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 without traverse of Group II, claims 12-20, in the reply filed on June 11, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 12-14 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ellis et al. (hereinafter “Ellis”) (WO 2020/118213 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Ellis teaches a method of recycling the cathode material of batteries, wherein the method includes processing one or more batteries into multiple core sections, each of which includes an anode section, a cathode section, a separator section and an electrolyte section (separating a cathode electrode from the spent lithium ion battery) (see paragraphs 29 and 30). The core sections may then be disposed into a solvent so as to form a mixture of cathode materials from the multiple core sections (combining the spent electrode with a solvent to form a suspension) (see paragraph 34). The cathode materials can then be extracted from the mixture for further processing using a variety of processes, such as density-based separation, filtration, dissolution, etc. (separating the spent lithium cathode material from the suspension) (see paragraphs 55-61). Lithium deficient cathode materials can be relithiated with a lithium containing material by mixing the lithium deficient cathode material with the lithium containing material to form a mixture (mixing the spent lithium cathode material with a particulate lithium source), and subsequently heating the mixture to sinter the mixture (heating the mixture to a temperature effective to sinter the mixture) (see paragraphs 117-121). The re-lithiated cathode material can be removed and is ready to be reused as a raw material for cathode manufacturing (see paragraph 123).
Regarding claim 13, Ellis teaches that an earlier heat treatment process may be used to remove or degrade pieces of separator and/or battery packaging.
Regarding claim 14, Ellis teaches that the earlier heating process may involve heating to at least 100 degrees Celsius (see paragraph 143). The sintering may be conducted at about 300 degrees Celsius to about 400 degrees Celsius (see paragraph 121).
Regarding claim 18, Ellis teaches that the solvent can include a polar solvent that can dissolve binders such as PVDF. Examples of such polar solvents can include N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP) (see paragraph 40).
Regarding claim 19, Ellis teaches that any lithium containing material described therein may be used as a lithium containing material (see paragraph 117). This includes lithium salts (see paragraph 109).
Regarding claim 20, Ellis teaches that the method may be used to recover and relithiated various types of cathode materials including cobalt rich materials such as LiCoO2 (see paragraph 35).
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.
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellis as applied to claims 12-14 and 18-20 above.
Regarding claim 15, although Ellis does not explicitly teach milling the sintered cathode material, it is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that relithiated cathode material may undergo subsequent mechanical processing, such as ball milling, to achieve a desired particle size distribution prior to cathode manufacturing.
Regarding claim 16, although not explicitly taught by Ellis, milling is well known in the art as a means of mixing particles.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellis as applied to claims 12-14 and 18-20 above, and further in view of Li et al. (hereinafter “Li”) (CN 111663042 A; see English machine translation).
Regarding claim 17, Ellis is silent as to removing the spent cathode electrode in an inert atmosphere.
Li teaches a method of recycling waste batteries in which, to effectively remove residual electrolyte from the positive electrode, the positive electrode can be immersed in an organic solvent and then dried in an inert gas (see paragraphs 23 and 24).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHAN J ESSEX whose telephone number is (571)270-7866. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571) 272-1330. 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.
/STEPHAN J ESSEX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights