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 § 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.
Claim4 is 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 4 recites the limitation "the surface" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawakami (US Patent 5,972,531) in view of Chiang et al. (US Patent 10,411,310) or Xia et al. (CN116093475, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Kawakami discloses a method of recovering an electrode material comprising:
providing an electrode laminate (see 5th step in fig. 1; anode 402 of battery in fig. 6 in example 1), wherein the electrode laminate comprises a current collector foil (400, fig. 6; col. 11, lines 47-58) and an electrode material (401, fig. 6; col. 11, lines 47-58) laminated on at least one surface of the current collector foil (400, see fig. 6);
supplying moisture to the electrode material (see 8th step of filling pores of electrode active material with liquid material in fig. 1; or filling the pores of electrode active material with liquid material comprising water as described in col. 10, lines 44-58; or filing the pores of the electrode active material with methanol aqueous solution in example 1);
freezing the moisture supplied to the electrode material (see 9th step of electrode is cooled in fig. 1; or quickly cool so that the liquid material in the pores is solidified described in col. 10, lines 44-63; or using liquid nitrogen described in example 1); and
crushing the electrode material and separating the electrode material from the current collector foil by applying a mechanical impact to the frozen electrode material (see 10th step in fig. 1; or under reduced pressure described in col. 10, lines 64-65, or impact by means of a hammer described in example 1).
Kawakami does not teach blowing a gas thereto.
Chiang et al. discloses using air classification (or air blow) to separate electrode material into constituents (see step 150 in figs. 1A-1B)
Xia et al. teaches blowing gas thereto by using blowing chamber (4004, fig. 15) having a blowing device (4003, fig. 15) to remove electrode material particles attached to the carrier film to make it easier to remove the electrode material particles, [n0122-0123]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Kawakami by incorporating a step of blowing a gas thereto to separate electrode material into constituents as taught by Chaing et al., or blowing a gas thereto to remove electrode material particles attached to the electrode collector (or the carrier film) to make it easier to remove the electrode material particles as taught by Xia et al.
Regarding claim 2, modified Kawakami discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein Kawakami discloses taking out the battery components (see 3rd step in fig. 1), the battery components are electrodes (cathode and anode, see 5th step in fig. 1). Kawakami teaches the electrode (such as anode 402) is a laminate wound in a cylindrical battery (see fig. 6).
Kawakami does not explicitly disclose taking out the battery component of electrode laminate by unwinding such that the electrode laminate is unwound from an electrode laminate roll on which the electrode laminate is wound and transported in a longitudinal direction.
However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the electrode laminated to be unwound from an electrode laminate roll (or the roll of electrodes 402/408 and separator 407) and on which the electrode laminate is wound (see fig. 6) and transported in a longitudinal direction, because Kawakami teaches taking out the electrode laminate of a spiral-wound cylindrical battery.
Regarding claim 5, modified Kawakami discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein Kawakami discloses using the apparatus of fig. 3 to separate the active material from each electrode.
Kawakami does not teach using a roll-to-roll apparatus to perform the method, such that the apparatus includes touch rolls for adjusting a tension of the electrode laminate are provided on an upstream side of a position at which the moisture is supplied to the electrode laminate and on a downstream side of a position at which the gas is blown to the electrode laminate, and thereby, the tension is applied to the electrode laminate at a position where the moisture is supplied to the electrode laminate, a position where the moisture is frozen, a position where the mechanical impact is applied to the electrode material, and a position where the gas is blown as claimed.
Xia et al. discloses using a roll-to roll apparatus to separate the active material from a carrier membrane (see fig. 15), wherein the apparatus includes touch rolls (4001) provided on an uspstream side where the separation process is started (see fig. 15) and on the downstream side at the end of a process (see fig. 15).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized a roll-to-roll apparatus including touch rolls (4001) provided on an upstream side and on the downstream as taught by Xia et al. to performed the method of modified Kawakami such that the tension is adjusted and the tension is applied to the electrode laminate at a position where the moisture is supplied to the electrode laminate, a position where the moisture is frozen, a position where the mechanical impact is applied to the electrode material, and a position where the gas is blown as claimed; because Xia et al. teaches using roll-to-roll to perform the separation of the electrode materials, and such utilization would involve nothing more than an intended use.
Regarding claim 6, modified Kawakami discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein Xia et al. teaches using hair dryer (see [n0123] of the translation), or the gas is dry air.
Regarding claim 7, modified Kawakami discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein Xia et al. teaches using hair dryer (see [n0123]), or the gas is a heated gas.
Regarding claim 8, modified Kawakami discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein Kawakami discloses using the apparatus of fig. 3 to separate the active material from each electrode.
Kawakami does not teach using a roll-to-roll apparatus to perform the method, such that the apparatus includes a winding roll to wind the current collector foil separated from the electrode material with the winding roll, and thereby providing a current collector foil roll
Xia et al. discloses using a roll-to roll apparatus to separate the active material from a carrier film (see fig. 15), wherein the apparatus includes a winding roll (4006) to wind the carrier film (4009) with the winding roll (4006) to provide a carrier film roll (4006) to be recycled for socio-economic benefits (see fig. 15 of the original document, [n0125-0126] of the translation).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized a roll-to-roll apparatus that includes a winding roll to wind the current foil (or the carrier film) separated from the electrode material with the winding roll to provide a current collector foil roll for recycle and for socio-economic benefits as taught by Xia et al.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Kawakami (US Patent 5,972,531) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nakashima et al. (US Patent 6,311,034).
Regarding claim 3, modified Kawakami discloses a method as in claim 1 above.
Modified Kawakami does not disclose the supplying moisture is carried out by contacting a sponge containing moisture with the electrode material.
Nakashima et al. teaches applying moisture (or solution) by contacting a sponge containing moisture (or roller 40 of a sponge roller, figs. 26-27, and 33-35) with the target (10; see col. 25 lines 1-61), because such method requires a simple construction and can be effectively applying an even coating film if an appropriate material is selected (see col. 3, lines 51-63).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Kawakami by carrying out the step of supplying moisture by contacting the sponge containing moisture with the target, e.g. the electrode material in the method of modified Kawakami, as taught by Nakashima et al., because Nakashima et al. teaches such method requires a simple construction and can be effectively applying an even coating film if an appropriate material is selected.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Kawakami (US Patent 5,972,531) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fang et al. (CN 207113404, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kawakami discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein Kawakami discloses freezing the electrode material and applying a mechanical impact (see claim 1 above).
Modified Kawakami does not teach using two cooling rollers having irregularities on the surface to carry out the step of freezing of the moisture and the applying the mechanical impact to the electrode material by passing the electrode laminate relatively between the two cooling rollers.
Fang et al. discloses two cooling rollers (1 and 2) having irregularities (3) on the surface (see figs. 1-2) so that material between the rollers is cooled and pre-crushed at different sizes (see [0025] of the translation), and such device not only improves cooling efficiency but also pre-crushes the material to reduce subsequent material pre-crushing procedures and improve production efficiency (see [0011] of the translation).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used two cooling rollers having irregularities on the surface as taught by Fang et al. to carry out the step of freezing the moisture and applying the mechanical impact the electrode material of the method of modified Kawakami by passing the electrode laminate relatively between the two cooling rollers; because Fang et al. teaches using such two cooling rollers having irregularities on the surface would allow the material to be cooled and pre-crushed at different sizes, not only the cooling efficiency is improved but also the material is pre-crushed to reduce subsequent material pre-crushing procedures, thereby improving production efficiency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH-TRUC TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-6594. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 6:00pm.
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, Jeffrey T. Barton can be reached at 5712721307. 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.
THANH-TRUC TRINH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/THANH TRUC TRINH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights