized through gradual rolling, so as to finally achieve the extreme of continuous rolling production with high surface quality and no quality defects such as bubbling (comprising multiple embossing rollers, wherein the embossing rollers are configured to emboss the graphite after the graphite is compressed or pre-compacted, wherein the first roller or the second roller comprises at least one embossing roller) (Fig 1 and Translation Pg 1). Fig 1 shows that the embossing rollers are in the form of a embossing barrel roller (wherein the first roller comprises a first barrel roller or is configured as a first barrel roller and the second roller comprises a second barrel roller or is configured as a second barrel roller).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the system disclosed in Ciu by applying the known technique of embossing rollers in the form of a barrel roller printed with the pattern of the plate to be formed disclosed in ART to the first roller and the second roller disclosed in Ciu with predictable results and resulting in an improved system in order to prevent warping and achieve a continuous rolling production with high surface quality and no quality defects such as bubbling. MPEP 2143(D).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the system disclosed in Ciu such that the first roller and the second roller have a surface and the surfaces have different friction coefficients or roughness coefficients with predictable results in order to assist the transfer of the flexible graphite slab (see ART, Pg 3, Step 3).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided), as applied to claim 10, and in view of Breault (US 2014/0338825 A1).
Regarding claim 13, as applied to claim 10, Cui does not specify wherein the first belt or the second belt has a surface which has a flow field pattern.
However, reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned (belts with flow field patterns; see MPEP 2141.01(a)), Breault discloses a system wherein one or more of the belts, for example, the lower belt, may include ribs that form the flow field channels during pressing (Fig 11 and ¶0043).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the system disclosed in Ciu by applying the known technique of belts with ribs that create flow field patterns disclosed in Breault to the surface of the first belt or the second belt disclosed in Ciu with predictable results and resulting in an improved system. MPEP 2143(D).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided), as applied to claim 10, and in view of Kurata (US 2020/0031090 A1).
Regarding claim 14, as applied to claim 10, Cui does not specify wherein the first belt or the second belt is porous.
However, reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned (porous belts; see MPEP 2141.01(a)), Kurata discloses a system wherein the suction member 48 sucks very small particles passing through the mesh of the mesh belt 46 together with air and transfers the very small particles to the dust collector 27 through the tube 23 (¶0137). The dust collector 27 separates the very small particles that have passed through the mesh belt 46 from the air flow to accumulate the particles (¶0137).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the system disclosed in Ciu by applying the known technique of porous belts disclosed in Kurata to the first belt or the second belt disclosed in Ciu with predictable results and resulting in an improved system. MPEP 2143(D).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided).
Regarding claim 16, as applied to claim 15, Cui does not specify wherein the system further comprises at least one further feeder element, comprising at least one additionally hopper, configured to supply graphite to at least one second first roller and at least one second second roller.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the system disclosed by Ciu such that the system further comprises at least one further feeder element, comprising at least one additionally hopper, configured to supply graphite to at least one second first roller and at least one second second roller, since it has been held that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided), as applied to claim 16, and in view of Funakoshi (US 4,111,626).
Regarding claim 17, as applied to claim 16, Cui teaches a system wherein the further feeder is configured to supply graphite depending on a thickness or basis weight of compressed graphite, in particular graphite web, exiting the first roller and second roller (see the rejection of claims 1 and 15-16).
Cui does not teach a system wherein the further feeder is controlled based on signals of a first sensing element measuring a thickness or basis weight of compressed graphite exiting the first roller and the second roller.
However, reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned (further feeder is controlled based on signals of a first sensing element; see MPEP 2141.01(a)), Funakoshi discloses a system comprising a thickness detector for detecting the thickness of a mass of powdery material being compressed between the compressing rolls 10 and 11 and a powder supply control circuitry for adjusting the rate of supply of the powdery material onto said compressing rolls 10 and 11 by controlling the speed of rotation of the motor 14 in accordance with variation in the minimum clearance between the compressing rolls 10 and 11 (Fig 1 and Col 3, Ln 50-57). By detecting variations in thickness of a mass of powdery material being compressed between the compressing rolls 10 and 11, the number of revolutions of the screw feeder 13 can be controlled in response to said variations in such a manner that the mass of powdery material being compressed receives a uniform compressive force over the entire width thereof, and a resultant compressed product in the form of substantially flaky articles having uniform thickness can be obtained (a feeder controlled based on signals of a first sensing element measuring a thickness of compressed material exiting a first roller a second roller) (Fig 1 and Col 4, Ln 23-32).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the system disclosed in Ciu by applying the known technique of a feeder controlled based on signals of a first sensing element measuring a thickness of compressed material exiting a first roller a second roller disclosed in Funakoshi to the further feeder disclosed in Ciu with predictable results and resulting in an improved system. MPEP 2143(D).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided) in view of Koszo (US 2014/0141961 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Cui teaches a system for compressing graphite, the system comprising: at least one hopper configured to supply graphite (see Figures 1 and 3,namely frame element 215, guide plate 216 and discharge shut-off fan 17; “During work, graphite powder is fed between the lower frame 215 and the upper side of the guide plate 216 through the discharge shut-off fan 17, and the graphite powder can be discharged slowly and uniformly between the lower side of the guide plate 216 and the rear side of the lower frame 215”); a first guide roller (see guide roller pertaining to belt 212 on the lefthand side of said belt; namely conveying roller 211; Figures 3-4); a second guide roller (see guide roller pertaining to belt 225 on the lefthand side of said belt; namely transfer roller 221; Figures 3-4); a first nip roller (see roller pertaining to belt 212 on the right hand side of Figures 3-4); a second nip roller (see roller 221 pertaining to belt 225 on the right hand side of Figures 3-4); a first belt (212) attached to the first guide roller and the first nip roller; and a second belt (225) attached to the second guide roller and the second nip roller; wherein the first belt and the second belt are configured to direct graphite to the first nip roller and the second nip roller (“The belt 212 rotates in synchronization with the upper pressing belt 225, so that the graphite powder on the upper side of the conveyor belt 212 cooperates with the conveying of the conveyor belt 212 and the upper pressing belt 225 to extrude the graphite powder into a graphite coil”; see Figures 3-4), and the first nip roller and the second nip roller are configured to compress graphite as the graphite passes between the first nip roller and the second nip roller (see nip adjustment; “The distance between the belt 225 and the conveyor belt 212 is suitable for pre-compressing graphite coils of different thicknesses”) (Fig 1, 3-5, 8-10 and Translation Pg 6-7, 11-12).
Cui does not teach a method wherein at least one of the first guide roller, second guide roller, first nip roller, second nip roller, first belt, or second belt has at least one porous surface.
However, in the same field of endeavor, compressed articles, Koszo teaches the known technique wherein an important attribute of the conveyor 14 is that it has enough porosity to allow air to escape beneath it during pressing of granules (belt has at least one porous surface) (¶0171).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the method disclosed in Cui by applying the known technique of a belt having at least one porous surface disclosed in Koszo to the method disclosed in Cui such that at least one of the first guide roller, second guide roller, first nip roller, second nip roller, first belt, or second belt has at least one porous surface with predictable results and resulting in an improved method. MPEP 2143(D).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui (CN-110775970-A - translation provided) in view of Koszo (US 2014/0141961 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Cui teaches a processed graphite web (Fig 1, 3-5, 8-10 and Translation Pg 6-7, 11-12; see also the rejection claims 1 and 20 above). Examiner notes that “wherein the processed graphite web is produced by: providing a system, wherein the system comprises at least one hopper, a first guide roller, a second guide roller, a first nip roller, a second nip roller, a first belt attached to the first guide roller and the first nip roller, and a second belt attached to the second guide roller and the second nip roller; providing graphite into the at least one hopper; inserting the graphite between the first guide roller and the second guide roller using the at least one hopper; guiding the graphite towards the first nip roller and second nip roller using the first belt and the second belt; and compressing the graphite using the first nip roller and the second nip roller” is a recitation of a product-by-process claim. Product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. MPEP 2113. Cui does not teach a method wherein at least one of the first guide roller, second guide roller, first nip roller, second nip roller, first belt, or second belt has at least one porous surface.
However, in the same field of endeavor, compressed articles, Koszo teaches the known technique wherein an important attribute of the conveyor 14 is that it has enough porosity to allow air to escape beneath it during pressing of granules (belt has at least one porous surface) (¶0171).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the method disclosed in Cui by applying the known technique of a belt having at least one porous surface disclosed in Koszo to the method disclosed in Cui such that at least one of the first guide roller, second guide roller, first nip roller, second nip roller, first belt, or second belt has at least one porous surface with predictable results and resulting in an improved method. MPEP 2143(D).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JaMel M Nelson whose telephone number is (571)272-8174. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM ET - 5:00 PM ET.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached on (571) 270-5516. 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.
/JAMEL M NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights