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
Applicant's election with traverse of Group 1 in the reply filed on 06/24/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that no search burden is present. This is not found to be persuasive and thus the restriction requirement dated 03/25/2026 is withdrawn.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 10/19/2023, 10/26/2023, and 12/12/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanisch et al. (US 2018/0301769 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hanisch discloses a mobile device for treating of lithium-ion accumulators (abstract, method and system for the treatment of used batteries in particular lithium batteries), comprising:
an input chamber configured to accommodate lithium-ion accumulators (Figures 1-2 discharge unit 12 and dismantling station 14 can hold the cells before going into the commination unit 18);
a crushing device to which the lithium-ion accumulators accommodated by the input chamber are conveyed from the input chamber, the crushing device being configured to crush the conveyed lithium-ion accumulators (Figure 2; commination unit 18 comminutes the batteries; [0059]);
a rotary kiln into which the crushed lithium-ion accumulators are conveyed, the rotary kiln being electrically heatable and configured to thermally treat the crushed lithium-ion accumulators conveyed thereinto (Figures 1-2; drying device 26; the first conveyor 56 delivers the comminuted material 24 to the drying device); and
a discharge conveyor device configured to convey the thermally treated lithium-ion accumulators out of the rotary kiln (Figure 1-2; second conveyor 58 is arranged behind the drying device 58 that delivers the inactivated comminuted material 42 to the filling station).
Hanisch discloses in Figures 1-2 wherein the material is conveyed from the commination unit to the drying device, and is silent with respect to the intermediate charging container to which the crushed lithium ion accumulators are conveyed form the crushing device and wherein the intermediate charging container being configured to receive the crushed lithium ion accumulators therein. Hanisch further discloses in Figure 3 of optional component of the battery processing installation including a plurality of intermediate transport containers that can store the crushed comminute material (Figure 3; [0071] containers 78, 86, 46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to modify the system of Hanisch to include an intermediate transport container after the comminution device to store the crushed lithium ion accumulators as taught by Hanisch to provide a container to store the crushed accumulators before being conveyed to the rotary kiln as taught by Hanisch. Thus through the modification all the claim limitations of claim 1 are rendered obvious in view of Hanisch as providing a container to store the crushed battery material is already taught by Hanisch and thus a skilled artisan can combine the optional components into the embodiments of Figures 1-2 to render the claim as obvious.
Regarding claim 2, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Hanisch further discloses wherein an intergas atmosphere is set in the input chamber ([0059] comminution unit comminutes the batteries under shielding gas and is provided before comminution of the batteries).
Regarding claim 3, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Hanisch further discloses wherein the lithium ion accumulators accommodated in the input chamber are conveyed from the input chamber to the crushing device by means of gravity (Figure 2 the comminution unit 18 is provided and the material can fall to the conveyor 56 that delivers to the region above the drying device and appears that the comminuted material again falls to the drying device by gravity).
PNG
media_image1.png
536
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Hanisch further discloses wherein the crushing device comprises a single shaft shredder ( [0058] comminution unit can comprise a rotary shear with a rotor and a stator or several rotors or a cutting mill with a rotator and several rotors that would cut in pieces and thus shred and could contain a single shaft).
Regarding claim 6, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Hanisch further discloses wherein the crushed lithium ion accumulators are conveyed from the crushing device to the intermediate charging container by means of gravity (Figure 2 the comminution unit 18 is provided and the material can fall to the conveyor 56 that delivers to the region above the drying device and appears that the comminuted material again falls to the drying device by gravity, see modification of claim 1). Through the modification of claim 1, a container can be provided to store the crushed lithium ion accumulators that then can be transported to the intermediate charging container. Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to arrange the intermediate charging container of modified claim 1 to collect the crushed lithium ion accumulators from the crushing device to be below the crushing device such that gravity works to convey the crushed lithium ion accumulators to the intermediate charging container. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
PNG
media_image1.png
536
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Applicant’s instant application claims that pyrolysis can occur at temperatures below 250 °C, however, pyrolysis only partially occurs and then further discloses a complete pyrolysis occurs due to heating between 250-650 °C (Instant invention [0026-0027]), and thus it will be interpreted that only a partial pyrolysis can occur at temperatures below 250 °C.
Hanisch discloses wherein the drying preferably occurs at a maximum temperature of 80 °C ([0031], [0008]) and thus will be capable of a partial pyrolytic decomposition of the crushed lithium ion accumulators as claimed.
Regarding claim 8, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Hanisch further discloses an input conveyor device configured to convey the crushed lithium accumulators received in the intermediate charging container into the rotary kiln (Figure 2; [0067] conveyor 56 moves the comminuted material to the drying device 26).
Regarding claim 9, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 8. Modified Hanisch further wherein the conveyor can comprise a screw conveyor ([[0067], Figure 2). Hanisch is explicitly silent with respect to two screw conveyors, however, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to duplicate the screw conveyors such that at least two screw conveyors can be used to move the comminuted material to the drying apparatus. The mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 12, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Hanisch further discloses an intermediate outlet container into which the thermally treated lithium ion accumulators are conveyed out of the rotary kiln by the discharge conveyor device (Figure 1-2; second conveyor 58 is arranged behind the drying device 58 that delivers the inactivated comminuted material 42 to the filling station and transport container 46).
PNG
media_image2.png
536
726
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Hanisch further discloses means for generating an intergas (Figures 1-2; [0059] shielding gas pathway seen in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 14, Hanisch discloses a method of treating lithium-ion accumulators (abstract, method and system for the treatment of used batteries in particular lithium batteries), comprising:
inputting lithium-ion accumulators into an input chamber of a mobile device (Figures 1-2 discharge unit 12 and dismantling station 14 can hold the cells before going into the commination unit 18 and inputting the lithium batteries into the system);
conveying the inputted lithium ion accumulators to a crushing device of the mobile device (Figure 1; [0058] the battery cells are fed into a comminution unit 18);
crushing, via the crushing device, the conveyed lithium ion accumulators (Figure 2; commination unit 18 comminutes the batteries; [0059]);
conveying the crushed lithium ion accumulators into a rotary kiln of the mobile device (Figures 1-2; drying device 26; the first conveyor 56 delivers the comminuted material 24 to the drying device);
thermally treating, via the rotary kiln, the crushed lithium ion accumulators conveyed into the rotary kiln (Figures 1-2; drying device 26; the first conveyor 56 delivers the comminuted material 24 to the drying device; [0035-0036]); and
conveying the thermally treated lithium ion accumulators out of rotary kiln by a discharge conveyor device of the mobile device (Figure 1-2; second conveyor 58 is arranged behind the drying device 58 that delivers the inactivated comminuted material 42 to the filling station).
Hanisch discloses in Figures 1-2 wherein the material is conveyed from the commination unit to the drying device, and is silent with respect to conveying the crushed lithium ion accumulators into an intermediate charging container of the mobile device after the crushing device. Hanisch further discloses in Figure 3 of optional component of the battery processing installation including a plurality of intermediate transport containers that can store the crushed comminute material (Figure 3; [0071] containers 78, 86, 46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to modify the system of Hanisch to include an intermediate transport container after the comminution device to store the crushed lithium ion accumulators as taught by Hanisch to provide a container to store the crushed accumulators before being conveyed to the rotary kiln as taught by Hanisch. Thus through the modification all the claim limitations of claim 14 are rendered obvious in view of Hanisch as providing a container to store the crushed battery material is already taught by Hanisch and thus a skilled artisan can combine the optional components into the embodiments of Figures 1-2 to render the claim as obvious.
Regarding claim 15, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 14. Applicant’s instant application claims that pyrolysis can occur at temperatures below 250 °C, however, pyrolysis only partially occurs and then further discloses a complete pyrolysis occurs due to heating between 250-650 °C (Instant invention [0026-0027]), and thus it will be interpreted that only a partial pyrolysis can occur at temperatures below 250 °C.
Hanisch discloses wherein the drying preferably occurs at a maximum temperature of 80 °C ([0031], [0008]) and thus will be capable of a partial pyrolytic decomposition of the crushed lithium ion accumulators as claimed.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanisch et al. (US 2018/0301769 A1) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Yamashita et al. (US 2024/0243381 A1- having a priority date of 5/28/2021).
Regarding claim 4, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Hanisch discloses wherein lithium batteries are comminuted by a comminution device. Hanisch is silent with respect to the at least 90% by mass of the crushed lithium ion accumulators have a particle size being less or equal to 20 mm.
Yamashita discloses a method of separating valuable material of a battery and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of recycling battery parts. Yamashita discloses wherein a lithium ion secondary battery is crushed and undergoes a heat treatment to break down the battery particles and is crushed to have coarse, medium, and fine particles wherein the coarse particles have a size of more than 2.4 mm, the medium particles having a size of 0.6-2.4 mm ([0109]), and the fine particles having a size of 40-300 micrometers ([0110]; [0013]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to adjust the size of the comminuted material of Hanisch to have a size as taught by Yamashita such as the medium or fine particles having a size of 40 micrometers to 2.4 mm as a simple adjustment of the size due to the comminution device. The comminution device can form comminuted material having a particle size that is adjustable and thus can be adjusted such that at least 90% by mass of the comminuted material can have a particle size of less than or equal to 20 mm. The size of an article is not a matter of invention. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanisch et al. (US 2018/0301769 A1) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Martinet et al. (US 2005/0069768 A1).
Regarding claim 10, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Hanisch further teaches wherein the rotary kiln comprises a rotary tube (Figure 2; drying device having a tube like rectangular shape); and
An inlet housing, rotary tube being sealed with respect to the inlet housing via a seal ([0060] air tight with an air lock).
Hanisch is silent with respect to wherein a seal comprises polytetrafluoroethylene.
Martinet discloses a lithium electrochemical generator that is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of battery cells. Martinet discloses a seal that can be made of a polytetrafluoroethylene that can seal to electrode and is a known sealant ([0024,0075-0076,0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to use a polytetrafluoroethylene material to seal the rotary tube/air lock of the drying chamber as polytetrafluoroethylene is a known sealant used for battery and battery equipment. The resulting modification would render obvious wherein the sealant can be polytetrafluoroethylene. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Regarding claim 11, modified Hanisch discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Hanisch further teaches wherein the rotary kiln comprises a rotary tube (Figures 1-2; drying device having a tube like rectangular shape); and
An outlet housing, rotary tube being sealed with respect to the inlet housing via a seal (Figures 1-2; [0060] air tight with an air lock).
Hanisch is silent with respect to wherein a seal comprises polytetrafluoroethylene.
Martinet discloses a lithium electrochemical generator that is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of battery cells. Martinet discloses a seal that can be made of a polytetrafluoroethylene that can seal to electrode and is a known sealant ([0024,0075-0076,0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to use a polytetrafluoroethylene material to seal the rotary tube/air lock of the drying chamber as polytetrafluoroethylene is a known sealant used for battery and battery equipment. The resulting modification would render obvious wherein the sealant can be polytetrafluoroethylene. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Stevens (WO 2010102377 A1)- discloses a battery recycling system and method and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of recycling batteries.
Ewles et al. (US 2010/0230518 A1)- discloses a system and process for battery recycling and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of recycling batteries.
Weber et al. (US 2021/0359312 A1)- discloses a plant for recycling used batteries and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of recycling batteries.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adam J Francis whose telephone number is (571)272-1021. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7 am-4 pm 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571)270-7871. 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.
/ADAM J FRANCIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights