DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/23/2025 has been entered.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The declaration fails to overcome the prior art rejection presented.
No further arguments are made in the attorney response at the filing of the RCE, no amendment is filed to the instant claim; this action is FINAL after RCE.
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.
Claim(s) 17-23, 26-46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida et al (PGPUB 2008/0050295) and further in view of Hanisch et al (WO 2013/023640).
Claim 17: Uchida teaches a method of recovering valuable materials from lithium batteries [abstract]. The lithium battery being processed comprises a cathode, anode, separator, and electrolyte [0064-0068]. The electrolyte of the cell is taught to comprise a lithium salt in which fluorine serves as a constituent element such as LiPF6 and carbonates such as ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate, dimethyl carbonate (DMC), and ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) [0069]. A drying device (60: reduced pressure heating furnace) has heating coils (62) and a vacuum pump (65) in order to control the pressure and temperature of the device [0072]. The pressure of the device is taught to be 0.1-100 kPa [0074]. The prior art adjusts the pressure and temperature inside the treatment chamber to the boiling point of the organic solvent of the electrolyte solution [0075]. Explicit examples to decompose and vaporize the organic carbonate material is taught to be conducted at 50kPa (500 hPa) and 90oC [0074-0077], however the teaching of vaporizing DMC is 24oC at 2.4 kPA (24hPa) and EMC is 25oC at 3.3 kPa (33hPa) would obviate processing pressure and temperatures at these levels, with the expectation of longer operation times but increased opportunity to reuse the gasified solvent [0078, 0083-0086]. During this initial processing, the fluorine salt is not decomposed by the pressure and temperature combination as subsequent processing steps address the processing of fluorine removal after the organic carbonate has been vaporized [0079, 0088].
Uchida teaches a first step of engaging the spent lithium-ion secondary battery (s210) and heating under a reduced pressure (s220), but is silent to teach comminuted step of the batteries first.
Hanish teaches a method for reclaiming active material of a battery cell [Abstract]. The invention serves to recycle active material, especially lithium, from lithium accumulators or batteries [0004]. The steps include (a) comminuting the cells, particularly under inert gas or in a vacuum, (b) heating the solid cell fragments to a decomposition temperature under inert gas or in a vacuum [0003]. The cells comprise an anode, cathode, separator, and electrolyte [0003, 0022]. The prior art teaches a preferable embodiment where the cells are crushed under an inert gas to achieve comminution of the cells [0026]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 18: Uchida is silent to teach the comminuting device.
Hanish teaches an active material separation plant (10) to comprise a cell crushing device (12) which the cells are fed [0040]. The cells fed to be comminuted comprise are used lithium batteries which would include a cathode, anode, separator, and electrolyte [0003, 0022]. The comminution of cells is performed [0014] and a resulting product is obtained. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 19: Uchida teaches the cells (1) are placed into a chamber to process the electrolyte solvent, but is silent to teach comminuting the cells.
Hanish teaches comminuting the cells [0014, 0040]. The cells are dried at a heated temperature and under a vacuum [0023-0024]. The elements are depicted in Figure 1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Instant claim states the drying is performed at least in part within an interior of the comminuting device. It is obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to either combine functionality of devices into one singular device to conserve space and transfer of materials or to have independent devices for individual steps to efficiently create an assembly line of production. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to produce a combined drying and comminuting device in order to reduce the required space for processing machines and for containing electrolyte within a single cavity while crushing.
Claim 20: Uchida teaches a processing step which is tailored for the organic carbonate solvent [0074-0078] and subsequent processing for the fluoride salt [0079-0080], thus the drying step first is performed at a temperature which avoids significant hydrogen fluoride formation.
Claim 21: Uchida teaches an inactivating processing of the cells [0074-0078], but is silent to teach comminuting the cells.
Hanish teaches comminuting the cells [0014, 0040]. The cells are dried at a heated temperature and under a vacuum [0023-0024]. The elements are depicted in Figure 1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 22: Uchida teaches the solvent to be at least DMC or EMC [0069]. The prior art provides ranges for pressures and temperatures making time and amount of carbonate vaporized and removed result effective variable proportions. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to tailor the pressure, temperature, and time in order to control the amount of carbonate vaporized such that time is minimized, and the amount of recovered materials is maximized.
Claim 23: Uchida teaches condensing gases created from vaporizing the organic carbonate [0076].
Claim 26: Uchida is silent to teach the comminuted processing.
Hanish teaches comminuting the cells [0014, 0040]. The cells are dried at a heated temperature and under a vacuum [0023-0024]. The elements are depicted in Figure 1. A line (30) is utilized to connect the comminuted processing and the drying [Fig 1]; it would be obvious to not introduce oxygen to this material in order to reduce adverse effects. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 27-28: Uchida teaches a cooling apparatus to liquefy and recover organic solvents that have been volatized [0073-0076], but is silent to teach the specific temperatures to be below 0OC. It is interpreted that one having ordinary skill in the art would be obviated to discover workable temperature ranges of the cooling apparatus to be within the claimed scope in order to perform the action of liquifying a vaporized stream.
Claim 29-30: Uchida teaches gasifying DMC and EMC and then liquefying the material after extracting it from the drying device [0076] whereby a gas stream is drawn out of a device used for performing the drying and particles from the gas stream are removed by condensing.
Claim 31: Uchida is silent to teach the comminuted processing.
Hanish teaches comminuting the cells [0014, 0040]. The cells are dried at a heated temperature and under a vacuum [0023-0024]. The elements are depicted in Figure 1. The material is produced to be below a sieve size of 55mm [0021, 0046] It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to comminute the battery cells of Uchida as taught by Hanish in order to increase the recycling rate [0026].
Claim 32: Uchida teaches a battery comprising a foil and binder [0019]. The first removal is of a carbonate material (S220, S222) followed by a fluorine salt (S226) and binder (s228) such that the drying does not decompose the fluorine salt and binder [Fig 2].
Claim 33: Uchida teaches a first temperature to be under 85oC [ 0073-0078] and the binder removal step to be at 400oC [0081].
Claim 34: Uchida teaches a process of agitating the materials.
Hanish teaches that it is known to vibrate heat-treated cell fragments [0005, 0021]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate a vibration of the cell fragments as taught by Hanish to modify the processing of Uchida in order to improve the recovery of active material from old batteries [0005].
Claim 35: Uchida teaches lowering a pressure and temperature in order to vaporize carbonate materials [0072-0074]. A temperature of 24oC and 2.4kPa is taught for the vapor pressure of DMC [0078]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to utilize temperatures of less than 75oC for the vaporization of DMC carbonate material of Uchida in order to remove the carbonate material from the used batteries.
Claim 36: Uchida teaches a tank to receive used batteries and process the batteries; this is interpreted to read on applicant’s ‘batched’ scope [Fig 5].
Claim 37: Uchida teaches lowering a pressure and temperature in order to vaporize carbonate materials [0072-0074]. A temperature of 24oC and 2.4kPa is taught for the vapor pressure of DMC [0078]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to utilize a pressure of not more than 300hPa for the vaporization of DMC carbonate material of Uchida in order to remove the carbonate material from the used batteries.
Claim 38: Uchida teaches the recycle steps to include removal of the carbonate material and then fluorine salt [0072-0083]. These steps allow for the recovery of electrolyte materials as well as remaining battery pieces that are able to be recovered.
Claim 39: Uchida teaches the batteries to be complete discharged in advance [0025].
Claim 40: Uchida is silent to teach conveying materials.
Hanish teaches a conveyer of material [Fig 1; 0046]. The system of Hanish is interpreted to be a dust-free environment in order to reduce impurities into the assembly; this type of processing of material is well known in engineering processing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate a processing conveyer as taught by Hanish to modify the processing of Uchida in order to improve the recovery of active material from old batteries [0005].
Claim 41: Uchida teaches a processing of the fluorine salt to be decomposed by heat; no additional material is taught to be added [0079-80].
Claim 42: Uchida teaches processing of a material containing an active material on a current collector carrier that separates the materials from each other for sorting and recycling [
Claim 43-44: Uchida teaches lowering a pressure and temperature in order to vaporize carbonate materials [0072-0074]. A temperature of 24oC and 2.4kPa is taught for the vapor pressure of DMC [0078]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to utilize a pressure of not more than 100hPa for the vaporization of DMC carbonate material of Uchida in order to remove the carbonate material from the used batteries. [Fig 2, 8].
Claim 45: Uchida teaches the decomposition of carbonate materials [0072-0078]. It is interpreted the heating and pressure method is substantially similar to the instant claimed invention and therefore would operate in the same manner such that quantities of fluorophosphates and hydrogen fluoride can be ruled out.
Claim 46: Uchida teaches a classifying oof the inactivated material of the cathode and anode [Fig 8; Table 1].
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida et al (PGPUB 2008/0050295) and Hanisch et al (WO 2013/023640) as applies to claim 17 above, further in view of Song et al (PGPUB 2021/0040581).
Claim 24: Uchida teaches a device that controls temperature and pressure of the system that evacuates a vaporized carbonate material and other materials during recycling of a battery, but is silent to teach a sensor that monitors the reactant and adjusts the parameters, particularly time.
Song teaches a system and process for recycling electronic components whereby discrete steps remove materials from the recycle device [abstract]. Song utilizes sensors and adjustments to the parameters of processing in order to improve the efficiency of the recycling whereby it would be obvious to incorporate sensors to detect actual state of the processing and adjust the time to reflect the state of the system instead of following a pre-programmed recipe that may require additional time of operation where no further material is being separated since it has all been extracted [0337-0380]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would be motivated to incorporate a sensor of Song in the recycle system of Uchida in order to have real-time results monitored in order to reduce the time of recycling when observations of the sensor reveal there are no more additional, or minimal amounts of material being vaporized from the recycled unit; one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing is well accustomed to computers, programming languages for engineering applications, and would find the instant claim computation obvious.
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 STEPHEN J YANCHUK whose telephone number is (571)270-7343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-8p.
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, Nick Smith can be reached at 571-272-8760. 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.
/STEPHEN J YANCHUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752