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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species (b), there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 18 December 2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 13-15 are amended; claims 18-30 are cancelled. Accordingly, claims 1-17 remain pending in the application with claims 1-4 and 6-17 considered in this Office Action. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 16 September 2025.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-10, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao (CN 113151680) in view of Snydacker (US 10,648,090).
Regarding Claim 1, Gao discloses a method for recycling waste lithium batteries comprising: A) reacting waste lithium battery materials with acid solution, filtering to obtain a leachate (recycling lithium from a leachate meets the limitation of a method for extracting a species from a leachate); B) subjecting the leachate to chemical impurity removal and resin adsorption to obtain a decontamination solution (the decontamination solution is a leachate which has been through impurity removal and resin adsorption, such that the decontamination solution meets the limitation of a leachate comprising a first species and a second species); C) subjecting the decontamination solution to bipolar membrane electrodialysis (bipolar membrane electrodialysis meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack) to obtain a lithium hydroxide solution (lithium hydroxide solution meets the limitation of a basic solution with the second species), an acid solution (acid solution meets the limitation of an acidic solution with the first species) and a salt solution (salt solution meets the limitation of a depleted leachate; [n0046]). Gao further illustrates diffusing sulfate ions (sulfate ions meet the limitation of a first species) across a membrane and diffusing lithium ions (lithium ions meet the limitation of a second species) across a membrane (Fig. 1, Fig. 2), such that Gao meets the limitation of diffusing the first species across a first membrane and diffusing a second species across a second membrane. Gao further discloses the acid solution output from the acid chamber is recycled to step A [n0110], such that a portion of the acidic solution is flowed back into the electrodialysis stack.
Gao is silent to treating sedimentary ore with the acidic solution in the presence of an oxidant.
Gao, however, discloses reusing the acid solution output from the electrodialysis acid chamber to perform leaching in step 1 [n0147], wherein waste battery materials, sulfuric acid, and hydrogen peroxide (hydrogen peroxide meets the limitation of an oxidant) are combined [n0144]. Gao further discloses lithium is a valuable metal with a large demand [n0002].
Snydacker discloses an electrodialysis system for converting a lithium sulfate solution (lithium sulfate solution meets the limitation of a leachate comprising a first species and a second species) into a lithium hydroxide solution (lithium hydroxide solution meets the limitation of a basic solution with the second species) and a sulfuric acid solution (sulfuric acid solution meets the limitation of an acidic solution with the first species; Col. 42, lines 43-46), such that Snydacker meets the limitation of a method for extracting a species (lithium and sulfate) from a leachate (lithium sulfate solution). Snydacker further discloses the membrane electrolysis cell (i.e. an electrodialysis system) may be a three-compartment cell in which lithium ions are transferred from a central compartment across a cation-conducting membrane to one compartment (transferring lithium ions across a cation-conducting membrane meets the limitation of diffusing the second species across a second membrane) and sulfate ions are transferred from a central compartment across an anion-conducting membrane to another compartment (transferring sulfate ions across an anion-conducting membrane meets the limitation of diffusing the first species across a first membrane; Col. 44, lines 3-14). The multi-compartment electrodialysis system of Snydacker meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack. Snydacker discloses converting lithium sulfate to lithium hydroxide and sulfuric acid using a three-compartment cell wherein lithium ions and sulfate ions are diffused across their respective membranes, such that forming a depleted leachate in the central compartment is necessarily present.
Snydacker further discloses recycling the acidified solution (sulfuric acid) from the membrane cell to an ion exchange unit wherein the lithium ions from the lithium-enriched ion exchange material are exchanged with hydrogen ions from the acid solution to produce a lithium eluate, and the lithium eluate is passed to the membrane cell (of the electrodialysis stack) (Col. 41, lines 30-57), such that Snydacker meets the limitation of flowing a portion of the acidic solution back into the electrodialysis stack.
Snydacker further discloses the liquid resource is a natural brine, a dissolved salt flat, seawater, concentrated seawater, a desalination effluent, a concentrated brine, a processed brine, an oilfield brine, a liquid from an ion exchange process, a liquid from a solvent extraction process, a synthetic brine, a leachate from an ore or combination of ores, a leachate from a mineral or combination of minerals, a leachate from a clay or combination of clays, a leachate from recycled products, a leachate from recycled materials, or combinations thereof; or the liquid resource is produced by leaching ores, clays, sediments, waste, scrap, post-consumer products, slurries, or other materials using hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, other acids, or combinations thereof (ores/sediments/other materials meet the limitation of sedimentary ore; leaching materials with acid meets the limitation of treating sedimentary ore with an acidic solution; Col. 70, lines 19-32). Snydacker further discloses lithium is an essential element for high-energy rechargeable batteries and other technologies (Col. 1, lines 15-19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gao to incorporate the teachings of Snydacker to treat sedimentary ore with the acidic solution in the presence of an oxidant in order to leach lithium from sedimentary ore, as both Gao [n0002] and Snydacker (Col. 1, lines 15-19) recognize lithium is a valuable metal, and Gao teaches the claimed invention except that waste battery material is used instead of sedimentary ore. Snydacker teaches that the sedimentary ore (aka ores, clays, sediments) and waste battery materials (aka recycled products/materials, waste, scrap, post-consumer products, slurries, or other materials) are equivalent products known in the art of leaching lithium and using an electrodialysis stack to convert lithium sulfate into lithium hydroxide and sulfuric acid. Therefore, because the two products were art recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute the waste battery material for the sedimentary ore.
Regarding Claim 2, Gao discloses separating lithium from other valuable metal ions to directly obtain pure lithium hydroxide solution and other valuable metal ion solutions that do not contain lithium [n0046], such that the salt solution of Gao (salt solution meets the limitation of a depleted leachate) has a concentration of lithium (lithium meet the limitation of the second species) that is less than a concentration of lithium in the leachate.
Regarding Claim 3, Gao further discloses the conductive liquid entering the acid chamber is a sulfuric acid solution; the mass concentration of the sulfuric acid solution is 0.01% to 5% [n0035], which is approximately 0.1-50 M.
Regarding the concentration of acid in the acidic solution in claim 3, it appears that 0.1-50 M taught by Gao overlaps the claimed range of less than or equal to 3 M such that the range taught by Gao obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding Claim 4, Gao further discloses the bipolar membrane electrodialysis device includes an anion exchange membrane and a monovalent cation exchange membrane; a lithium hydroxide solution is output from the alkali chamber, a salt solution is output from the salt chamber, and an acid solution is output from the acid chamber [n0034]. Gao further discloses the conductive liquid entering the acid chamber (aka the acid solution of Gao) is a sulfuric acid solution [n0035].
Regarding Claim 6, Gao further discloses the conductive liquid entering the alkali chamber is a lithium hydroxide solution; the mass concentration of the lithium hydroxide solution is 0.01% to 5% [n0036], which is approximately 0.4-208 M.
Regarding the concentration of base in the basic solution in claim 6, it appears that 0.4-208 M taught by Gao overlaps the claimed range of less than or equal to 3 M such that the range taught by Gao obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding Claim 7, Gao further discloses the conductive liquid entering the alkali chamber (aka the basic solution) is a lithium hydroxide solution (lithium hydroxide meets the limitation of a hydroxide salt; [n0036]).
Regarding Claim 8, Gao further discloses the conductive liquid entering the alkali chamber (aka the basic solution) is a lithium hydroxide solution [n0036].
Regarding Claim 9, Gao further discloses evaporating and crystallizing the lithium hydroxide solution to obtain solid lithium hydroxide [n0046], such that Gao meets the limitation of flowing the basic solution to a crystallizer.
Regarding Claim 10, Gao further discloses obtaining solid lithium hydroxide [n0046], such that Gao meets the limitation of isolating a product from the electrodialysis stack.
Regarding Claim 15, Gao discloses reacting waste lithium battery materials with acid solution, and filtering to obtain a leachate [n0012], wherein the acid solution includes sulfuric acid and phosphoric acid, and the concentration of the acid solution is 0.1 to 4 mol/L [n0019], such that water is necessarily present in the acid solution and the leachate of Gao.
Regarding Claim 16, Gao further discloses the acid solution output from the acid chamber is recycled to step A [n0110], wherein step A) is reacting waste lithium battery materials with acid solution, filtering to obtain a leachate [n0046], such that Gao meets the limitation of flowing the acidic solution from the electrodialysis stack to a first chamber to form the leachate.
Regarding Claim 17, Gao is silent to flowing the basic solution from the electrodialysis stack to a second chamber to precipitate one or more contaminants from the leachate.
Snydacker discloses an electrodialysis system converts a lithium sulfate solution (lithium sulfate solution meets the limitation of a leachate comprising a first species and a second species) into a lithium hydroxide solution (lithium hydroxide solution meets the limitation of a basic solution with the second species) and a sulfuric acid solution (sulfuric acid solution meets the limitation of an acidic solution with the first species; Col. 42, lines 43-46). Snydacker further discloses the membrane electrolysis cell is an electrodialysis cell with multiple compartments (Col. 47, lines 53-54), such that the electrodialysis/ membrane electrolysis system of Snydacker meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack. Snydacker further discloses basic solutions generated in membrane electrolysis steps are used or recycled for other steps in the integrated process, such as precipitation of impurities (impurities meets the limitation of contaminants; Col. 58, lines 48-53).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gao to incorporate the teachings of Snydacker to flow the basic solution from the electrodialysis stack to a second chamber to precipitate one or more contaminants from the leachate in order to produce a high purity product, as precipitating contaminant from the basic solution is a process parameter well-known in the art of extracting species from an electrodialysis stack, as recognized by Snydacker.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao (CN 113151680) in view of Snydacker (US 10,648,090) and Ko (KR 20220089545).
Regarding Claim 11, Gao and Snydacker teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Gao is silent to flowing the depleted leachate back into the electrodialysis stack.
Ko discloses introducing lithium sulfate aqueous solution (aka a leachate containing lithium sulfate; [0021], [0058]) (lithium sulfate aqueous solution meets the limitation of a leachate comprising a first species and a second species) into a bipolar electrodialysis device (bipolar electrodialysis device meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack) to obtain a lithium hydroxide aqueous solution (lithium hydroxide aqueous solution meets the limitation of a basic solution with the second species, wherein the second species is lithium); may include a step of converting the above lithium sulfate aqueous solution into a lithium hydroxide aqueous solution, a demineralized solution (demineralized solution meets the limitation of a depleted leachate), and a sulfuric acid aqueous solution (sulfuric acid aqueous solution meets the limitation of an acidic solution with the first species, wherein the first species is sulfate) using an electrodialysis device including a bipolar membrane [0015]. Ko further discloses in order to increase the economic efficiency during the process operation and reduce the loss of lithium, the demineralization solution (aka the depleted leachate) produced as a by-product in the electrochemical process of converting lithium sulfate to lithium hydroxide can be recycled [0064], wherein demineralized water generated during bipolar electrodialysis can be used as the leachate [0048].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gao to incorporate the teachings of Ko to flow the depleted leachate back into the electrodialysis stack in order to increase the economic efficiency during the process operation and reduce the loss of lithium, as recognized by Ko [0064].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao (CN 113151680) in view of Snydacker (US 10,648,090) and Ko (KR 20220089545) and Bourassa (US 11,697,861).
Regarding Claim 12, Gao, Snydacker, and Ko teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 11.
Gao and Ko are silent to combining the depleted leachate with the leachate at or upstream from the electrodialysis stack.
Bourassa ‘861 discloses an aqueous stream 29 comprising lithium sulfate is introduced into anolyte compartment 14 of a first electrochemical cell 12 (Col. 76, lines 56-60; Fig. 44), wherein a first lithium-reduced aqueous stream 24 and a first lithium hydroxide-enriched aqueous stream 26 are obtained from the anolyte compartment 14 and catholyte compartment 16, respectively, of the first electrochemical cell 12 (Col. 76, lines 36-41; Fig. 44). Bourassa ‘861 further discloses the first lithium-reduced aqueous stream 24 (lithium-reduced aqueous stream 24 meets the limitation of a leachate comprising a first species and a second species, wherein the first species is sulfate and the second species is lithium) can be submitted to a second electromembrane process that comprises a three-compartment membrane electrolysis process to prepare lithium hydroxide in a second electrochemical cell 30 (second electrochemical cell 30 meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack) comprising an anolyte compartment 32 separated from a central compartment 34 by an anion exchange membrane 36 and a catholyte compartment 38 separated from the central compartment 34 by a cation exchange membrane 40 (Col. 76, line 61-Col. 77, line 8). Bourassa ‘861 further discloses lithium ions can be driven across a cation exchange membrane 40 (driven across a membrane meets the limitation of diffusing) into catholyte compartment 38 and sulfate ions can be drive across an anion exchange membrane 36 into anolyte compartment 32, and a second lithium-reduced aqueous stream 46 (second lithium-reduced aqueous stream 46 meets the limitation of a depleted leachate) and a second lithium hydroxide-enrich aqueous stream 48 (second lithium hydroxide-enrich aqueous stream 48 meets the limitation of a basic solution with the second species) are obtained (Col. 77, lines 15-26).
Bourassa ‘861 further discloses recycling at least a portion of a second lithium-reduced aqueous stream 46 (second lithium-reduced aqueous solution meets the limitation of a depleted leachate); for example, the second lithium-reduced aqueous stream 46 can be introduced into the anolyte compartment 14 of the first electrochemical cell 12 (Col. 78, lines 25-30; Fig. 44). Bourassa ‘861 illustrates combining lithium-reduced aqueous stream 46 with lithium sulfate stream 29 (Fig. 44), which flows to a first electrochemical cell 12 followed by a second electrochemical cell 30, wherein a three-compartment membrane electrolysis process is carried out (second electrochemical cell 30 meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack; Col. 77, lines 1-8; Fig. 44), such that Bourassa ‘861 meets the limitation of combining the depleted leachate with the leachate at or upstream from the electrodialysis stack. Bourassa ‘861 further teaches recycling the second lithium-reduced aqueous solution to obtain higher concentration lithium hydroxide, and it would be appreciated by a person skilled in the art that a continuous process for preparing lithium hydroxide may be useful (Col. 35, lines 3-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gao to incorporate the teachings of Bourassa ‘861 to combine the depleted leachate with the leachate at or upstream from the electrodialysis stack to obtain higher concentration lithium hydroxide, and because a continuous process for preparing lithium hydroxide may be useful, as recognized by Bourassa ‘861 (Col. 35, lines 3-11).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao (CN 113151680) in view of Snydacker (US 10,648,090) and Bourassa (US 2019/0136392).
Regarding Claim 13, Gao and Snydacker teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Gao discloses the acid solution output from the acid chamber is recycled to step A [n0110], such that a portion of the acidic solution is flowed back into the electrodialysis stack.
Gao is silent to diluting the portion of the acidic solution.
Bourassa ‘392 discloses submitting an aqueous composition comprising lithium sulphate to electrodialysis for converting lithium sulphate into lithium hydroxide [0019]. Bourassa ‘392 further discloses electrodialysis can be carried out in an electrolytic cell in which a cathodic compartment is separated from the central or anodic compartment by a cathodic membrane (electrolytic cell meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack; [0139]). Bourassa ‘392 further discloses the cathodic and anodic compartments are fed with deionized water in order to keep the lithium hydroxide and sulphuric acid concentrations at predetermined levels [0256]. Bourassa ‘392 further discloses controlling pH by diluting [0205], and varying the control pH of the acid compartment in an effort to mediate problems with the resulting feed pH [0293].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gao to incorporate the teachings of Bourassa ‘392 to dilute the portion of the acidic solution in order to mediate problems with the resulting feed pH, as recognized by Bourassa ‘392 [0293].
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao (CN 113151680) in view of Snydacker (US 10,648,090) and Bourassa (US 11,697,861) and Bourassa (US 2019/0136392).
Regarding Claim 14, Gao and Snydacker teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Gao is silent to flowing a portion of the basic solution back into the electrodialysis stack.
Bourassa ‘861 discloses an aqueous stream 29 comprising lithium sulfate is introduced into anolyte compartment 14 of a first electrochemical cell 12 (Col. 76, lines 56-60; Fig. 44), wherein a first lithium-reduced aqueous stream 24 and a first lithium hydroxide-enriched aqueous stream 26 are obtained from the anolyte compartment 14 and catholyte compartment 16, respectively, of the first electrochemical cell 12 (Col. 76, lines 36-41; Fig. 44). Bourassa ‘861 further discloses the first lithium-reduced aqueous stream 24 (lithium-reduced aqueous stream 24 meets the limitation of a leachate comprising a first species and a second species, wherein the first species is sulfate and the second species is lithium) can be submitted to a second electromembrane process that comprises a three-compartment membrane electrolysis process to prepare lithium hydroxide in a second electrochemical cell 30 (second electrochemical cell 30 meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack) comprising an anolyte compartment 32 separated from a central compartment 34 by an anion exchange membrane 36 and a catholyte compartment 38 separated from the central compartment 34 by a cation exchange membrane 40 (Col. 76, line 61-Col. 77, line 8). Bourassa ‘861 further discloses lithium ions can be driven across a cation exchange membrane 40 (driven across a membrane meets the limitation of diffusing) into catholyte compartment 38 and sulfate ions can be drive across an anion exchange membrane 36 into anolyte compartment 32, and a second lithium-reduced aqueous stream 46 (second lithium-reduced aqueous stream 46 meets the limitation of a depleted leachate) and a second lithium hydroxide-enrich aqueous stream 48 (second lithium hydroxide-enrich aqueous stream 48 meets the limitation of a basic solution with the second species) are obtained (Col. 77, lines 15-26).
Bourassa '861 further discloses recycling at least a portion of the second lithium hydroxide-enriched aqueous stream 48 to the first electromembrane process (Col. 78, lines 36-38), wherein a certain concentration of LiOH is reached in the compartment 38 of the second electrochemical cell 30, the stream 48 can be conveyed to the compartment 16 of the first electrochemical cell 12 in which LiOH can be further concentrated (Col. 79, lines 19-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gao to incorporate the teachings of Bourassa ‘861 to flow a portion of the basic solution back into the electrodialysis stack in order to further concentrate lithium hydroxide, as recognized by Bourassa ‘861 (Col. 79, lines 19-21).
Gao is further silent to diluting the portion of the basic solution.
Bourassa ‘392 discloses submitting an aqueous composition comprising lithium sulphate to electrodialysis for converting lithium sulphate into lithium hydroxide [0019]. Bourassa ‘392 further discloses electrodialysis can be carried out in an electrolytic cell in which a cathodic compartment is separated from the central or anodic compartment by a cathodic membrane (electrolytic cell meets the limitation of an electrodialysis stack; [0139]). Bourassa ‘392 further discloses the cathodic and anodic compartments are fed with deionized water in order to keep the lithium hydroxide and sulphuric acid concentrations at predetermined levels [0256]. Bourassa ‘392 further discloses diluting lithium hydroxide solution to maintain a certain concentration [0263].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gao to incorporate the teachings of Bourassa ‘392 to dilute a portion of the basic solution in order to obtain a desired concentration of lithium hydroxide, as recognized by Bourassa ‘392 [0263].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see "Remarks", pg. 9-10, filed 18 December 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4 and 6-17 under 35 U.S.C 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Gao (CN 113151680) and Snydacker (US 10,648,090).
Conclusion
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 SLONE ELZABETH SIMKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-3214. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-4:30PM.
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, KEITH WALKER can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/S.E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/PAUL A WARTALOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights