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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 3, 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-17, 19-23 are pending.
The rejection of claims 1-3, 5-11, 13-18 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sloop is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 1, 3, 5, 7 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guo et al is withdrawn.
The rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al in view of He et al is withdrawn.
The rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al in view of Yabuki et al is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 8-9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sloop in view of Yan is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 10-11, 13-18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al in view of He et al is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al in view of He et al in view of Yan et al is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-2, 5-10, 13-17, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sloop (US Patent Application 2017/0200989 (already of record))) in view of Sloop (2) (US Patent Application 2010/0203366 (already of record)).
Regarding claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-17, 21-23, Sloop teaches a method of recycling a positive electrode material of a battery comprising harvesting a used electrode material, thrash in basic medium, collect solids, rinse solids, dry solids, grind solids, remove carbon, relithiate with lithium ions with oxidizing agent, collect solids, rinse solids (Fig. 1). Sloop further teaches an aluminum support (Paragraph 26). Sloop further teaches the basic medium may be a liquid medium in which the positive electrode material is suspended, i.e. aqueous solution or nonaqueous solution; in one embodiment, the positive electrode material is suspended in water basified with lithium hydroxide….In some examples, an oxidizing agent such as LiClO, hydrogen peroxide, lithium peroxide may be included in this solution (Paragraph 26). Sloop further teaches the relithiation step comprises heating the positive electrode material in the in an autoclave comprising relithiation solution under pressure (Paragraph 35). Sloop further teaches harvesting a used electrode material comprising disassembly of one or more batteries and removal of the electrode material therein (Paragraph 23). However, Sloop fails to specifically disclose carbonate solvents.
In the same field of endeavor, Sloop (2) teaches reconditioning of electrode material (Abstract). Sloop further teaches lithium replenishing by suspending the electrode in a solvent system comprising a carbonate solvent (Paragraphs 54-56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted a carbonate solvent in Sloop in view of Sloop (2) in order to form a liquid medium in which the positive electrode material is suspended. Simple substitution of one known solvent for another would provide the predictable results of forming a suspending medium for the positive electrode material.
Claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-17, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sloop (US Patent Application 2017/0200989 (already of record))) in view of Lee et al (US Patent Application 2018/0212282).
Regarding claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-17, 21-23, Sloop teaches a method of recycling a positive electrode material of a battery comprising harvesting a used electrode material, thrash in basic medium, collect solids, rinse solids, dry solids, grind solids, remove carbon, relithiate with lithium ions with oxidizing agent, collect solids, rinse solids (Fig. 1). Sloop further teaches an aluminum support (Paragraph 26). Sloop further teaches the basic medium may be a liquid medium in which the positive electrode material is suspended, i.e. aqueous solution or nonaqueous solution; in one embodiment, the positive electrode material is suspended in water basified with lithium hydroxide….In some examples, an oxidizing agent such as LiClO, hydrogen peroxide, lithium peroxide may be included in this solution (Paragraph 26). Sloop further teaches the relithiation step comprises heating the positive electrode material in the in an autoclave comprising relithiation solution under pressure (Paragraph 35). Sloop further teaches harvesting a used electrode material comprising disassembly of one or more batteries and removal of the electrode material therein (Paragraph 23). However, Sloop fails to specifically disclose carbonate or acetonitrile solvents.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches a method for recovering a positive electrode active material from a lithium secondary battery comprising separating a positive electrode into a collector and a positive electrode part (Abstract). Lee et al further teaches delaminating the positive electrode part containing the lithium transition metal oxide by immersing in a solvent such as water, a carbonate or acetonitrile solvent (Paragraphs 13-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted carbonate or acetonitrile solvents in Sloop in view of Lee et al in order to form a liquid medium in which the positive electrode material is suspended. Simple substitution of one known solvent for another would provide the predictable results of forming a suspending medium for the positive electrode material.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sloop (US Patent Application 2017/0200989 (already of record))) in view of Lee et al (US Patent Application 2018/0212282) as applied to claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-17, 21-23 above, and further in view of Wang (CN105186058).
Regarding claims 18-19, Sloop and Lee et al disclose the invention substantially as claimed. Sloop and Lee et al teaches the features above. However, Sloop and Lee et al fail to specifically disclose a molten salt.
In the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches a method for recycling lithium ion battery electrodes comprising placing the lithium ion battery electrode in a high temperature liquid to cause the electrode material to detach from the current collector (Paragraph 9). Wang et al further teaches the high temperature liquid is a molten salt such as a chloride salt including sodium or calcium chloride (Paragraph 13). Wang further teaches the high temperature liquid is controlled between 450-700C (Paragraph 33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided the high temperature liquid comprising a molten salt in Sloop and Lee et al in view of Wang in order to detach the current collector from the electrode material. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) See MPEP 2144.07.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sloop (US Patent Application 2017/0200989 (already of record))) in view of Sloop (2) (US Patent Application 2010/0203366 (already of record)) as applied to claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-17, 21-23 above, and further in view of Wang (CN105186058).
Regarding claims 18-19, Sloop and Sloop (2) disclose the invention substantially as claimed. Sloop and Sloop (2) teach the features above. However, Sloop and Sloop (2) fail to specifically disclose a molten salt.
In the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches a method for recycling lithium ion battery electrodes comprising placing the lithium ion battery electrode in a high temperature liquid to cause the electrode material to detach from the current collector (Paragraph 9). Wang et al further teaches the high temperature liquid is a molten salt such as a chloride salt including sodium or calcium chloride (Paragraph 13). Wang further teaches the high temperature liquid is controlled between 450-700C (Paragraph 33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided the high temperature liquid comprising a molten salt in Sloop and Sloop (2) in view of Wang in order to detach the current collector from the electrode material. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) See MPEP 2144.07.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-17, 19-23 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANISHA DIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-7730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday and Friday, 9:00AM-5:30PM.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/TANISHA DIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 September 24, 2026
