Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/990,517

LITHIUM RECOVERY FROM LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Nov 18, 2022
Examiner
SHERMAN, ERIC SCOTT
Art Unit
1736
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Ascend Elements, Inc.
OA Round
3 (Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
57 granted / 79 resolved
+7.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
113
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
44.6%
+4.6% vs TC avg
§102
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
§112
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 79 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claims 1-11 and 14-21 are pending and under consideration in this action. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed January 27, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On pages 6-7 of the response, Applicant argues that JP2011094228 (“Shunsuke”) is limited to a method for recovering material from lithium cobaltate batteries rather than NMC batteries as now recited in claim 1. However, Shunsuke expressly states that the method can be used on waste material obtained from NMC batteries comprising nickel, manganese, and cobalt (see Shunsuke at paragraph [0012]). Given the clear teaching in Shunsuke that black mass comprising nickel, manganese, and cobalt with lithium can be used, arguments that Shunsuke is limited to lithium cobaltate batteries are not persuasive. 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. Claim(s) 1-11, 14-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2011094228 (“Shunsuke”, machine translation used for citations) in view of Jandová, et al. "Recovery of lithium from waste materials." Ceramics-silikaty 56.1 (2012): 50-54 (“Jandová”). Regarding claim 1, Shunsuke teaches a method for recovering lithium from lithium ion batteries (see e.g. paragraph [0006]). Shunsuke teaches that the method can start with the pulverized product of a lithium ion secondary battery, which is the same as the claimed “black mass” as described in page 3, lines 10-14 of the instant Specification (see Shunsuke at paragraph [0011]). Shunsuke expressly teaches that the method can be performed on waste material from a battery stream comprising nickel manganese, and cobalt, which is a waste stream from NMC batteries (see e.g. paragraph [0012]). Shunsuke teaches that the method includes roasting the black mass at a temperature of between 500 °C and 700 °C (see e.g. paragraph [0011]). Shunsuke teaches that the roasting can be performed in an oxidizing atmosphere that is between 1-5 % oxygen in inert gas, which is a partial oxygen environment (see e.g. paragraph [0017]). Shunsuke teaches that the roasted material is then subjected to lithium leaching, which would leave behind the other metals including nickel, manganese, and cobalt (see e.g. paragraph [0019]). Shunsuke teaches that the leached lithium solution is then subjected to any of various treatments to recover the lithium carbonate, but does not explicitly state that the lithium leach solution is heated (see e.g. paragraph [0019]). However, Jandová teaches a similar method for isolating lithium from battery waste (see e.g. page 51, first column, last paragraph, starting “The aim of this study…”). Jandová teaches that, to isolate the lithium, the leach solution is heated to the boiling point (see e.g. page 52, first column, second full paragraph, starting “Li2CO3 was separated…”). Jandová teaches that this method of isolating the lithium provides 99.5% of the lithium carbonate at higher than 95% purity (see e.g. page 53, second column, last paragraph, starting “Lithium salt containing…”). Accordingly, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to heat the lithium leach solution to obtain the lithium carbonate as taught by Jandová in order to recover 99.5% of the lithium at a high purity. Regarding claim 2, Shunsuke teaches that the roasting is performed in an atmosphere of between 1.0 – 5.0 % oxygen in inert gas, which is a lower oxygen concentration than atmospheric oxygen (see e.g. paragraph [0017]). Shunsuke teaches that the inert gas can be nitrogen, which means a the 99 – 95 % nitrogen environment, which is higher than atmospheric nitrogen (see e.g. paragraph [0017]). Regarding claims 3-4, Shunsuke teaches that the roasting is performed in an atmosphere of between 1.0 – 5.0 % oxygen in inert gas, which overlaps significantly with the claimed ranges (see e.g. paragraph [0017]). Regarding claim 5, Shunsuke teaches that the roasting is performed in an atmosphere of between 1.0 - 5.0 % oxygen in inert gas, which means that greater than 80% of the gas is an inert gas (see e.g. paragraph [0017]). Regarding claim 6, Shunsuke teaches that the inert gas can be nitrogen (see e.g. paragraph [0017]). Regarding claims 7-8, Shunsuke teaches that the heat treatment is at a temperature of between 500 °C and 700 °C, which overlaps with, or is entirely within, the claimed range (see e.g. paragraph [0011]). Regarding claims 9-10, Shunsuke teaches that the black mass is roasted for 1-2 hours, which overlaps with, or is entirely within, the claimed ranges (see e.g. paragraph [0021]). Regarding claim 11, Shunsuke teaches that the material can be leached with water (see e.g. paragraph [0019]). Regarding claims 14-15, Shunsuke describes that the roasted black mass is added to water and agitated to leach the lithium (see e.g. paragraph [0019]). Given that Shunsuke does not teach heating or cooling the water during leaching, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the method of Shunsuke is to perform the leaching operation at room temperature, or about 20 - 25 °C, which is within the claimed ranges. Regarding claim 16, Shunsuke teaches that the lithium is recovered as lithium carbonate (see e.g. paragraph [0007]). Regarding claim 20, as noted by the instant application, lithium carbonate has a lower solubility at an increased temperature (see Specification at page 2, lines 16-19). As such, the precipitation of lithium carbonate while heating as taught by Jandová will necessarily be due to the solubility of lithium carbonate at the elevated temperature. Claims 17-19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shunsuke in view of Jandová as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 2012091999 (“Toshiji”, machine translation used for citations). Regarding claim 17, Shunsuke in view of Jandová teach the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Shunsuke does not teach combining the recovered lithium with carbon dioxide for selective dissolution and filtering the undissolved impurity solids. However, Toshiji teaches a method for further purification of lithium carbonate having impurities, similar to the product from the method of Shunsuke (see e.g. paragraph [0001]). Toshiji teaches combining carbon dioxide with the lithium solution to convert the lithium to lithium bicarbonate in water (see e.g. paragraph [0022]). Toshiji teaches that the solution, now containing lithium bicarbonate, is then filtered to remove the impurity solids (see e.g. paragraph [0023]). Toshiji teaches that this method provides high purity lithium carbonate with few impurities, capable of use for batteries (see e.g. paragraph [0002]). As such, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the method of Toshiji for further purification of the product from Shunsuke in order to result in battery grade lithium carbonate. Regarding claim 18, Toshiji teaches that the filtered solution contains lithium bicarbonate (see e.g. paragraphs [0022]-[0023]). Regarding claim 19, Toshiji teaches heating the solution to 70-100 °C, which overlaps with the claimed range, and filtering to obtain the purified lithium carbonate (see e.g. paragraph [0013]). Regarding claim 21, Shunsuke teaches a method for recovering lithium from lithium ion batteries (see e.g. paragraph [0006]). Shunsuke teaches that the method can start with the pulverized product of a lithium ion secondary battery, which is the same as the claimed “black mass” as described in page 3, lines 10-14 of the instant Specification (see Shunsuke at paragraph [0011]). Shunsuke expressly teaches that the method can use waste material from NMC batteries comprising nickel, manganese, and cobalt (see e.g. paragraph [0012]). Shunsuke teaches that the method includes roasting the black mass at a temperature of between 500 °C and 700 °C, which includes the entirety of the claimed range (see e.g. paragraph [0011]). Shunsuke teaches that the roasting can be performed in an oxidizing atmosphere that is between 1-5 % oxygen, which overlaps with the claimed range, in an inert gas such as nitrogen, which results in a nitrogen content above 80% (see e.g. paragraph [0017]). Shunsuke teaches that the roasting can be performed for 1 hour, which is within the claimed range (see e.g. paragraph [0021]). Shunsuke teaches leaching the roasted black mass in water while agitating for 30 minutes, which is within the claimed range (see e.g. paragraph [0030]). Given that Shunsuke does not teach heating or cooling the water during leaching, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the method of Shunsuke is to perform the leaching operation at room temperature, or about 20 - 25 °C, which is within the claimed ranges. Shunsuke teaches that the lithium leach solution is then filtered for removal of unleached solids, which would include the nickel, manganese, and cobalt (see e.g. paragraph [0019]). Shunsuke teaches that the leached lithium solution is then subjected to any of various treatments to recover the lithium carbonate, but does not explicitly state that the lithium leach solution is heated (see e.g. paragraph [0019]). However, Jandová teaches a similar method for isolating lithium from battery waste (see e.g. page 51, first column, last paragraph, starting “The aim of this study…”). Jandová teaches that the lithium is harvested by heating the leach solution to the boiling point, which would be at a temperature above 90 °C (see e.g. page 52, first column, second full paragraph, starting “Li2CO3 was separated…”). Jandová teaches that this method of isolating the lithium provides 99.5% of the lithium carbonate at higher than 95% purity (see e.g. page 53, second column, last paragraph, starting “Lithium salt containing…”). Accordingly, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to heat the lithium leach solution to obtain the lithium carbonate as taught by Jandová in order to recover 99.5% of the lithium at a high purity. Toshiji teaches a method for further purification of lithium carbonate having impurities, similar to the product from the method of Shunsuke (see e.g. paragraph [0001]). Toshiji teaches combining carbon dioxide in water, which is a carbonized solution, with the lithium solution to convert the lithium to lithium bicarbonate in water (see e.g. paragraph [0022]). Toshiji teaches that the solution, now containing lithium bicarbonate, is then filtered to remove the impurity solids (see e.g. paragraph [0023]). Toshiji teaches heating the solution to 70-100 °C, which overlaps with the claimed range, and filtering to obtain the purified lithium carbonate (see e.g. paragraph [0013]). Toshiji teaches that this method provides high purity lithium carbonate with few impurities, capable of use for batteries (see e.g. paragraph [0002]). As such, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the method of Toshiji to further purify the lithium from the method of Shunsuke in order to result in battery grade lithium carbonate. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC S SHERMAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4784. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 ET. 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at (571)270-3591. 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. /E.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1736 /ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 18, 2022
Application Filed
May 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 22, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 27, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 02, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603188
METHOD FOR DEHALOGENATION AND VITRIFICATION OF RADIOACTIVE METAL HALIDE WASTES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590010
TITANIUM OXIDE POWDER AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590257
TREATMENT OF HEAVY PYROLYSIS PRODUCTS BY PARTIAL OXIDATION GASIFICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576392
A MOLDING COMPRISING A MIXED OXIDE COMPRISING OXYGEN, LANTHANUM, ALUMINUM, AND COBALT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564830
POROUS METAL ORGANIC FRAMEWORK-POLYMER COMPOSITES FOR USE IN DETOXIFYING CHEMICAL WARFARE AGENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+8.4%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 79 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month