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 .
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 10 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. It is not clear what the applicant means by “amount of gradient is maximum amount”, or “the amount of gradient decreases”.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by N. Yamazaki (Japanese Patent: 2015-011964, here after Yamazaki).
Claim 1 is rejected. Yamazaki teaches a method of manufacturing a lithium-ion secondary battery [page 1, paragraph 2], the method comprising:
preparing an unwinder (20) supplying a current collector (2, electrode foil) to be coated to a predetermined position, a coating device (31) coating a coating liquid on the current collector, a drying device including a driving roll (66) and a drying nozzle (70) and drying the coated current collector, and a rewinder winding (50) the coated current collector passing through the drying device at a predetermined position [fig. 2, page 4 paragraphs 4-8];
coating, by the coating device, a coating liquid(slurry) on the current collector unwound from the unwinder [page 4 paragraph 6];
drying the coated current collector by the driving device; and
rewinding, by the rewinder, the current collector in which the coating liquid is dried, at a predetermined position [page 4 paragraphs 7-8].
Claim 2 is rejected. Yamazaki teaches the limitation of claim 1 and also teaches preparing a sensor sensing a degree of drying of a coating layer coated on the current collector, and a controller controlling driving of the drying nozzle on the basis of information sensed by the sensor [page 2 paragraph 2].
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 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over N. Yamazaki (Japanese Patent: 2015-011964, here after Yamazaki).
Claim 9 is rejected. Yamazaki teaches the limitation of claim 1 and also teaches sensing, by sensors, temperature of the upper surface and lower surface, and by control board controlling driving of the drying nozzle on the basis of sensed information [page 5 last paragraph, page 6 paragraphs 1-3]. Although Yamazaki doesn’t teach sensing a degree of drying of a coating layer coated on the current collector, however simulated work and temperature sensors and control board acts as a sensor to sense (or calculate) the degree of drying of the coating material.
Claim 10 is rejected. Yamazaki teaches the controlling the driving of the drying nozzle on the basis of the sensed information is performed by allowing a maximum amount of air to be sprayed from the drying nozzle such that an amount of gradient is maximum in a state in which the coating layer has fluidity, and by allowing an amount of air sprayed from the drying nozzle to be decreased such that the amount of gradient decreases as the degree of drying of the coating layer increases temperature gradient [page 7 paragraph 3-page 11 paragraph 3], in fact with higher amount of solvent in coating, heat transfer coefficient and heat conductivity changes, and the control board adjust parameters such as rotational speed of the fan[page 6 paragraph 1, last 4 lines], which the wind speed and air volume of the hot air coming out from the hot air nozzle are changed [page 4 paragraph 7].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-8 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. Yamazaki does not teach forming a gradient on each of the driving roll and the drying nozzle in a width direction of the current collector. Casey E. Walker et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2014/0116275) teaches creating an air flow gradient along width of a web for drying [0044], but is it related to a print head and paper coating and can not fairly combine with Yamazaki.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 5712725166. 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.
/TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718