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
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 207241009 U, in view of Slivar, U.S. Patent No. 6035518.
Regarding claims 1 and 8, the method described in these claims would inherently result from the use of invention of CN ‘009 as advanced above. CN ‘009
discloses a coil (i.e., when a first end material is wound around 504, see figure 2) comprising a winding core 541, a foil (i.e., a material from 200) wound on the winding core 541, wherein the winding core 541 has a perforated circumferential surface (542, see figure 3) contacting the coiled foil with at least one opening (542 connected to 543, see figure 3) which is connected to a vacuum source (not shown, connected to 543) which allows the foil (i.e., a material from 200) being sucked through at least one opening 542 without damaging the foil and free of adhesive material (claims 4-6); and a plurality of openings 542 are arranged in a distributed manner at least along a circumferential direction or the winding core 541 has an axis of rotation (i.e., an axis of rotation of 541) extending along an axial direction and the openings 542 are arranged in a distributed manner along the axial direction (see figure 3, claims 2 and 9); see figures 1-5.
As stated above, CN ‘009 does not explicitly explain the metal foil material.
Slivar ‘518 discloses the foil comprising a support material of an electrode foil, an electrode foil, which has at least one active material, or a separator foil which are used as components of a battery cell (see columns 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of CN ‘009 to include a particular foil material as suggested by Slivar ‘518, to show that other materials can be wound on the winding shaft. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN ‘009 in view of Slivar ‘518 as applied to claims above, and further in view of Schultz et al., U.S. Patent No. 6695245 B1.
Regarding claims 3 and 10, as stated above, CN ‘009 in view of Slivar ‘518 shows the plurality of openings, but does not explicitly explain if openings can be different.
Schultz ‘245 recognizes the concept of arranging a plurality of apertures 64 which can be randomly spaced or patterned on the cylinder to change the openings, see column 6, lines 40-55.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of CN ‘009 in view of Slivar ‘518 to include different openings as suggested by Schultz ‘245, in order to help remove the coil from the mandrel easier. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN ‘009 in view of Slivar ‘518 as applied to claims above, and further in view of Kury et al., U.S. Patent No. 6270034 B1.
Regarding claim 7, as stated above, CN ‘009 in view of Slivar ‘518 shows one winding core rather than two winding cores.
Kury ‘034 discloses the concept of a plurality of shafts (10-60) with perforations 300 for winding the material continuously, see figures 1-8B.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of CN ‘009 in view of Slivar ‘518 to include a plurality of shafts as suggested by Kury ‘034, in order to help wind the material continuously. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12 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:
The claims 11-12 are patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claims 11-12, including every structural element recited in the claim in combination of independent claim(s), including wherein shapes of the respective openings are at least partially different from each other. The prior art of record, Schultz ‘245 recognizes the concept of arranging a plurality of apertures 64 which can be randomly spaced or patterned on the cylinder to change the openings, but not actual shapes arranged on the respective openings are different from each other.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the device as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the device in the manner required by the claims.
Response to Arguments
Claims 11-12 have been added.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-9 have been amended.
Applicant’s arguments/remarks, filed on 6/4/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-10 under Silvar ‘518 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of CN ‘009 in view of Silvar ‘518 as stated above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-6947. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 9 P.M or Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Hodge, can be reached on (571) 272-2097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
SK
6/30/26
/SANG K KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights