DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination, wherein claims 12-17 and 19-20 are withdrawn.
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 without traverse of Group I and Species I.A in the reply filed on July 10, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-11 and 18 are objected to because a comma in each of the preamble limitations “method for recycling a waste lithium ion battery, comprising” (emphasis added) should be removed. Appropriate correction is respectively requested.
Claim 1 is objected to because the limitation “which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite” in “preparing a mixture of a lithium alloy compound in which lithium compounds, aluminum and copper are partially melted, a copper metal and an aluminum-copper alloy from waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite” (emphasis added) may modify (1) “waste lithium ion battery cases,” (2) “discharged waste lithium ion battery cells,” (3) “waste lithium ion battery cell shreds,” (4) “waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases,” or (5) “waste lithium ion battery” (in the preamble).
However, on review of the instant specification (see e.g. ¶¶ 0033-37 and 203-226), it appears that the intent is for interpretation (5), but the waste lithium-ion battery is in the preamble. Appropriate correction is respectively required.
Further, since “lithium-ion battery” is singular, the “comprise” should be “comprises.” Appropriate correction is respectively required.
Claims 2-11 are objected to because the articles “a” in the preamble limitation “method for recycling a waste lithium ion battery, comprising a partial melt separation process for lithium alloy compound formation and graphite separation” (emphasis added) each should be “the” or equivalent. Appropriate correction is respectively required.
Claim 2 is objected to because the step “wherein the method comprises adding metal powder such as aluminum powder or copper powder to the mixture…” should indicate the adding step is “further” required, such as e.g. “the method further comprises adding metal powder…” since it is an additional step not yet claimed in a parent claim. Appropriate correction is respectively required.
Claim 8 is objected to because the limitation “which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite” in “charging waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite” (emphasis added) may modify (1) “waste lithium ion battery cases,” (2) “discharged waste lithium ion battery cells,” (3) “waste lithium ion battery cell shreds,” (4) “waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases,” or (5) “waste lithium ion battery” (in the preamble).
However, on review of the instant specification (see e.g. ¶¶ 0033-37 and 203-226), it appears that the intent is for interpretation (5), but the waste lithium-ion battery is in the preamble. Appropriate correction is respectively required.
Further, since “lithium-ion battery” is singular, the “comprise” should be “comprises.” Appropriate correction is respectively required.
Claim 18 is objected to because the limitation “which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite” in “preparing a mixture of a lithium alloy compound in which lithium compounds, aluminum and copper are partially melted, a copper metal and an aluminum-copper alloy from waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite” (emphasis added) may modify (1) “waste lithium ion battery cases,” (2) “discharged waste lithium ion battery cells,” (3) “waste lithium ion battery cell shreds,” (4) “waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases,” or (5) “waste lithium ion battery” (in the preamble).
However, on review of the instant specification (see e.g. ¶¶ 0033-37 and 203-226), it appears that the intent is for interpretation (5), but the waste lithium-ion battery is in the preamble. Appropriate correction is respectively required.
Further, since “lithium-ion battery” is singular, the “comprise” should be “comprises.” Appropriate correction is respectively required.
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.
Claims 1-11 and 18 are 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 1, from which claims 2-11 depend, recites the limitation “the mixture” in the second step, “the mixture of the lithium alloy compound, the copper metal and the aluminum-copper alloy,” does not have antecedent basis, noting that the claimed “a mixture” in the first step, “preparing a mixture of a lithium alloy compound in which lithium compounds, aluminum and copper are partially melted, a copper metal and an aluminum-copper alloy from waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite,” has different components than the limitation in said second step, as claimed.
Claims 2-3 recite the limitation “such as aluminum powder or copper powder” (emphasis added) which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 3, recites the limitation “the particle size of the metal powder” (emphasis added) does not have antecedent basis.
Claim 7, recites the limitation “the particle size of the mixture of the lithium alloy compound, copper metal and aluminum-copper alloy” (emphasis added) does not have antecedent basis.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “such as gravity selection, sieving and air suspension” (emphasis added) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 18 recites the limitation “the mixture” in the second step, “the mixture of the lithium alloy compound, the copper metal and the aluminum-copper alloy,” does not have antecedent basis, noting that the claimed “a mixture” in the first step, “preparing a mixture of a lithium alloy compound in which lithium compounds, aluminum and copper are partially melted, a copper metal and an aluminum-copper alloy from waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite,” has different components than the limitation in said second step, as claimed.
Claim 18, recites the limitation “the particle size of the mixture of the lithium alloy compound, copper metal and aluminum-copper alloy” (emphasis added) does not have antecedent basis.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4-8, 10-11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa et al (WO 2021/182451, with citations to US 2023/0107938).
Regarding independent claim 1, Nishikawa teaches a method for easily recovering at low cost a valuable substance from a lithium ion secondary battery, such as defective lithium ion secondary batteries generated during manufacturing or lithium ion secondary batteries discarded due to expired life,
wherein examples of said valuable substance include e.g. a high-grade carbon (C) concentrate (e.g. a carbon grade of 80% or higher), copper (Cu), aluminum (Al), lithium (Li), cobalt (Co), and nickel (Ni),
wherein said lithium ion secondary battery is not particularly limited, and expressly may include components and compositions such as:
(i.a) a positive electrode with a positive electrode current collector and positive electrode active material,
said positive electrode current collector may be composed of aluminum and copper, wherein aluminum is preferred;
said positive electrode active material may be at least one of e.g. lithium manganate (LiMn2O4), lithium cobaltate (LiCoO2), NMC (LiNixCoyMnzO2, x+y+z=1), NCA (LiNixCoyAlz, x+y+z=1), lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4), lithium cobalt-nickelate (LiCo1/2Ni1/2O2), and lithium titanate (Li2TiO3) and may include graphite conducting agent;
(i.b) a negative electrode with a negative electrode current collector and a carbon negative electrode active material,
said negative electrode current collector may be composed of aluminum and copper, wherein copper is preferred;
said carbon negative electrode active material may be graphite; and
(i.c) a housing (also “case,” “exterior case,” and “exterior container”) in which said positive and negative electrode are contained, wherein said housing may be composed of e.g. stainless steel, aluminum, and copper, preferably aluminum,
said method comprising steps including:
(ii.a) thermally treating said lithium ion secondary battery, to obtain a thermally treated product (also “roasted product”), such as in batch-type furnaces such as a rotary kiln, a fluidized bed furnace, a tunnel furnace, and a muffle, a cupola, and a stoker furnace,
wherein thermal treatment of said lithium ion secondary battery may be in an oxygen shielding container to keep said carbon (e.g. said graphite) of said negative electrode active substance remaining without being combusted, thereby improving a recovery rate of said carbon (e.g. said graphite),
said thermal treatment may be at a temperature of preferably 750°C or higher, such as e.g. expressly taught 900°C and 1,080°C, said thermal treatment melts e.g. said aluminum so that it is more easily recovered;
(ii.b) pulverizing said thermally treated product to obtain a pulverized product, wherein said pulverizing may be performed e.g. by a wet process to prevent loss of said carbon negative electrode active material (e.g. said graphite);
(ii.c) classifying said pulverized product to obtain a coarse-grained product and a fine-grained product both containing a valuable substance, wherein said classifying may be performed e.g. by a wet process,
wherein lithium, cobalt, nickel, and said carbon (e.g. said graphite) may be concentrated in said fine-grained product,
said fine-grained product preferably has a particle size of 0.6 mm or greater and 2.4 mm or less, and more preferably 0.85 mm or greater and 1.7 mm or less; and,
wherein said classifying may be performed by a wet process to prevent loss of said carbon negative electrode active material (e.g. said graphite); plus,
(ii.d) multiple subsequent steps including wet magnetic sorting to remove magnetic materials; and, solid-liquid separation, such as using e.g. filter paper or a centrifuge, which removes said carbon concentrate,
wherein a recovery rates of Co and Ni is 90% or higher and
a recovery rate of said carbon (e.g. said graphite) is 80% or higher
(e.g. ¶¶ 0001, 45, 51-53, 56-57, 61-64, 66, 70-72, 74-76, 86-91, 94-96, 99, 104, 107-112,149-152, 245-246, 283, 285, 291-292, 295-296, 299-300, 303-304, 307-308, 311-312, and 321-328 plus e.g. Figures 1-3), reading on “method for recycling a waste lithium ion battery comprising a partial melt separation process for…graphite separation,” said method comprising:
said lithium ion secondary battery is not particularly limited, and expressly may include components and compositions such as:
- said positive electrode with said positive electrode current collector and positive electrode active material,
said positive electrode current collector may be composed of aluminum and copper, wherein aluminum is preferred;
said positive electrode active material may be at least one of e.g. lithium manganate (LiMn2O4), lithium cobaltate (LiCoO2), NMC (LiNixCoyMnzO2, x+y+z=1), NCA (LiNixCoyAlz, x+y+z=1), lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4), lithium cobalt-nickelate (LiCo1/2Ni1/2O2), and lithium titanate (Li2TiO3) and may include graphite conducting agent;
- said negative electrode with said negative electrode current collector and said carbon negative electrode active material,
said negative electrode current collector may be composed of aluminum and copper, wherein copper is preferred;
said carbon negative electrode active material may be graphite; and
- said housing (also “case,” “exterior case,” and “exterior container”) in which said positive and negative electrode are contained, wherein said housing may be composed of e.g. stainless steel, aluminum, and copper, preferably aluminum,
wherein said steps including:
(1) thermally treating said lithium ion secondary battery, to obtain said thermally treated product (also “roasted product”),
wherein thermal treatment of said lithium ion secondary battery may be in said oxygen shielding container to keep said carbon (e.g. said graphite) of said negative electrode active substance remaining without being combusted, thereby improving said recovery rate of said carbon (e.g. said graphite),
said thermal treatment may be at said temperature of preferably 750°C or higher, such as e.g. expressly taught 900°C and 1,080°C, said thermal treatment melts e.g. said aluminum so that it is more easily recovered;
(2) pulverizing said thermally treated product to obtain said pulverized product, wherein said pulverizing may be performed e.g. by said wet process to prevent loss of said carbon negative electrode active material (e.g. said graphite);
(3) classifying said pulverized product to obtain said coarse-grained product and said fine-grained product both containing said valuable substance, wherein said classifying may be performed e.g. by said wet process,
wherein lithium, cobalt, nickel, and said carbon (e.g. said graphite) may be concentrated in said fine-grained product,
said fine-grained product preferably has said particle size of 0.6 mm or greater and 2.4 mm or less, and more preferably 0.85 mm or greater and 1.7 mm or less; and,
wherein said classifying may be performed by said wet process to prevent loss of said carbon negative electrode active material (e.g. said graphite)
(e.g. supra), said steps (1)-(3) reading on “preparing a mixture of…a copper metal…from waste lithium ion battery cell shreds, discharged waste lithium ion battery cells or waste lithium ion battery cases which comprise lithium compounds, aluminum, copper and graphite;” plus,
(4) said multiple subsequent steps including wet magnetic sorting to remove magnetic materials; and, solid-liquid separation, such as using e.g. filter paper or a centrifuge, which removes said carbon concentrate (e.g. supra), said steps (1)-(3) reading on “physically separating the graphite from the mixture of the lithium alloy compound, the copper metal and the aluminum-copper alloy,” as claimed.
Nishikawa teaches said method including said thermal treatment may be at said temperature of preferably 750°C or higher, such as e.g. expressly taught 900°C and 1,080°C applied to said battery that includes said lithium-ion battery composed of said positive electrode current collector that may be composed of aluminum and copper, wherein aluminum is preferred; said positive electrode active material may be at least one of e.g. lithium manganate (LiMn2O4), lithium cobaltate (LiCoO2), NMC (LiNixCoyMnzO2, x+y+z=1), NCA (LiNixCoyAlz, x+y+z=1), lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4), lithium cobalt-nickelate (LiCo1/2Ni1/2O2), and lithium titanate (Li2TiO3) and may include graphite conducting agent; said negative electrode with said negative electrode current collector and said carbon negative electrode active material, said negative electrode current collector may be composed of aluminum and copper, wherein copper is preferred; said carbon negative electrode active material may be graphite; and, said housing, wherein said housing may be composed of e.g. aluminum and copper, preferably aluminum; and, pulverizing said thermally treated product to obtain said pulverized product (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitations “lithium alloy compound formation” and “preparing a mixture of a lithium alloy compound in which lithium compounds, aluminum and copper are partially melted, a copper metal, and an aluminum-copper alloy.”
However, Nishikawa teaches a process with substantially identical compositions (e.g. supra) processed by a substantially identical process (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of said limitations, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01. See further instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0017-93, 176, 246, 251, 361, 423, and 475, reading on said limitations.
Regarding claim 4, Nishikawa teaches the method of claim 1, wherein said positive electrode active material may be at least one of e.g. lithium manganate (LiMn2O4), lithium cobaltate (LiCoO2), NMC (LiNixCoyMnzO2, x+y+z=1), NCA (LiNixCoyAlz, x+y+z=1), lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4), lithium cobalt-nickelate (LiCo1/2Ni1/2O2), and lithium titanate (Li2TiO3) and may include graphite conducting agent (e.g. supra), reading on “wherein the lithium compound is at least one selected from the group consisting of lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4), lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide (Li(Ni,Co,Mn)O2), lithium manganese oxide (LiMn2O4), lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide (Li(Ni,Co,Al)O2) and lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2).”
Regarding claim 5, Nishikawa teaches the method of claim 1, wherein said carbon negative electrode active material may be graphite (e.g. supra), noting graphite may be only either artificial graphite or natural graphite, reading on “the graphite is artificial graphite or natural graphite.”
Regarding claims 6-8, Nishikawa teaches the method of claim 1, wherein said thermal treatment may be at said temperature of preferably 750°C or higher, such as e.g. expressly taught 900°C and 1,080°C applied to said battery that includes said lithium-ion battery composed of said positive electrode current collector that may be composed of aluminum and copper, wherein aluminum is preferred; said positive electrode active material may be at least one of e.g. lithium manganate (LiMn2O4), lithium cobaltate (LiCoO2), NMC (LiNixCoyMnzO2, x+y+z=1), NCA (LiNixCoyAlz, x+y+z=1), lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4), lithium cobalt-nickelate (LiCo1/2Ni1/2O2), and lithium titanate (Li2TiO3) and may include graphite conducting agent; said negative electrode with said negative electrode current collector and said carbon negative electrode active material, said negative electrode current collector may be composed of aluminum and copper, wherein copper is preferred; said carbon negative electrode active material may be graphite; and, said housing, wherein said housing may be composed of e.g. aluminum and copper, preferably aluminum; said pulverized product after classification obtains said lithium, cobalt, nickel, and said carbon (e.g. said graphite) may be concentrated in said fine-grained product, wherein said fine-grained product preferably has a particle size of 0.6 mm or greater and 2.4 mm or less, and more preferably 0.85 mm or greater and 1.7 mm or less; plus, said multiple subsequent steps including wet magnetic sorting to remove magnetic materials; and, solid-liquid separation, such as using e.g. filter paper or a centrifuge, which removes said carbon concentrate (e.g. supra), noting “such as gravity selection, sieving and air suspension” (claim 8, emphasis added) is interpreted as merely optional and does not patentably distinguish he instant invention, reading on “…separating the graphite…by physical methods such as gravity selection, sieving and air suspension” (claim 8), but does not expressly teach the other claim limitations.
However, Nishikawa teaches a process with substantially identical compositions (e.g. supra) processed by a substantially identical process (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of said limitations, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01. See further instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0017-93, 176, 246, 251, 361, 423, and 475, reading on the claimed limitations.
Regarding claims 10-11, Nishikawa teaches the method of claim 1, wherein said recovery rate Ni is 90% or higher and said recovery rate of said carbon (e.g. said graphite) is 80% or higher (e.g. supra), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the separation rate of nickel is 95 to 99% by weight” (claim 10 and “the separation rate of graphite is 70 to 95% by weight” (claim 11).
Regarding claim 18, Nishikawa is applied as provided supra.
Still regarding independent claim 18, Nishikawa teaches said method, wherein the preamble limitation “for smart recycling…” is interpreted as merely interpreted as merely intended use and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see also e.g. MPEP § 2111.02.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
None of the art of record teaches or suggests each of the limitations of dependent claim 2, from which claim 3 depends, or those of dependent claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Han et al (US 2025/0055053);
Singh (US 2024/0194961); and,
Gao et al (US 2024/0055685).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights