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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Declaration filed does not persuasively overcome the prior art rejection of record.
No additional arguments presented at the time of filing of RCE and no amendment to claims are made, therefore the office action is FINAL.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 9-12, 14-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida et al (PGPUB 2008/0050295) and further in view of Hanisch et al (WO 2013/023640).
Claim 9: Uchida teaches a method of recovering valuable materials from lithium batteries [abstract]. The lithium battery being processed comprises a cathode, anode, separator, and electrolyte [0064-0068]. The electrolyte of the cell is taught to comprise a lithium salt in which fluorine serves as a constituent element such as LiPF6 and carbonates such as ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate, dimethyl carbonate (DMC), and ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) [0069]. A drying device (60: reduced pressure heating furnace) has heating coils (62) and a vacuum pump (65) in order to control the pressure and temperature of the device [0072]. The pressure of the device is taught to be 0.1-100 kPa [0074]. The prior art adjusts the pressure and temperature inside the treatment chamber to the boiling point of the organic solvent of the electrolyte solution [0075]. Explicit examples to decompose and vaporize the organic carbonate material is taught to be conducted at 50kPa (500 hPa) and 90oC [0074-0077], however the teaching of vaporizing DMC is 24oC at 2.4 kPA (24hPa) and EMC is 25oC at 3.3 kPa (33hPa) would obviate processing pressure and temperatures at these levels, with the expectation of longer operation times but increased opportunity to reuse the gasified solvent [0078, 0083-0086]. During this initial processing, the fluorine salt is not decomposed by the pressure and temperature combination as subsequent processing steps address the processing of fluorine removal after the organic carbonate has been vaporized [0079, 0088].
Uchida teaches a first step of engaging the spent lithium-ion secondary battery (s210) and heating under a reduced pressure (s220), but is silent to teach comminuted step of the batteries first.
Hanish teaches a method for reclaiming active material of a battery cell [Abstract]. The invention serves to recycle active material, especially lithium, from lithium accumulators or batteries [0004]. The steps include (a) comminuting the cells, particularly under inert gas or in a vacuum, (b) heating the solid cell fragments to a decomposition temperature under inert gas or in a vacuum [0003]. The cells comprise an anode, cathode, separator, and electrolyte [0003, 0022]. The prior art teaches a preferable embodiment where the cells are crushed under an inert gas to achieve comminution of the cells [0026]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 10: Uchida is silent to teach the comminuting device.
Hanish teaches an active material separation plant (10) to comprise a cell crushing device (12) which the cells are fed [0040]. The cells fed to be comminuted comprise are used lithium batteries which would include a cathode, anode, separator, and electrolyte [0003, 0022]. The comminution of cells is performed [0014] and a resulting product is obtained. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 11: Uchida teaches the cells (1) are placed into a chamber to process the electrolyte solvent, but is silent to teach comminuting the cells.
Hanish teaches comminuting the cells [0014, 0040]. The cells are dried at a heated temperature and under a vacuum [0023-0024]. The elements are depicted in Figure 1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
The first step separates the carbonate material and then obviates a second flow of material in additional steps through a route that separates the remaining battery elements to subsequent steps, separate from the flow of carbonate vapor. This route reads on the claim as presented.
Claim 12: Uchida teaches the cells (1) are placed into a chamber to process the electrolyte solvent, but is silent to teach comminuting the cells.
Hanish teaches comminuting the cells [0014, 0040]. The cells are dried at a heated temperature and under a vacuum [0023-0024]. The elements are depicted in Figure 1. A path from the comminution device and the drying area is a path that does not expose the material to the outside elements and is therefore interpreted to be gas-tight and/or dust-tight; cleanliness and lowering outside contaminants is a strong motivation to one having ordinary skill in the art of material processing both to protect people from devices and to protect devices from people. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 14-15: Uchida teaches a heater and pressure vacuum to operate on the operation of manufacturing [0072-0078].
Claim 16: Uchida is silent to teach the comminuted processing.
Hanish teaches comminuting the cells [0014, 0040]. The cells are dried at a heated temperature and under a vacuum [0023-0024]. The elements are depicted in Figure 1. The material is produced to be below a sieve size of 55mm [0021, 0046] which is applicant’s bottom filter. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 17: Uchida teaches a pump system motivated to be lower than 400hPa. It is within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a single pump for space considerations that is capable of evacuating from 1ATM to below 400 hPA as well as using two pumps where one pump is efficient and less costly to operate to get from 1ATM to a vacuum state and a second more expensive to operate pump but tuned to reach higher vacuum states. The selection of pumps to achieve high vacuum states is obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing.
Claim 18: Uchida teaches a method of recovering valuable materials from lithium batteries [abstract]. The lithium battery being processed comprises a cathode, anode, separator, and electrolyte [0064-0068]. The electrolyte of the cell is taught to comprise a lithium salt in which fluorine serves as a constituent element such as LiPF6 and carbonates such as ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate, dimethyl carbonate (DMC), and ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) [0069]. A drying device (60: reduced pressure heating furnace) has heating coils (62) and a vacuum pump (65) in order to control the pressure and temperature of the device [0072]. The pressure of the device is taught to be 0.1-100 kPa [0074]. The prior art adjusts the pressure and temperature inside the treatment chamber to the boiling point of the organic solvent of the electrolyte solution [0075]. Explicit examples to decompose and vaporize the organic carbonate material is taught to be conducted at 50kPa (500 hPa) and 90oC [0074-0077], however the teaching of vaporizing DMC is 24oC at 2.4 kPA (24hPa) and EMC is 25oC at 3.3 kPa (33hPa) would obviate processing pressure and temperatures at these levels, with the expectation of longer operation times but increased opportunity to reuse the gasified solvent [0078, 0083-0086]. During this initial processing, the fluorine salt is not decomposed by the pressure and temperature combination as subsequent processing steps address the processing of fluorine removal after the organic carbonate has been vaporized [0079, 0088].
Uchida teaches a first step of engaging the spent lithium-ion secondary battery (s210) and heating under a reduced pressure (s220), but is silent to teach comminuted step of the batteries first.
Hanish teaches a method for reclaiming active material of a battery cell [Abstract]. The invention serves to recycle active material, especially lithium, from lithium accumulators or batteries [0004]. The steps include (a) comminuting the cells, particularly under inert gas or in a vacuum, (b) heating the solid cell fragments to a decomposition temperature under inert gas or in a vacuum [0003]. The cells comprise an anode, cathode, separator, and electrolyte [0003, 0022]. The prior art teaches a preferable embodiment where the cells are crushed under an inert gas to achieve comminution of the cells [0026]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
The prior art obviates the utilization of a comminuted material and a chamber to remove electrolyte components therefrom. Removing the comminuted material introduces risks and hazards and therefore motivates one having ordinary skill in the art to continuously process the material until it is complete. One having ordinary skill in the art is motivated to conserve energy in order to reduce overall costs and therefore would be motivated to utilize the material warmed by comminuting and therefor be already heated to a minimal capacity by the first processing step before going through the decomposition pressure and heating.
Claim 19: Uchida teaches during this initial processing, the fluorine salt is not decomposed by the pressure and temperature combination as subsequent processing steps address the processing of fluorine removal after the organic carbonate has been vaporized [0079, 0088].
Claim 20: Uchida teaches a tank to receive used batteries and process the batteries; this is interpreted to read on applicant’s ‘batched’ scope [Fig 5].
Claim 21: Uchida teaches a heating of a vessel which is obviated to try a conductive heating as this is common practice in the art [0075-0078].
Claim 22: Uchida teaches the material of a used battery to be received and under go first processing steps to remove carbonates, fluoride salt, and binders [0072-0082] and subsequent processing to remove light fraction and separator foils and coating materials as well as heavy materials and foils [Table 1; 0025-0051].
Claim 23: Uchida the separation of materials by a chemical sieve of oxalate acid and method processing steps [0015-0019].
Claim 24: Uchida teaches a device processing that separates active material from carriers [0025-0051].
Claim 25: Uchida teaches a processing step that filters out carbon material from used batteries and flows material from the drying unit to a condensing unit by force of a vacuum whereby the activated carbon material is filtered [0072-0078].
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida et al (PGPUB 2008/0050295) and Hanisch et al (WO 2013/023640) as applies to claim 9 above, further in view of Tedjar et al (PGPUB 2007/0196725).
Claim 14: Uchida teaches a processing of used batteries. A tube exists between the drying device and the condenser whereby material flows and acts as a particle separation channel from the vessel. Uchida is silent to teach an airlock.
Tedjar teaches a method for treating lithium batteries to be rejuvenated [abstract]. A double air-lock is utilized [0062]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate an airlock to the processing step of the battery of Uchida as taught by Tedjar in order to reduce the influence of oxygen on the system while being recycled; one having ordinary skill in the art would be highly motivated to reduce the effects of oxygen in the rejuvenation process in order to improve safety.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 STEPHEN J YANCHUK whose telephone number is (571)270-7343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-8p.
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, Nick Smith can be reached at 571-272-8760. 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.
/STEPHEN J YANCHUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752