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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/03/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 02/03/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 7-11, 13-18 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 7-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 3-5, 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Qian et al ("Upcycling Low-nickel polycrystalline cathodes from Retired Electric Vehicle Batteries into Single crystal Nickel-Rich Cathodes").
Regarding claim 1, Qian discloses the feasibility of molten salts direct-recycling (MSDR) by upcycling a low-nickel polycrystalline LiNi0.5Mn0.3Co0.2O2 (NMC) cathode material that is widely used in early-year electric vehicles into Ni-rich (Ni>65%) single crystal NMCs with increased energy-density (>10% increase) and outstanding electrochemical performance (abstract meeting limitation “a method of forming a single crystal nickel-rich cathode material”).
To upgrade the degraded NMC532 into Ni66-NMC, 0.2 mole of the degraded NMC532 cathode powder was mixed (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “ combining a recycling stream of a nickel-lean cathode material”) with 0.2 mole of Ni0.83Mn0.09Co0.08(OH)2 (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “a quantity of Ni”) and 0.5 mole of LiOH (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “a quantity of Li salts”) and 0.1 mole of Li2SO4 and transferred into a crucible (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “a fluxing agent”). LiOH was in excess to facilitate complete relithiation, which is a self-saturated process accord to literature (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “a fluxing agent” where fluxing agent is interpreted as additional LiOH and Li2SO4 , and “the fluxing agent includes an excess of Li salts”).
Regarding the limitation “wherein the quantity of Ni is based on a target nickel ratio of the single crystal nickel-rich cathode material”, the quantity of Ni added to for Ni66-NMC is 0.2 mole of Ni0.83Mn0.09Co0.08(OH)2 (Pg. 19 par. 2). Qian also discloses forming Ni80-NMC where 0.3 mole of Ni(OH)2 is added as Ni source. Therefore, the method of Qian meets this limitation since the quantity of Ni is different for different target nickel ratios.
The material mixture was heated to 900 °C… and held at 900 °C for 5 h and then at 860 °C for 15 h in air before slow cooling… to 300 °C (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “sintering the Li salt mixture to form the single crystal nickel-rich cathode material having the target nickel ratio”).
Regarding claim 3, Qian discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses, In the MSDR process, the cathode powders from the used battery, which contains degraded NMC 532 particles… are used as “materials feedstock” (Pg. 10 par. 1). They are first mixed with Ni-rich materials… and then heated at a high temperature in LiOH-Li2SO4 molten-salt mixtures (Pg. 10 par. 1 meeting limitation “heating the Li salt mixture to form a molten salt defining the fluxing agent, the heating performed a single time for generating the single crystal cathode materials”).
Regarding claim 4, Qian discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses the obtained powders were recovered from the crucible, ground in an agate mortar, and washed using deionized water to separate the material from the water-soluble Li-salts (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “further comprising, following sintering, rinsing the single crystal cathode material for removing excess, soluble lithium salts”).
Regarding claim 5, Qian discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses the powder was ground again to pass through a 400-mesh sieve and then stored (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “further comprising agitating the single crystal cathode material for granular uniformity”).
Regarding claim 10, Qian discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses the small amount of carbon black and polymer binder in the NMC532 cathode are burned away during the thermal treatment (Pg. 10 par. 1). A time-resolved in situ XRD experiment is carried out to track the reaction between equal moles of the degraded NMC532 (Ni = 50%) and Ni 0.83Mn0.09Co0.08(OH)2 (Ni = 83%) in molten LiOH-Li2SO4 (Pg. 10 par. 1). At the beginning, peaks associated with the degraded NMC532, Ni0.83Mn0.09Co0.08(OH)2, LiOH, and Li2SO4 could all be observed. As the temperature increase, Ni0.83Mn0.09Co0.08(OH)2 peaks disappear at 200 [Symbol font/0xB0]C, likely due to the loss of H2O and long-range structural ordering (Pg. 10 par. 1). The initially merged (006) and (012) peaks in the degraded NMC532 become separated, which also indicates the recovery of the layered structure (Pg. 10 par.1 meeting limitation “wherein the nickel-lean cathode material remains in a solid, undissolved state”).
Regarding claim 11, Qian discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including to upgrade the degraded NMC532 into Ni66-NMC, 0.2 mole of the degraded NMC532 cathode powder was mixed with 0.2 mole of Ni0.83Mn0.09Co0.08(OH)2 and 0.5 mole of LiOH (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “a quantity of Li salts includes LiOH”) and 0.1 mole of Li2SO4 and transferred into a crucible (Pg. 19 par. 2). LiOH was in excess to facilitate complete relithiation, which is a self-saturated process accord to literature (Pg. 19 par. 2 meeting limitation “the fluxing agent includes additional LiOH and Li2SO4”).
Qian also discloses we notice that many transition metal oxides (such as NiO) are soluble in molten salts and take advantage of this phenomenon to develop the herein presented MSRD method for low-Ni polycrystalline NMC into Ni-rich single-crystal NMC (Pg. 10 par. 1 meeting limitation “the quantity of Ni includes NiO”).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qian et al ("Upcycling Low-nickel polycrystalline cathodes from Retired Electric Vehicle Batteries into Single crystal Nickel-Rich Cathodes") in view of Jin et al (WO 2020111807 A1, machine translation used for citations).
Regarding claim 2, Qian discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above but is silent to “wherein the single crystal nickel-rich cathode material has a greater percentage of primary particles and a lesser percentage of secondary particles than the nickel lean cathode material”.
Jin discloses a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery in a primary particle state and a method for producing the same ([0001]). Unlike conventional cathode active materials that exhibit the form of secondary particles in which multiple primary particles are aggregated, the cathode active material of the present invention is composed only of individual primary particles that are not aggregated ([0014]). In the method for manufacturing a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery from a recycled cathode active material according to the present invention, the recycled cathode active material can be used without limitation as long as it contains Ni ([0029]). LiOH as a lithium source and Ni(OH)2 as a nickel source were mixed in a solid phase with LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2 positive electrode material ([0056]). The crushed particles were manufactured into a pellet shape, heat treated at 900 °C for 5 hours, and the pellets were crushed into particles ([0057]). As shown in Fig. 2, it was confirmed that the cathode active material in the form of primary particles manufactured according to an embodiment of the present invention was a cathode active material in the form of primary particles ([0064]). In the case of Comparative Example 1, where pellets were not manufactured in Fig. 3, it was confirmed that the primary particles were not manufactured into a cathode active material in the state of primary particles as aggregated secondary particles ([0065]). Jin further discloses by manufacturing it in a pellet shape and then firing it, the particle size is adjusted to a certain range, so that a lithium secondary battery including the positive electrode active material manufactured by the present invention exhibits the effect of improving the charge density characteristics and charge/discharge characteristics ([0045]).
Figure 2, shown below, shows that more than 90% of the particles in the single crystal cathode material are primary particles.
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the single crystal cathode material to have a greater percentage of primary particles and a lesser percentage of secondary particles than the nickel lean cathode material in the method of Qian in order to improve the charge density characteristics and charge/discharge characteristics as taught by Jin.
PNG
media_image1.png
889
599
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
751
530
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Qian in view of Jin discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including Figure 2, which shows that more than 90% of the particles in the single crystal cathode material are primary particles.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qian et al ("Upcycling Low-nicel polycrystalline cathodes from Retired Electric Vehicle Batteries into Single crystal Nickel-Rich Cathodes") in view of Wang et al (WO 2017/091562, as cited on IDS 03/14/2023).
Regarding claim 8, Qian discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above but is silent to “further comprising: agitating an end-of-life battery waste stream to generate a particulate mass including casing, current collector, anode material and cathode material, and separating the recycling stream of nickel-lean cathode material from the particulate mass through physical separation”.
Wang discloses receiving a recycling stream of expended, discarded and/or spent lithium ion batteries i.e., end-of life battery waste stream, and agitating the batteries to expose the internal components and charge material by physical crushing, shredding and/or disengagement (Pg. 16 lines 5-8). Physical separation process dismantles the battery to form a granular mass i.e., particulate mass, of the exhausted battery material including the raw materials in particulate form, usually by simply crushing and grinding the spent battery casings and cells therein (Pg. 6 lines 21-26). Physical sieving and filtering remove casing, separators and large extraneous materials (Pg. 16 lines 9-10, meeting limitation “casing, current collector, anode material and cathode material”). A leached solution is formed by combining crushed battery material from the lithium battery recycling stream with an acidic leach agent and hydrogen peroxide to separate cathode materials from undissolved material (Pg. 16 lines 10-13, meeting limitation “separating the recycling stream of nickel-lean cathode material from the particulate mass through physical separation”). Wang further discloses following the recycling process, active charge materials result and are employed to form new cells including the recycled cathode material and the new cells may then be employed in the various types of devices that contributed the exhausted, spent cells (Pg. 7 lines 3-6). One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the economic and environmental benefits of recycling.
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to agitate an end-of-life battery waste stream to generate a particulate mass including casing, current collector, anode material and cathode material, and separating the recycling stream of nickel-lean cathode material from the particulate mass through physical separation in the method of Qian in order to recycle cathode material as taught by Wang which has economic and environmental benefits.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qian et al ("Upcycling Low-nicel polycrystalline cathodes from Retired Electric Vehicle Batteries into Single crystal Nickel-Rich Cathodes") in view of Wang et al (WO 2017/091562, as cited on IDS 03/14/2023) and in further view of Zhang et al (CN 104183888 A, machine translation used for citations).
Qian in view of Wang discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above but is silent to “separating copper and aluminum current collector materials from the particulate mass; and sieving particles of the nickel-lean cathode material from graphite defining the anode material”.
Zhang discloses a green recycling method for waste lithium iron phosphate power batteries comprising the following steps ([0009]): discharging, cutting and disassembling the used batteries ([0010]), mechanically separated to obtain the positive electrode sheet, negative electrode sheet and diaphragm ([0011]), mechanically stirring and crushing the dried positive electrode material and negative electrode material, respectively, and obtaining aluminum foil i.e., aluminum current collector material, positive electrode coarse powder containing a small amount of aluminum scraps and copper foil, and negative electrode coarse powder containing a small amount of copper scraps after screening, respectively. The aluminum foil and copper foil, i.e. copper current collector, are separated and recycled, and the positive electrode coarse powder and negative electrode coarse powder are ball-milled and screened i.e., sieved, respectively ([0013]). Zhang further discloses the recovered positive electrode powder and negative electrode powder have good charge and discharge performance ([0018]), and the aluminum foil and copper foil can be recycled at the same time and have high purity.
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to separate copper and aluminum current collector materials from the particulate mass and sieve particles of the nickel-lean cathode material from graphite defining the anode material in the method of Qian in view of Wang in order to for the recovered positive electrode powder and negative electrode powder to have good charge and discharge performance and for the copper and aluminum current collector materials to be recycled at the same time and have high purity as taught by Zhang.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE L QUIST whose telephone number is (571)270-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:00.
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, Sally Merkling can be reached at (571) 272-6297. 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.
/N.L.Q./Examiner, Art Unit 1738
/SALLY A MERKLING/SPE, Art Unit 1738