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 .
Status of Claims
An amendment, filed 01/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-12, and 21-28 are pending.
Claim 13-20 have been canceled.
Claims 1, 5, 21, 24 and 28 have been amended, however, amendment finds support in the specification, therefore, no new matter is presented.
Claims 21, 23-26, and 30 are withdrawn from consideration,
Therefore, claims claim 1-12 and 21-28 are under examination on the merits for this office action.
Status of Previous Rejections
The previous Specification Objection for the abstract of the disclosure has been withdrawn and amendment of the abstract has been entered.
The previous 35 USC § 112(b) second paragraph rejections of the claims have been withdrawn.
The previous 35 USC § 102 and 35 USC § 103 rejections of the claims have been withdrawn, due to amendment of the claim 1, 24 and 28.
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(s) 1-12 and 21-28 are 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.
Claim 1 recites, "performing the solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead", in line 7 renders the claim indefinite. in line 3, the instant claim recites “mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture”, i.e. a mixture is lead paste and lead alloy, therefore, it is not clear whether solid-state electrolysis is performed on "the mixture" after the step of mixing and/or agitating, and/or after removing the lead alloy step. After removing the lead alloy step the mixture is no longer exist as defined by the mixing step of the instant claim.
It is to be noted, in the instant specification of the disclosure,
the paragraph [00120] describes, "an alloy-free lead slurry may be removed from the slurry tank and further processed to reclaim pure elemental lead by smelting, electrolytic processing",
the paragraph [00108] describes "lead paste, upon which at 94 electrolytic processing is performed-using any of the processes disclosed earlier herein-to produce near-pure lead (Pb)" and
the paragraph [00067] describes "the desulfurized lead paste may be combined with an electrolyte and supplemental chemicals to form a slurry mixture (or, in alternative implementations, a slurry solution). At 70, this slurry is then introduced into an electrolyzer cell and, at 72, solid-state electrolysis may be performed".
None of these above paragraph describes that the solid state electrolysis is performed on the mixture as defined by the instant claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-12 are also rejected from their dependency on claim 1.
Claim 21 recites, "performing the solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead", in line 9 renders the claim indefinite. Because in line 3, the instant claim recites “mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture”, i.e. a mixture is lead paste and lead alloy, therefore, it is not clear whether solid-state electrolysis is performed on "the mixture" after the step of mixing and/or agitating, and/or after removing the lead alloy step. After removing the lead alloy step the mixture is no longer exist as defined by the mixing step of the instant claim.
It is to be noted, as shown above, in the instant specification of the disclosure, none of the paragraphs [00120], [00108], [00067] describes that the solid state electrolysis is performed on the mixture as defined by the instant claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 22-27 are also rejected from their dependency on claim 21.
Claim 28 recites, "performing the solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead", in line 12 renders the claim indefinite. Because in line 3, the instant claim recites “mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture”, i.e. a mixture is lead paste and lead alloy, therefore, it is not clear whether solid-state electrolysis is performed on "the mixture" after the step of mixing and/or agitating, and/or after removing the lead alloy step. After removing the lead alloy step the mixture is no longer exist as defined by the mixing step of the instant claim.
It is to be noted, as shown above, in the instant specification of the disclosure, none of the paragraphs [00120], [00108], [00067] describes that the solid state electrolysis is performed on the mixture as defined by the instant claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)/(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhiqiang Liu, et.al. [US9257731B2].
Regarding Claim 1, Liu discloses a full cycle regeneration process method of waste lead acid batteries [Col. 13, line 64-67] includes the following steps
mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture (smashing the waste lead acid battery in a mixture of grid lead, lead mud (equivalent to lead paste) and waste electrolyte, i.e., the diluted sulfuric acid) [Col. 14, line 1-4].
agitating the mixture in a manner sufficient to cause the lead paste to no longer physically adhere to the lead alloy (the waste battery is smashed in a crusher and the material then passes a vibration screen) [Col. 14, line 14-16]. Vibration is a synonym for agitation, and the paragraph [00121] of the instant specification of the disclosure also defines “the term “agitating” as used herein is intended to have a broad meaning that includes both hammering and/or vibrating as these terms are disclosed or utilized herein”.
Liu then discloses, removing the lead alloy from the mixture (less than 1 mm diachylon is separated out by the vibration screen, this part of diachylon is formed into lead mud with electrolysis acid liquor. Grid lead is larger than 1 mm and remains on the upper surface of the vibration screen) [Liu’s Step (1) Col. 14, line 16-22] and the diachylon is a mixture consisting of lead sulfate (PbSO4), lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead monoxide (PbO) [Col. 14, line 35-42], therefore, diachylon is the lead based paste (according to the instant specification of the disclosure, "Background Section" and in the paragraph [0002], grid lead is defined as a lead alloy and lead-based paste typically comprises lead oxides and lead sulfates coated over the exposed surfaces of the lead-alloy grid).
performing solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead (Liu’s Step (2): the lead mud obtained from Step (1) is filter pressed to separate the solid from the liquid, and the separated solid is diachylon, a mixture consisting of lead sulfate (PbSO4), lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead monoxide (PbO) [Col. 14, line 35-42] and then in Liu’s Step (3): desulphurization and deoxidation of diachylon are performed under airtight condition, wherein lead sulfate and the lead dioxide react to obtain lead monoxide (PbO) and sulfur trioxide (SO3) and then the obtained lead monoxide is reduced by solid phase electrolysis so that the lead monoxide is reduced into sponge lead [Col. 14, line 50-67, and Col. 15, line 19-58]. It is to be further noted, Liu’s process as described in [Col. 15, line 19-58] is same as the Solid-state electrolysis process as described in the paragraph [0067] of the instant specification of the disclosure.
Regarding Claim 8, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 are applicable to claim 8, wherein, Liu discloses the agitating comprises vibrating a container within which the mixture is contained (the waste battery is smashed in a crusher and the material then passes a vibration screen) [Col. 14, line 14-16]. Liu further anticipates said vibration sufficient to cause material movement within the mixture, as Liu discloses separating out of the materials within the mixture using the vibration screen (less than 1 mm diachylon is separated out by the vibration screen. This part of diachylon is formed into lead mud with electrolysis acid liquor and Grid lead which is larger than 1 mm and remains on the upper surface of the vibration screen [Col. 14, line 16-22].
Regarding Claim 9, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 and 8 are applicable to claim 9, wherein, Liu discloses the container comprises a sieve through which the solution and the lead paste may pass but through which the lead alloy may not pass (the waste battery is smashed in a crusher and the material then passes a vibration screen and less than 1 mm diachylon is separated out by the vibration screen. This part of diachylon is formed into lead mud with electrolysis acid liquor and Grid lead which is larger than 1 mm and remains on the upper surface of the vibration screen) [Col. 14, line 14-22].
Regarding Claim 10, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 and 9 are applicable to claim 10, in addition, Liu discloses the vibrating of the container at least in part facilitates passage of the solution and the lead paste through the sieve (the waste battery is smashed in a crusher and the material then passes a vibration screen and less than 1 mm diachylon is separated out by the vibration screen. This part of diachylon is formed into lead mud with electrolysis acid liquor and Grid lead which is larger than 1 mm and remains on the upper surface of the vibration screen) [Col. 14, line 14-22].
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.
Claim 2-6, 12, 21-24 and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Zhiqiang Liu, et.al. [US9257731B2] as applied to claim 1 and in view of Albert E. La Point et.al. [US4018567].
Regarding Claim 2 and 3, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 are applicable to claim 2, wherein Liu teaches smashed and crushed waste battery is passes through a vibration screen (agitating) [Col. 14, line 14-16].
But Liu is silent about the agitating comprises rotational hammering of the mixture.
However, Albert discloses separating the constituents of lead-acid batteries having grid plates of antimonial lead, other lower grade alloy parts, active material consisting of lead, lead oxide, and lead sulfate, and organic material consisting of the battery case and separators [Col.3, line 20 – 24]. Albert’s disclosed process includes the following steps
mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture (shredded lead-acid batteries, sodium carbonate and water are fed into a rotating drum separator) [Col. 3, line 26-28].
agitating the mixture in a manner sufficient to cause the lead paste to no longer physically adhere to the lead alloy (Agitation of the mixture, by internal drum features serves (a) to further fracture and degrade the battery fragments; (b) to form a bath or slurry in which fine particles of active material create a pseudo-heavy density liquid adapted to float the organic material there on and to permit the remaining battery fragments to sink; ( c) to transpose the finer lead sulfate particles into lead carbonate; and (d) to neutralize any battery acid which contaminates the slurry [Col. 3, line 28-37], and means for rotating the drum with a range of velocity for proper fragmentation of the batteries and avoidance of centrifuging [Col. 3, line 65-68]).
Albert further discloses, removing the lead alloy from the mixture (The remaining sinkable fragments, consisting mainly of grid metal, are concentrated and discharged from a separate drum opening onto a second screen for further segregation by size) [Col. 3, line 41-44].
With respect to the term “hammering” in agitating step, as defined by the paragraph [00122] of the instant specification of the disclosure, “to create a hammering effect on the mass mixture ("hammering") to promote the physical detachment of the lead paste from the broken lead alloy grid components within the mixture” and claim 3 recites “the rotational hammering is achieved at least in part through use of a rotating drum”, as Albert discloses, a rotating drum [Col. 3, line 65-68] and the physical detachment of the lead paste from the broken lead alloy grid components within the mixture using drum velocity, controlling movements of battery fragments and efficient breakup by the grinding balls[Col. 4, line 3-8]. Therefore, Albert’s rotating drum is creating rotational hammering effect.
Albert is analogous to Liu and instant claim as Liu is in the field of recycling of lead-acid batteries.
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of rotating drum to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 4, all the above discussions regarding claim 1-3 are applicable to claim 4, but Liu is silent about the rotating drum comprises internal baffles that at least in part contribute to the rotational hammering.
However, Albert further teaches the rotating drum comprises internal baffles that at least in part contribute to the rotational hammering, (a helical scroll on the internal drum surface, aided by longitudinal lifter bars, advances sinkable battery fragments toward the second or opposite end of the drum until obstructed by a transverse baffle plate (internal baffles) which restricts further passage to all material larger than predetermined size. The larger fragments are therefore concentrated for efficient breakup by the grinding balls while means are provided for lifting the smaller fragments) [Col. 4, line 3-8].
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of rotating drum to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 5, all the above discussions regarding claim 1-4 are applicable to claim 5, but Liu is silent about the rate of rotation of the rotating drum is maintained to achieve the rotational hammering of the mixture.
However, Albert further teaches a rate of rotation of the rotating drum is maintained to achieve the rotational hammering of the mixture (means are provided for rotating the drum with a range of velocity for proper fragmentation of the batteries and avoidance of centrifuging [Col. 3, line 65-68] and the motion of the rotating drum both cleans and fractures the grid metal. The battery grids quickly loose most of their attached active material by the combined action of the water and the tumbling and shearing motion brought about by the drum rotation. The speed of rotation of the drum must be sufficient to maintain finer active material in suspension but not so great so to create centrifuging of solid fragments [Col. 7, line 1-9]).
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of rotating drum to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and clean separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 6, all the above discussions regarding claim 1-5 are applicable to claim 6, but Liu is silent about the range is the rate of rotation at which the portions of the mass in the drum are lifted above a medial axis of the drum and subsequently fall back below the medial axis.
However, Albert further discloses the range is the rate of rotation at which the portions of the mass in the drum are lifted above a medial axis of the drum and subsequently fall back below the medial axis, (means are provided for rotating the drum with a range of velocity for proper fragmentation of the batteries and avoidance of centrifuging [Col. 3, line 65-68]. Albert further teaches the longitudinal lifter bars raise both the grinding balls and the larger sinkable battery fragments, consisting mainly of grid metal and other lower grade lead alloy parts, out of the bath to a height dependent on drum speed and diameter [Col. 6, line 64-68], from which they fall back into the pulp or suspension. This motion both cleans and fractures the grid metal. The battery grids quickly loose most of their attached active material by the combined action of the water and the tumbling and shearing motion brought about by the drum rotation. The speed of rotation of the drum 10 must be sufficient to maintain finer active material in suspension but not so great so to create centrifuging of solid fragments [Col. 7, line 1-9].
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of rotating drum to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and clean separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 12, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 are applicable to claim 12, but Liu is silent about the solution comprises at least one supplemental chemical that at least in part diminishes adherence of the lead paste to the lead alloy.
However, Albert discloses the solution comprises at least one supplemental chemical that at least in part diminishes adherence of the lead paste to the lead alloy (shredded lead-acid batteries, together with sodium carbonate and water are fed into a rotating drum separator, to transpose the finer lead sulfate particles into lead carbonate and to neutralize any battery acid which contaminates the slurry) [Col. 3, line 26-37].
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of supplemental chemical to modify Liu’s process for efficient separation of the battery materials and neutralizing the slurry to avoid contamination in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 21, Liu discloses a full cycle regeneration process method of waste lead acid batteries [Col. 13, line 64-67] includes the following steps
mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture (smashing the waste lead acid battery in a mixture of grid lead, lead mud (equivalent to lead paste) and waste electrolyte, i.e., the diluted sulfuric acid) [Col. 14, line 1-4].
agitating the mixture in a manner sufficient to cause the lead paste to no longer physically adhere to the lead alloy (the waste battery is smashed in a crusher and the material then passes a vibration screen) [Col. 14, line 14-16]. Vibration is a synonym for agitation, and the paragraph [00121] of the instant specification of the disclosure also defines “the term “agitating” as used herein is intended to have a broad meaning that includes both hammering and/or vibrating as these terms are disclosed or utilized herein”.
Liu then discloses, removing the lead alloy from the mixture (less than 1 mm diachylon is separated out by the vibration screen, this part of diachylon is formed into lead mud with electrolysis acid liquor. Grid lead is larger than 1 mm and remains on the upper surface of the vibration screen) [Liu’s Step (1) Col. 14, line 16-22] and the diachylon is a mixture consisting of lead sulfate (PbSO4), lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead monoxide (PbO) [Col. 14, line 35-42], therefore, diachylon is the lead based paste (according to the instant specification of the disclosure, "Background Section" and in the paragraph [0002], grid lead is defined as a lead alloy and lead-based paste typically comprises lead oxides and lead sulfates coated over the exposed surfaces of the lead-alloy grid).
performing solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead (Liu’s Step (2): the lead mud obtained from Step (1) is filter pressed to separate the solid from the liquid, and the separated solid is diachylon, a mixture consisting of lead sulfate (PbSO4), lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead monoxide (PbO) [Col. 14, line 35-42] and then in Liu’s Step (3): desulphurization and deoxidation of diachylon are performed under airtight condition, wherein lead sulfate and the lead dioxide react to obtain lead monoxide (PbO) and sulfur trioxide (SO3) and then the obtained lead monoxide is reduced by solid phase electrolysis so that the lead monoxide is reduced into sponge lead [Col. 14, line 50-67, and Col. 15, line 19-58].
But Liu is silent about the rotational hammering of the mixture.
However, Albert discloses separating the constituents of lead-acid batteries having grid plates of antimonial lead, other lower grade alloy parts, active material consisting of lead, lead oxide, and lead sulfate, and organic material consisting of the battery case and separators [Col.3, line 20 – 24]. Albert’s disclosed process includes the following steps
mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture (shredded lead-acid batteries, sodium carbonate and water are fed into a rotating drum separator) [Col. 3, line 26-28].
agitating the mixture in a manner sufficient to cause the lead paste to no longer physically adhere to the lead alloy (Agitation of the mixture, by internal drum features serves (a) to further fracture and degrade the battery fragments; (b) to form a bath or slurry in which fine particles of active material create a pseudo-heavy density liquid adapted to float the organic material there on and to permit the remaining battery fragments to sink; ( c) to transpose the finer lead sulfate particles into lead carbonate; and (d) to neutralize any battery acid which contaminates the slurry [Col. 3, line 28-37], and means for rotating the drum with a range of velocity for proper fragmentation of the batteries and avoidance of centrifuging [Col. 3, line 65-68]).
Albert further discloses, removing the lead alloy from the mixture (The remaining sinkable fragments, consisting mainly of grid metal, are concentrated and discharged from a separate drum opening onto a second screen for further segregation by size) [Col. 3, line 41-44].
With respect to the term “hammering” in agitating step, as defined by the paragraph [00122] of the instant specification of the disclosure, “to create a hammering effect on the mass mixture ("hammering") to promote the physical detachment of the lead paste from the broken lead alloy grid components within the mixture” and claim 3 recites “the rotational hammering is achieved at least in part through use of a rotating drum”, as Albert discloses, a rotating drum [Col. 3, line 65-68] and the physical detachment of the lead paste from the broken lead alloy grid components within the mixture using drum velocity, controlling movements of battery fragments and efficient breakup by the grinding balls[Col. 4, line 3-8]. Therefore, Albert’s rotating drum is creating rotational hammering effect.
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of rotating drum to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 22, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 are applicable to claim 2, but Liu is silent about the agitating comprises rotational hammering of the mixture.
However, Albert discloses the rotational hammering is achieved at least in part through use of a rotating drum (means for rotating the drum with a range of velocity for proper fragmentation of the batteries [Col. 3, line 65-68]).
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of rotating drum to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 23, all the above discussions regarding claim 1-3 are applicable to claim 4, but Liu is silent about the rotating drum comprises internal baffles that at least in part contribute to the rotational hammering.
However, Albert further teaches the rotating drum comprises internal baffles that at least in part contribute to the rotational hammering, (a helical scroll on the internal drum surface, aided by longitudinal lifter bars, advances sinkable battery fragments toward the second or opposite end of the drum until obstructed by a transverse baffle plate (internal baffles) which restricts further passage to all material larger than predetermined size. The larger fragments are therefore concentrated for efficient breakup by the grinding balls while means are provided for lifting the smaller fragments) [Col. 4, line 3-8].
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of internal baffles to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 24, all the above discussions regarding claim 1-4 are applicable to claim 5, but Liu is silent about the rate of rotation of the rotating drum is maintained to achieve the rotational hammering of the mixture.
However, Albert further teaches a rate of rotation of the rotating drum is maintained to achieve the rotational hammering of the mixture (means are provided for rotating the drum with a range of velocity for proper fragmentation of the batteries and avoidance of centrifuging [Col. 3, line 65-68] and the motion of the rotating drum both cleans and fractures the grid metal. The battery grids quickly loose most of their attached active material by the combined action of the water and the tumbling and shearing motion brought about by the drum rotation. The speed of rotation of the drum must be sufficient to maintain finer active material in suspension but not so great so to create centrifuging of solid fragments [Col. 7, line 1-9]).
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of rate of rotation of rotating drum to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and clean separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 26, all the above discussions regarding claim 21 are applicable to claim 26, in addition, Liu discloses vibrating a container within which the mixture is contained (the waste battery is smashed in a crusher and the material then passes a vibration screen) [Col. 14, line 14-16]. As Liu’s process separated the materials from the mixture (less than 1 mm diachylon is separated out by the vibration screen. This part of diachylon is formed into lead mud with electrolysis acid liquor and Grid lead which is larger than 1 mm and remains on the upper surface of the vibration screen [Col. 14, line 16-22], therefore, Liu’s vibration would have been sufficient to cause material movement within the mixture.
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention, to combine Liu’s vibration screen and Albert’s rotational hammering effect for separating the battery materials effectively.
Regarding Claim 27, all the above discussions regarding claim 21 and 26 are applicable to claim 27, in addition, Liu discloses utilizing a sieve through which the solution and the lead paste may pass but through which the lead alloy may not pass; and vibrating the sieve to at least in part facilitates passage of the solution and the lead paste through said sieve (the waste battery is smashed in a crusher and the material then passes a vibration screen and less than 1 mm diachylon is separated out by the vibration screen. This part of diachylon is formed into lead mud with electrolysis acid liquor and Grid lead which is larger than 1 mm and remains on the upper surface of the vibration screen [Col. 14, line 14-22].
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention, to combine Liu’s vibration screen modify Albert and Albert’s rotational hammering effect for separating the battery materials effectively.
Regarding Claim 28, Liu discloses a full cycle regeneration process method of waste lead acid batteries [Col. 13, line 64-67] includes the following steps
mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture (smashing the waste lead acid battery in a mixture of grid lead, lead mud (equivalent to lead paste) and waste electrolyte, i.e., the diluted sulfuric acid) [Col. 14, line 1-4];
vibrating the mixture sufficient to cause material movement within the mixture (the waste battery is smashed in a crusher and the material then passes a vibration screen) [Col. 14, line 14-16];
removing the lead alloy from the mixture (less than 1 mm diachylon is separated out by the vibration screen, this part of diachylon is formed into lead mud with electrolysis acid liquor. Grid lead is larger than 1 mm and remains on the upper surface of the vibration screen) [Liu’s Step (1) Col. 14, line 16-22] and the diachylon is a mixture consisting of lead sulfate (PbSO4), lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead monoxide (PbO) [Col. 14, line 35-42], therefore, diachylon is the lead based paste (according to the instant specification of the disclosure, "Background Section" and in the paragraph [0002], grid lead is defined as a lead alloy and lead-based paste typically comprises lead oxides and lead sulfates coated over the exposed surfaces of the lead-alloy grid);
performing solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead (Liu’s Step (2): the lead mud obtained from Step (1) is filter pressed to separate the solid from the liquid, and the separated solid is diachylon, a mixture consisting of lead sulfate (PbSO4), lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead monoxide (PbO) [Col. 14, line 35-42] and then in Liu’s Step (3): desulphurization and deoxidation of diachylon are performed under airtight condition, wherein lead sulfate and the lead dioxide react to obtain lead monoxide (PbO) and sulfur trioxide (SO3) and then the obtained lead monoxide is reduced by solid phase electrolysis so that the lead monoxide is reduced into sponge lead [Col. 14, line 50-67, and Col. 15, line 19-58].
But Liu is silent about the rotational hammering of the mixture in a manner sufficient to cause the lead paste to no longer physically adhere to the lead alloy, the rotational hammering being achieved at least in part through use of a rotating drum comprises internal baffles.
However, Albert discloses separating the constituents of lead-acid batteries having grid plates of antimonial lead, other lower grade alloy parts, active material consisting of lead, lead oxide, and lead sulfate, and organic material consisting of the battery case and separators [Col.3, line 20 – 24]. Albert’s disclosed process includes the following steps
mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture (shredded lead-acid batteries, sodium carbonate and water are fed into a rotating drum separator) [Col. 3, line 26-28].
agitating the mixture in a manner sufficient to cause the lead paste to no longer physically adhere to the lead alloy (Agitation of the mixture, by internal drum features serves (a) to further fracture and degrade the battery fragments; (b) to form a bath or slurry in which fine particles of active material create a pseudo-heavy density liquid adapted to float the organic material there on and to permit the remaining battery fragments to sink; ( c) to transpose the finer lead sulfate particles into lead carbonate; and (d) to neutralize any battery acid which contaminates the slurry [Col. 3, line 28-37], and means for rotating the drum with a range of velocity for proper fragmentation of the batteries and avoidance of centrifuging [Col. 3, line 65-68]).
Albert further discloses, removing the lead alloy from the mixture (The remaining sinkable fragments, consisting mainly of grid metal, are concentrated and discharged from a separate drum opening onto a second screen for further segregation by size) [Col. 3, line 41-44].
With respect to the term “hammering” in agitating step, as defined by the paragraph [00122] of the instant specification of the disclosure, “to create a hammering effect on the mass mixture ("hammering") to promote the physical detachment of the lead paste from the broken lead alloy grid components within the mixture” and claim 3 recites “the rotational hammering is achieved at least in part through use of a rotating drum comprises internal baffles”, as Albert discloses, a rotating drum [Col. 3, line 65-68] and a helical scroll on the internal drum surface, aided by longitudinal lifter bars, advances sinkable battery fragments toward the second or opposite end of the drum until obstructed by a transverse baffle plate (internal baffles) which restricts further passage to all material larger than predetermined size. The larger fragments are therefore concentrated for efficient breakup by the grinding balls while means are provided for lifting the smaller fragments) [Col. 4, line 3-8]. Therefore, Albert’s rotating drum comprises internal baffles would have created rotational hammering effect.
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Albert’s teaching of rotational hammering to modify Liu’s process for efficient breakup of the battery fragment and separation of the battery material in the recycling operation.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhiqiang Liu, et.al. [US9257731B2] as applied to claim 1 and in view of Takashi Hottori et.al. [US7132195B2].
Regarding Claim 7, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 are applicable to claim 7, in addition Liu discloses, in the separating process of waste lead acid battery, the smashed and crushed waste battery material passes a vibration screen and grid lead and plastic on the upper surface of the vibration screen. According to the difference of specific gravity, plastic and grid lead are separated out. The last plastic part is further separated in a plastic separating system according to the difference of plastic specific gravity to separate out polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). The known technology is adopted to treat the separated plastic, for reusing polypropylene in production of plastic battery enclosures and reusing other plastic products [Col. 14, line 15-36].
Although Liu is silent about the mixture further comprises cloth adhering to the lead paste, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, that if the waste battery would contain any cloth adhering to the lead paste with Liu’s process of agitating would cause the cloth to no longer adhere to the lead paste or to the lead alloy as Liu discloses separating everything in the battery material including all the plastic materials.
However, Hottori discloses a lead-acid battery, and particularly to a separator thereof which prevents an internal short-circuit and thereby realizes a longer-life battery. In general, a discharge reaction of the lead-acid battery produces lead sulfate (PbSO4) through electrochemical reduction and oxidation of lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead (Pb) in sulfuric acid (H2SO4) electrolyte solution; where PbO2 and Pb are active materials of positive and negative electrodes. The produced PbSO4 on the positive and negative electrodes is electrochemically reduced as well as oxidized by charging, thereby not only producing PbO2 and Pb, but also revitalizing H2SO4 [Col. 1, line 12-29]. Hottori discloses a battery separator made from hydrophilic treated synthetic fiber non-woven and thermoplastic cloth to avoid short circuit [Col. 3, line 63-65, Col. 4 line 1-3]. Hottori’s separator 4 may be hydrophilic treated non-woven cloth made from a mixture of (a) polyethylene (PE) fiber and (b) polypropylene (PP) fiber [Col. 4, line 29-33]. Hottori’s cloth is made of plastics and organic material.
Hottori is in the field of lead-acid batteries of the type having grid plates as an electrodes, active material consisting of lead, lead oxide, and lead sulfate, electrolytes and plastic and organic material consisting of the battery case and separators, similar as Liu and the instant claim.
Hottori’s battery comprises cloth separator, and cloth is a mixture of (a) polyethylene (PE) fiber and (b) polypropylene (PP) fiber [ Hottori, Col. 4, line 29-33] are similar material as disclosed by Liu (separating out of polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP) [Liu’ Col. 14, line 15-36]) and are also similar to Albert’s separator (separator consisting of (organic materials) and the plastics those are no longer adhere to the lead paste or to the lead alloy [Col. 6, Line 11 – 60]).
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to combine Hottori’s teaching with Liu’s process, for recycling of the lead-acid batteries comprising a cloth separator.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhiqiang Liu, et.al. [US9257731B2] as applied to claim 1 and in view of Tyagi, Vipin [WO2016130675A1].
Regarding Claim 11, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 are applicable to claim 11, Liu discloses in Step (1) of the separation process, the grid lead is put into a melting pod for melting and refining and then casting the molten lead into a mold to cast an alloy lead ingot and the obtained alloy lead ingot will be used in the manufacture of the battery pole plate [Col.14, Line 8-14].
But Liu is silent about the pressing the lead alloy into a pressed form.
However, Tyagi discloses a recycling process of lead waste battery, in step C the grid obtained in step A undergoes further treatment to remove the paste on it. The grid can directly be melted to obtain lead metal or lead alloy. To improve the recovery and decrease the amount of dross formation during the melting process, (a) the grid lead is washed with the basic electrolyte (optionally with agitation); (b) the cleaned grid metal obtained in can be pressed into ingots or melted [Section 0047].
Tyagi is in the field of recycling process of waste lead-acid batteries and therefore, analogous to Liu and the instant claim.
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was invented to have Tyagi’s teaching to modify Liu’s process for separating lead alloy and to be pressed into ingots for further manufacturing the battery or any other application.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhiqiang Liu, et.al. [US9257731B2] as applied to claim 1 and in view of Albert E. La Point et.al. [US4018567], and further in view of Takashi Hottori et.al. [US7132195B2].
Regarding Claim 25, all the above discussions regarding claim 21 are applicable to claim 25, in addition Liu discloses, in the separating process of waste lead acid battery, the smashed and crushed waste battery material passes a vibration screen and grid lead and plastic on the upper surface of the vibration screen. According to the difference of specific gravity, plastic and grid lead are separated out. The last plastic part is further separated in a plastic separating system according to the difference of plastic specific gravity to separate out polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). The known technology is adopted to treat the separated plastic, for reusing polypropylene in production of plastic battery enclosures and reusing other plastic products [Col. 14, line 15-36].
Although Liu is silent about the mixture further comprises cloth adhering to the lead paste, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, that if the waste battery would contain any cloth adhering to the lead paste with Liu’s process of agitating would cause the cloth to no longer adhere to the lead paste or to the lead alloy as Liu discloses separating everything in the battery material including all the plastic materials.
Albert also discloses in the process of separating the constituents of lead-acid batteries of the type having grid plates of antimonial lead, other lower grade alloy parts, active material consisting of lead, lead oxide, and lead sulfate, and organic material consisting of the battery case and separators [Col.3, line 20 – 24]. Albert teaches once the drum starts to rotate, the organic material, made up of plastic battery housings and separators will float immediately upon release from other inorganic battery parts and the finely divided active material is mixed with water and agitated by the drum rotation forms a pseudo-heavy density liquid or "heavy media" suspension whose density is higher than that of the organic material. As the organic material is advanced over the second set of screens 38-38 by the action of the screw 49, it is sprayed with water from a separately supported spray nozzle 50 which extends longitudinally within the trommel 15. This will remove any remaining active material clinging to the organic material and deposit it in the hopper 28. The organic material is then pushed out through the open end of the trommel 16 [Col. 6, Line 11 – 60]. Therefore, Albert’s mixture comprises the separator and plastic materials adhering to the lead paste, and wherein the agitating causes the separator and the plastics to no longer adhere to the lead paste or to the lead alloy.
But Albert is also silent about the cloth.
However, Hottori discloses a lead-acid battery, and particularly to a separator thereof which prevents an internal short-circuit and thereby realizes a longer-life battery. In general, a discharge reaction of the lead-acid battery produces lead sulfate (PbSO4) through electrochemical reduction and oxidation of lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead (Pb) in sulfuric acid (H2SO4) electrolyte solution; where PbO2 and Pb are active materials of positive and negative electrodes. The produced PbSO4 on the positive and negative electrodes is electrochemically reduced as well as oxidized by charging, thereby not only producing PbO2 and Pb, but also revitalizing H2SO4 [Col. 1, line 12-29]. Hottori discloses a battery separator made from hydrophilic treated synthetic fiber non-woven and thermoplastic cloth to avoid short circuit [Col. 3, line 63-65, Col. 4 line 1-3]. Hottori’s separator 4 may be hydrophilic treated non-woven cloth made from a mixture of (a) polyethylene (PE) fiber and (b) polypropylene (PP) fiber [Col. 4, line 29-33]. Hottori’s cloth is made of plastics and organic material.
Hottori is in the field of lead-acid batteries of the type having grid plates as an electrodes, active material consisting of lead, lead oxide, and lead sulfate, electrolytes and plastic and organic material consisting of the battery case and separators, similar as Liu and Albert as well as the instant claim.
Hottori’s battery comprises cloth separator, and cloth is a mixture of (a) polyethylene (PE) fiber and (b) polypropylene (PP) fiber [ Hottori, Col. 4, line 29-33] are similar material as disclosed by Liu (separating out of polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP) [Liu’ Col. 14, line 15-36]) and are also similar to Albert’s separator (separator consisting of (organic materials) and the plastics those are no longer adhere to the lead paste or to the lead alloy [Col. 6, Line 11 – 60]).
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to combine Hottori’s teaching with Liu and Albert’s process, for recycling of the lead-acid batteries comprising a cloth separator.
Claim 1-6, 8-12, 21-24, and 26 are alternately rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Albert E. La Point et.al. [US4018567], and in view of Tyagi, Vipin [WO2016130675A1].
Claim 1-6, 8-10, 12, 21-24, and 26 Albert discloses separating the constituents of lead-acid batteries having grid plates of antimonial lead, other lower grade alloy parts, active material consisting of lead, lead oxide, and lead sulfate, and organic material consisting of the battery case and separators [Col.3, line 20 – 24]. Albert’s disclosed process includes the following steps
mixing the lead paste and lead alloy with a solution to form a mixture (shredded lead-acid batteries, sodium carbonate and water are fed into a rotating drum separator) [Col. 3, line 26-28].
agitating the mixture in a manner sufficient to cause the lead paste to no longer physically adhere to the lead alloy (Agitation of the mixture, by internal drum features serves (a) to further fracture and degrade the battery fragments; (b) to form a bath or slurry in which fine particles of active material create a pseudo-heavy density liquid adapted to float the organic material there on and to permit the remaining battery fragments to sink; ( c) to transpose the finer lead sulfate particles into lead carbonate; and (d) to neutralize any battery acid which contaminates the slurry [Col. 3, line 28-37], and means for rotating the drum with a range of velocity for proper fragmentation of the batteries and avoidance of centrifuging [Col. 3, line 65-68]).
Albert further discloses, removing the lead alloy from the mixture (The remaining sinkable fragments, consisting mainly of grid metal, are concentrated and discharged from a separate drum opening onto a second screen for further segregation by size) [Col. 3, line 41-44].
With respect to the term “hammering” in agitating step, as defined by the paragraph [00122] of the instant specification of the disclosure, “to create a hammering effect on the mass mixture ("hammering") to promote the physical detachment of the lead paste from the broken lead alloy grid components within the mixture” and claim 3 recites “the rotational hammering is achieved at least in part through use of a rotating drum”, as Albert discloses, a rotating drum [Col. 3, line 65-68] and a helical scroll on the internal drum surface, aided by longitudinal lifter bars, advances sinkable battery fragments toward the second or opposite end of the drum until obstructed by a transverse baffle plate (internal baffles) which restricts further passage to all material larger than predetermined size. The larger fragments are therefore concentrated for efficient breakup by the grinding balls while means are provided for lifting the smaller fragments) [Col. 4, line 3-8]. Therefore, Albert’s rotating drum is creating rotational hammering effect and rotating drum comprises internal baffles would have created rotational hammering effect.
Albert further teaches the longitudinal lifter bars raise both the grinding balls and the larger sinkable battery fragments, consisting mainly of grid metal and other lower grade lead alloy parts, out of the bath to a height dependent on drum speed and diameter [Col. 6, line 64-68], from which they fall back into the pulp or suspension. This motion both cleans and fractures the grid metal. The battery grids quickly loose most of their attached active material by the combined action of the water and the tumbling and shearing motion brought about by the drum rotation. The speed of rotation of the drum 10 must be sufficient to maintain finer active material in suspension but not so great so to create centrifuging of solid fragments [Col. 7, line 1-9].
But Albert is silent about performing solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead.
However, Tyagi teaches a method for recovery of near-pure lead from an impure lead container metal from a used lead-acid battery, the method comprising: desulfurizing the impure metal material, combining the impure lead with a sodium hydroxide electrolyte to form a slurry, thus a slurry that is a mixture of the impute material and the electrolyte such that the electrolyte does not dissolve the target metal in the impure metal material, performing solid state electrolysis on the slurry to form lead deposits and residual components, and mechanically separating the lead from the electrolyte and the residual components (Paragraphs 0027-0031, 0035-0038 and 0044-0045). The similar Solid-state electrolysis process as described in the paragraph [0067] of the instant specification of the disclosure including the desulfurization and using NaOH for making slurry same as Tyagi.
Tyagi is analogous to Albert and instant claim as Tyagi is in the field of recycling of lead-acid batteries.
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was made, to have Tyagi’s teaching of performing solid state electrolysis to modify Albert’s process for separation of pure elemental lead from the battery recycling operation.
Regarding Claim 11, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 are applicable to claim 11, Liu discloses in Step (1) of the separation process, the grid lead is put into a melting pod for melting and refining and then casting the molten lead into a mold to cast an alloy lead ingot and the obtained alloy lead ingot will be used in the manufacture of the battery pole plate [Col.14, Line 8-14].
But Liu is silent about the pressing the lead alloy into a pressed form.
However, Tyagi discloses a recycling process of lead waste battery, in step C the grid obtained in step A undergoes further treatment to remove the paste on it. The grid can directly be melted to obtain lead metal or lead alloy. To improve the recovery and decrease the amount of dross formation during the melting process, (a) the grid lead is washed with the basic electrolyte (optionally with agitation); (b) the cleaned grid metal obtained in can be pressed into ingots or melted [Section 0047].
Tyagi is in the field of recycling process of waste lead-acid batteries and therefore, analogous to Liu and the instant claim.
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention was invented to have Tyagi’s teaching to modify Liu’s process for separating lead alloy and to be pressed into ingots for further manufacturing the battery or any other application.
Claim 2-6, are alternately rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhiqiang Liu, et.al. [US9257731B2] as applied to claim 1 and in view of Hong Seong Ho [KR20040005770A] (machine translation is being used for the text and original is being used for the Figures).
Regarding Claim 2-6, all the above discussions regarding claim 1 are applicable, but Liu is silent about the rotational hammering.
However, Hong teaches a process and device for a waste battery recycling, wherein the process includes after separating the plastic, using a crusher for crushing lead plates [Section 34]. Hong’s lead plate crusher is a hammer crusher, and a rotating shaft is installed inside the case of the hammer crusher, and both ends of the rotating shaft are installed on both sides of the case so that rotation is supported by bearings, and two fixed shafts are installed symmetrically in parallel with the rotating shaft, so that when the lead plate, is fed into the case through the inlet of the crusher, it is crushed by the rotating hammer [Section 35]. Hong teaches the lead plate is made up of a lead grid (lead alloy) and a paste applied to the lead grid (lead paste) [Section 55]. Hong’s lead plate is fed through the inlet of the shredder inside the case, where it is crushed by a rotating hammer. When a pair of hammers collide with each other due to rotational force and centrifugal force, the lead is pulverized into powder between them or between the hammers and the lining of the case. Or it can be crushed into powder by being directly hit by a hammer. The hammer crusher is powered by an electric motor, and a stepper motor can be used to adjust the forward and reverse rotation and rotation speed. The case is manufactured in two parts, upper and lower, for easy maintenance [Section 62 and 63].
Hong is in the field of recycling process of waste lead-acid batteries and therefore, analogous to Liu and the instant claim.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention, to have Hong’s rotating hammer crusher for utilizing rotational force and centrifugal force, to pulverize lead plate to modify Liu’s process to have an effective and easy maintained rotating hammer for separating all the battery materials from the waste lead acid batteries.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/27/2025 have been fully considered, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 21 and 28 filed 10/27/2025 have been fully considered but mostly are moot because of the amendment of the claims 1 21 and 28. All the previous rejections have been withdrawn.
In response to Applicant's main arguments regarding the previous 35 USC 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) of claim 1, that “that both LaPoint and Liu fails to anticipate at least the claimed feature of "performing solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead" after the lead alloy is removed from the mixture as recited by Applicant's independent claims as amended. Indeed, nowhere do either LaPoint or Liu disclose any use of solid-state electrolysis”.
This is persuasive in case of LaPoint, as LaPoint does not teach performing solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead.
But this is not persuasive at least for claim 1, as even in Applicant's remark as mentioned “Liu discloses a method ………. Step (3): the obtained lead monoxide is reduced by solid phase electrolysis in a wet way so that the lead monoxide is reduced into sponge lead. (Liu, Abstract.)”. In addition, Liu's grid lead (lead alloy) is removing from the diachylon (lead paste), and then solid state electrolysis is performed on desulfurized diachylon to have pure lead. Liu teaches the diachylon is a mixture consisting of lead sulfate (PbSO4), lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead monoxide (PbO) [Col. 14, line 35-42]. According to the instant specification of the disclosure, "Background Section" and in the paragraph [0002], grid lead is defined as a lead alloy and lead-based paste typically comprises lead oxides and lead sulfates coated over the exposed surfaces of the lead-alloy grid.
Liu discloses performing solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead (Liu’s Step (2): the lead mud obtained from Step (1) is filter pressed to separate the solid from the liquid, and the separated solid is diachylon, a mixture consisting of lead sulfate (PbSO4), lead dioxide (PbO2) and lead monoxide (PbO) [Col. 14, line 35-42] and then in Liu’s Step (3): desulphurization and deoxidation of diachylon are performed under airtight condition, wherein lead sulfate and the lead dioxide react to obtain lead monoxide (PbO) and sulfur trioxide (SO3) and then the obtained lead monoxide is reduced by solid phase electrolysis so that the lead monoxide is reduced into sponge lead [Col. 14, line 50-67, and Col. 15, line 19-58], wherein the solid lead monoxide is reduced into solid sponge lead.
It is to be further noted, Liu’s solid phase electrolysis process described in [Liu’s Col. 15, line 19-58] is the same Solid-state electrolysis process as described in the paragraph [0067] of the instant specification of the disclosure including the desulfurization and using NaOH for making slurry same as Liu. Therefore, Liu still anticipates the claim 1.
In response to Applicant's main arguments regarding the previous 35 USC 103 rejections of the deepened claims is that “La Point, Liu, Hattori, and Tyagi fail to anticipate at least the claimed feature of "performing solid-state electrolysis on the mixture to recover pure elemental lead" after the lead alloy is removed from the mixture as recited by Applicant's independent claims as amended”, Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections, in this case, for obviousness rejection, Applicant’s remark is about the anticipation, regarding the argument about La point and Liu has been shown above. Hattori and Tyagi are not being used to reject any independent claims previously and Applicant did not show any argument about the dependent claim individually. However, Tyagi teaches a method for recovery of near-pure lead from an impure lead container metal from a used lead-acid battery, the method comprising: desulfurizing the impure metal material, combining the impure lead with a sodium hydroxide electrolyte to form a slurry, thus a slurry that is a mixture of the impute material and the electrolyte such that the electrolyte does not dissolve the target metal in the impure metal material, performing solid state electrolysis on the slurry to form lead deposits and residual components, and mechanically separating the lead from the electrolyte and the residual components (Paragraphs 0027-0031, 0035-0038 and 0044-0045). The similar Solid-state electrolysis process as described in the paragraph [0067] of the instant specification of the disclosure including the desulfurization and using NaOH for making slurry same as Liu.
Therefore, a new 35 USC 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) of the claim 1 over Zhiqiang Liu, et.al. [US9257731B2] have been maintained, however, re written due to the amendments (please check the section of the 35 USC 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) rejection associated with this office action for further details) and new 35 USC § 103 rejections of the claim 21 and 28 and other dependent claims have been also rewritten due to the amendments (please check the section of the 35U.S.C. 103 rejection associated with this office action for further details).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZMUN NAHAR SHAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-5421. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 AM-7:30PM (EST).
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, Merkling Sally can be reached on (571)2726297. 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.
/NAZMUN NAHAR SHAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 1738
/SALLY A MERKLING/SPE, Art Unit 1738