Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/796,311

APPARATUS FOR DISCHARGING POWDER FOR SECONDARY BATTERY

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 07, 2024
Examiner
PANCHOLI, VISHAL J
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
SK On Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
671 granted / 921 resolved
+2.9% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
955
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
47.7%
+7.7% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 921 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to the claims field by the applicant on 08/07/2024. The application claims foreign priority to KR 10-2023-0108126 filed on 08/18/2023. Because all of the foreign priority requirements are met, the effective filing date of the claims is 08/18/2023. Therefore, claims 1-16 are pending and examined on the merits. 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 § 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, 8, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ganzer et al. (“Ganzer” hereinafter) (US PG PUB 2016/0052719). Regarding claim 1, Ganzer discloses an apparatus (item 10, figure 1) for discharging powder for a secondary battery (the hopper is capable of holding and discharging powder or granular material), the apparatus comprising: a hopper (items 12 and 14, figure 1) having an accommodating space in which powder is accommodated and a discharge port (item 60, figure 11) through which the powder is discharged; a mesh plate (item 30, figures 1-3) disposed inside the hopper; and a vibration transmission unit (item 66, figure 3) transmitting vibrations to the mesh plate (paragraph [0066]). Regarding claim 8, Ganzer discloses that the hopper includes a tapered portion (item 14, figure 3) having an inner diameter that gradually narrows, and the discharge port is disposed in a lower portion of the tapered portion (figures 3 and 11). Regarding claim 15, Ganzer discloses a valve (item 148, figure 11) opened and closed is connected to the discharge port (paragraph [0068]). 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. Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ganzer in view of Ha (KR 10-2021-0074570). Regarding claims 2-6, Ganzer does not teach at least one guide member disposed in the accommodating space and guiding a moving direction of the powder, wherein the at least one guide member is fixed to and disposed on both sides of the mesh plate, wherein the at least one guide member has a cone shaped with inclined portion to guide the powder material. Ha teaches another powder dispenser (figure 1) comprising a hopper (item 10, figure 1) and a dispersion cone (item 50, figure 2) with inclined surfaces that is in the middle of the hopper to break apart larger chunks of powder or granular material (paragraphs [0008], [0011]), wherein the cone is fixed to the hopper via support members (item 51, figure 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a cone-shaped guide member in the middle of the hopper of Ganzer’s device as taught by Ha in order to provide a guide surface and also a dispersion device that helps not only the powder to flow but also break apart larger chunks or pieces of powder material into siftable material. Furthermore, it would be obvious to place such guide member in contact and fixed with the mesh plate in order to ensure that the powder material is being guided while passing through the mesh plate and also after passing through the mesh plate. Ganzer already teaches multiple fastener devices so adding a cone with additional support members and fastener will only require a simple modification. Claims 9-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ganzer in view of Saunders et al. (“Saunders” hereinafter) (US PG Pub 2011/0114662). Regarding claims 9-11, Ganzer teaches that the mesh plate is adjacent the tapered portion and that the vibration transmission unit is attached to the mesh plate. Saunders teaches another granular material dispenser (item 10, figure 1) comprising a vertical mesh plate (item 25, figure 1) that is disposed inside a tapered portion of a hopper (item 20, figure 1), wherein two vibration units (item 35, figure 1) are attached to the tapered portion of the hopper outside the hopper via fastening mechanisms (item 75, figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Ganzer as taught by Saunders by placing the horizontal mesh plate in the tapered portion of the hopper along with the vibration transmission unit outside the hopper that connects to the outside wall of the hopper while still transmitting the vibrations to the mesh plate in the tapered portion. Doing so allows the powder or granular material to already pass through the tapered portion before going through the mesh plate thus consolidating the amount of mass that passes through the mesh plate. Furthermore, placing the vibration transmission unit outside the hopper prevents the powder from contacting the transmission unit to prevent any unwanted contamination. Regarding claim 12, Ganzer as modified by Saunders teaches that the vibration transmission unit and the mesh plate are connected through a connection member (dampeners 50 through holes 45, figure 1, paragraph [0006]), and the connection member penetrates through a portion of the hopper (figure 1). Regarding claim 13, Ganzer does not explicitly teach a controller controlling driving of the vibration transmission unit. Saunders teaches a controller (item 80, figure 1, paragraph [0012]) that controls the vibration transmission unit and controls the vibratory patterns of the vibrators. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a controller in the device of Ganzer as taught by Saunders to control the vibration transmitting mechanisms such that they impart effective vibratory patterns on the mesh plate and the powder material for effective flow and dispensing of the material. Regarding claim 16, Ganzer does not explicitly teach that the mesh plate includes stainless steel. Saunders also teaches that various components of the invention are made of steel to effectively transmit and receive vibrations and also provide a long life to the invention (paragraph [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Ganzer as taught by Saunders to provide steel as material for various components of the invention, including the mesh plate, in order to effectively transmit and receive the vibrations from the vibration transmission system and also to provide the invention with a long life. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ganzer in view of Ha, as applied to claim 2 above, further in view of Saunders. Regarding claim 7, Ganzer does not explicitly teach that the guide member includes stainless steel. Saunders also teaches that various components of the invention are made of steel to effectively transmit and receive vibrations and also provide a long life to the invention (paragraph [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Ganzer as taught by Saunders to provide steel as material for various components of the invention, including the guide member, in order to effectively transmit and receive the vibrations from the vibration transmission system and also to provide the invention with a long life. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 14 is 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following documents disclose subject matter related to hopper dispensers for granular materials with vibratory or other moving transmitting mechanisms: US PN 3,591,001, US PN 6,079,911, and US PN 6,299,021. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL J PANCHOLI whose telephone number is (571)272-9324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (9 am - 7 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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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. /Vishal Pancholi/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 07, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599270
PORTABLE PERSONAL HAND SANITIZER DISPENSER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593942
DEFORMABLE PLASTIC VESSEL AND SYSTEM FOR REDUCING PLASTIC WASTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589401
DISPENSER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589936
SYSTEM FOR DISPENSING A FLUID SUBSTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583005
DOSING DEVICE, CONTAINER, PRODUCT DISPENSER AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+25.2%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 921 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month