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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Scheunis et al. (WO 2020/104164 A1, hereinafter “Scheunis”). Applicant provided a copy of Scheunis with the IDS filed 11/1/2024.
Regarding claim 1, Scheunis teaches a process for the concentration of lithium in metallurgical fumes comprising, providing a metallurgical molten bath furnace, preparing a metallurgical charge comprising lithium0bearing material, transition metals, and fluxing agents, smelting the metallurgical charge and fluxing agents in reducing conditions in the furnace to obtain a molten bath with an alloy and a slag phase, and optionally separating the alloy and slag phase (Scheunis, pg. 3, lines 20-27). Scheunis further teaches an example in which the metallurgical charge comprises end of life lithium batteries, the furnace is heated to 1500°C to melt the charge and samples of the slag and alloy are taken to determine the composition, where the alloy comprises cobalt, copper, and nickel (Scheunis, pg. 5, lines 10-28 and pg. 6, Table 2). Scheunis also teaches the alloy melt yields 97.2% cobalt recovery (Scheunis, pg. 6, Table 2). Scheunis teaches lithium batteries comprise a cathode, anode, and electrolyte, in which the electrolyte is in the form of LiPF6 (Scheunis, pg. 1, lines 14-20).
The method of melting the lithium batteries of Scheunis corresponds to a method for producing a valuable metal from a raw material that comprises discarded lithium ion batteries containing phosphorus of claim 1. Smelting the battery to form an alloy and slag phase of Scheunis corresponds to a melting step of melting the raw material to obtain a melt of claim 1. Separating the slag phase from the alloy of Scheunis corresponds to a slag separation step of separating slag from the melt and recovering an alloy comprising a valuable metal of claim 1.
The recovery of 97.2% cobalt in the alloy of Scheunis falls within a cobalt recovery rate from the raw material is 95.0% or more and 99.6% or less of claim 1. Given that Scheunis teaches a recovery rate of 97.2% cobalt, which falls within the present invention, it is clear that the alloy would inherently have a phosphorus content of 0.1 mass% or less as the amount of cobalt has been confirmed. The recovery of the alloy of Scheunis corresponds to then recovering the alloy of claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Scheunis teaches that the slag yields 2.8% cobalt and the alloy yields 97.2% cobalt as measured from the samples taken (Scheunis, pg. 5, lines 25-28 and pg. 6 Table, 2). Measuring the amount of cobalt in the slag of Scheunis corresponds to wherein the cobalt recovery rate is confirmed from analysis results of a cobalt grade in generated slag in the melting step of claim 2.
Regarding claims 3 and 5, the recovery rate of 97.2% cobalt in Scheunis falls within wherein the cobalt recovery rate is confirmed to be 95.0% or more and 98.0% or less, and the alloy is then recovered of claims 3 and 5.
Regarding claims 4, 6, 7, and 8, Scheunis teaches the charges are melted in an induction furnace at a temperature of 1500°C (Scheunis, pg. 5, lines 15-22). The melting temperature of 1500°C of Scheunis falls within wherein the raw material is melted at a heating temperature of 1300°C or higher and 1500°C or lower in the melting step of claims 4, 6, 7, and 8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 2014/0069234 A1 teaches a method that encompasses the presently claimed method with a recovery rate of cobalt of at least 75% ([0110]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE CARDA whose telephone number is (571)270-1240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:00 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, Sally Merkling can be reached at (571) 272-6297. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIELLE M. CARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738