9,11-15DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
In view of the amendment to Claim 4, the Drawing Objection is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-6, filed March 2, 2026, with respect to the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of Claims 1-6 and 8-16 have been fully considered and are only partially persuasive:
Applicant has amended Claim 1 to include the limitation of Claim 7, which was not rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(1). As such, the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of Claim 1 and its dependent claims (now Claims 3-6, 9, and 11-14 after Applicant’s March 2, 2026 Response) is withdrawn.
In addition to incorporating the limitation of Claim 7 into Claim 1, Applicant has appeared to incorporate a similar limitation to that found in Claim 8, and cancelled Claim 8. However, Claim 9 originally depended on Claim 8, but Applicant did not amend Claim 9 to change it dependency. As such, a new 35 USC 112(b) rejection of Claim 9 is presented below.
While the 35 USC 102 rejection statement at the beginning of paragraph 6 in the October 1, 2025 Office Action indicated that Claim 14 was rejected, the limitation recited in Claim 14, i.e., “wherein the conveyor device is a rotary conveyor”, was not discussed in relation to the teachings of Watanabe. It is maintained that Watanabe teaches, or at least suggests this limitation, as discussed below with regard to this limitation being incorporated into new Claim 17. In addition, because Claim 14 depends on Claim 1, it is allowable as discussed below.
Applicant has amended independent method Claim 15 to include several new limitations, including the “camera” limitation of Claim 16, which was rejected in subparagraph 6g in the October 1, 2025 Office Action. However, the other limitations directed to an “optical contrast sensor”, were added using alternative language, and therefore Watanabe still teaches all the limitations of Claim 15, as presented below.
Applicant added new Claim 17 which includes the rotary conveyor and the optical contrast sensor limitations discussed immediately above in subparagraphs “c” and “d”. As such, Claim 17 is also rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watanabe, as presented 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.
Claim 9 is 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 9 recites, “The stacking station in accordance with claim 8, wherein the imaging measuring apparatus is designed to capture images during standstill phases of the conveyor device”. Claim 9 is indefinite because it depends on cancelled Claim 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watanabe et al., US 2014/0026398.
With regard to Claim 15, Watanabe discloses a method for a battery cell producing industry (Figs. 1-24, [0035]-[0105]), comprising
conveying flat elements (20, 30, Figs. 10-24) by means of a conveyor device (110, 120, 130, Figs. 5-8) and receiving flat elements conveyed and delivered by the conveyor device in a stacking device (140, Figs. 5, 9) arranged downstream of the conveyor device (Fig. 5), wherein the stacking device places the flat elements on top of one another (Figs. 10-15, 18-23) and, thus, stacks the flat elements to form the segment stack (Figs. 18-23),
wherein the method comprises
an optical measurement by means of an optical measuring device comprising a camera (127, Figs. 6-7, [0048]; 137, Fig. 6, [0050]) and/or at least one optical contrast sensor looking at the conveyor device, and
detection of a position deviation AR,AS and/or an angle offset p of a flat element being conveyed on the conveyor device through image processing of images captured by the camera ([0048], [0050]), or by determining, from the signal of the at least one contrast sensor, an optical transition generated by a transverse edge of a flat element as a result of the conveying by the conveyor device.
Note: Because the optical measurement can be done by a camera OR an optical contrast sensor, as defined by the highlighted alternative language, the reference need only teach one of these alternatives to reject this limitation. In addition, because Watanabe describes a camera (127) that is located above the flat element (20) and a two light sources (126) located below the flat element (Fig. 7), this configuration can be construed to be a “contrast sensor” that can determine an “optical transition” generated by an edge of the flat element as a result of the conveying by the conveyor device.
With regard to Claim 17, Watanabe discloses a stacking station for a battery cell-producing industry (100, Figs. 1-24, [0035]-[0105]), comprising
a conveyor device (110, 120, 130, Figs. 5-6) for conveying flat elements (20, 30) and
a stacking device (140) arranged downstream of the conveyor device (Figs. 5, 18-23),
wherein the stacking device (140/141) receives flat elements delivered by the conveyor device (115/131; 114/121, Figs. 10-153),
wherein the stacking device places the flat elements on top of one another and, thus, stacks the flat elements to form a segment stack (Figs. 18-23),
wherein the stacking station has an optical measuring device comprising a camera (127, Figs. 6-7, [0048]; 137, Fig. 6, [0050]) and/or at least one optical contrast sensor looking at the conveyor device, and a control/evaluation unit (150) designed to detect a position deviation AR, AS and/or an angle offset p of a flat element being conveyed on the conveyor device through image processing of images captured by the camera ([0059]-[0068]), or by determining, from the signal of the at least one contrast sensor, an optical transition generated by a transverse edge of a flat element as a result of the conveying by the conveyor device, and
wherein the conveyor device is a rotary conveyor (Figs. 6, 10-15, [0044]-[0045]). Note: The present Specification teaches that the conveyor device “can be a rotary conveyor, for example a conveyor drum” (see page 2, lines 14-14); however, because the Specification does not define a “rotary conveyor” to be a “conveyor drum”, this term can be broadly construed to be any device that moves an object through rotation, which is done by device (110) in Watanabe.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-6, and 11-14 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Watanabe is the closest prior art, which teaches a stacking station and method for a battery cell-producing industry, the stacking station and method including/using inter alia, a conveyor device, a stacking device, and an image measurement device/camera to form an aligned segment stack from flat elements, the image measurement device/camera determining a position deviation ΔR, ΔS, and/or an angle offset Ψ of a flat element being conveyed on the conveyor device, and the conveyor device carries out a position and/or angle correction of the flat element on the basis of the image measurement. However, Watanabe fails to teach at least one element receptacle of the stacking device carrying out the position and/or angle correction by the element receptacle being adjustable and/or rotatable. The closest (intervening) prior art that teaches a stacking device that carries out position and/or angle correction is US 12,398,007. However, the position and/or angle control is carried out by a carrier that supports the stacking device, and not by an “element receptacle” of the stacking device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references describe a rotary conveyor:
US 6,793,217
US 10,581,108
US 12,398,007
US 2014/0056684
US 2021/0257653
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LYNN E SCHWENNING whose telephone number is (313)446-4861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5 pm EST.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272 -7097. 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.
/LYNN E SCHWENNING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights