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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the abbreviation “PID” in paragraphs [0015] and [0031] characterizing the type of controller should be spelled out.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“dua-chamber” in line 2 of the claim should read “dual-chamber”; and
the abbreviation “PID” in line 2 of the claim should be spelled out. Appropriate correction is 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 6 and 8 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 6 recites the limitation "the electrical temperature maintenance system" in the first line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 8, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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 1-2, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chinese Patent Publication No. CN 215389814 U by Yang et al., hereinafter “Yang”.
Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses a system for safe shredding of Lithium-ion batteries (system shown in Figs. 1-11; [n0056]), the system comprising:
a dual-chamber apparatus, wherein the dual-chamber apparatus comprises an upper chamber (upper chamber 3 in Fig. 1) and a lower chamber (lower chamber 2 in Fig. 1) such that the two chambers are mechanically coupled through a narrow neck region (opening 34 in Fig. 1 and discharge port 47 of collection cover 36 are a narrow neck region mechanically coupling chambers 3 and 2), and both the chambers broaden as they move away from the neck region (both chambers 2 and 3 broaden out as they move away from 36 and 47), thereby providing an hourglass-shape to the dual-chamber apparatus, and wherein, the dual-chamber apparatus enables safe shredding of Lithium-ion batteries by providing a temperature-controlled fluid environment inside the chambers ([n0001]);
a shredder, wherein the shredder is placed at the neck of the dual-chamber apparatus, and wherein, the width of the shredder is adjusted for size characterization of shredded material (shredding device 8 is placed at opening 34 of the narrow neck region and sized to shred material introduced in chamber 3; [n0059]);
a sieve, wherein the sieve is housed in the lower chamber of the dual-chamber apparatus (sieve screen plate 13 in Fig. 1; [n0061]);
a plurality of conveyors, wherein the conveyors are provided to transport material within the system for safe shredding (feeding conveyor 61 in Fig. 1 feeds material within cavity 1 to upper chamber 3; [n0058]), and from the system for safe shredding to any external equipment attached to the system for safe shredding (discharge conveyor 15 in Fig. 1; [n0062]);
a motor, wherein the motor is connected to the shredder (motors 21 in Fig. 5 are connected to shredder rollers 20; [n0066]); and,
a plurality of sensors (monitoring instrument 6 in Fig. 1 includes multiple sensors; [n0085]) and actuators (valve actuator 62 in Fig. 1 actuates introduction of material into chamber 3 and valve actuator 14 actuates discharge of material from lower chamber 2; [n0058] and [n0062]) for respectively sensing a plurality of parameters and actuating a plurality of operations in the system.
Regarding claim 2, Yang anticipates the system as claimed in claim 1 as explained above. Yang further discloses the upper chamber of the dual-chamber apparatus (upper chamber 3 in Fig. 1) is maintained at a constant temperature by electrically heating with submerged water heater and cooling using a heat exchanger or chiller (monitoring instrument 6 in Fig. 1 is used to maintain upper chamber 3 at a constant temperature by water distribution pipe 27; [n0057], [n0069][n0086]), and wherein, the upper chamber is connected to an inlet arrangement through which the material to be shredded is introduced into the dual-chamber apparatus (upper chamber 3 in Fig. 1 is connected to inlet valve 62 where material is introduced), and wherein, the upper chamber comprises a narrow chamber at the top portion to collect the exhaust gases produced during the shredding operation (gas chamber door 60 in Fig. 1; [n0088]), and wherein, the upper chamber further includes a fluid inlet arrangement (gas distribution pipe 28 in Fig. 6 and mounting holes 31 in Fig. 4; [n0091]) and a plurality of pressure sensors and temperature sensors (monitoring instrument 6 included in upper chamber 3 has multiple sensors; [n0085]).
Regarding claim 4, Yang anticipates the system as claimed in claim 1 as explained above. Yang further discloses the plurality of conveyors enable the transport of a plurality of types of material within and outside the system (conveyors 61 and 15 enable transport of a plurality of types of material within and outside the system of Fig. 1), and wherein, the shredded material that is classified as under-sized using preset parameters is transported out of the system through an outlet conveyor (shredded material classified as under-sized by screen plate 13 in Fig. 1 is transported out by outlet discharge conveyor 15), and wherein, the shredded material is classified as over-sized using preset parameters is transported for re-shredding and mixed with the feed material that is introduced into the system for shredding through an intra-system conveyor (paragraph [n0073] discloses over-sized material is returned for re-shredding).
The limitations “the intra-system conveyor is run at higher speed than outlet conveyor to create a flow of water inside the equipment for equal distribution of heat, and wherein, all the conveyors are designed to run at pre-calibrated constant speeds” at the end of claim 4 are recitation of the intended manner of operation which does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from Yang. See M.P.E.P. 2114,II.
Regarding claim 6, Yang anticipates the system as claimed in claim 1 as explained above. Yang further discloses the temperature of the dual-chamber apparatus is controlled using a controller (display and alarm device 57 in Fig. 2; [n0086]) and further comprises a plurality of temperature sensors to monitor the uniformity of temperature in the chamber ([n0040] discloses a plurality of temperature sensors are used to monitor the temperature).
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 1, 3 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 7,078,122 B1 to Rosenberg, hereinafter “Rosenberg”.
Regarding claim 1, Rosenberg discloses a system for safe shredding of Lithium-ion batteries (system shown in Fig. 1; col. 5, line 21-23), the system comprising:
a dual-chamber apparatus, wherein the dual-chamber apparatus comprises an upper chamber (upper shredding chamber 3 in Fig. 1; col. 5, line 49) and a lower chamber (lower reaction chamber 4 in Fig. 1; col. 5, line 58) such that the two chambers are mechanically coupled through a narrow neck region, and both the chambers broaden as they move away from the neck region, thereby providing an hourglass-shape to the dual-chamber apparatus (see “Neck Region” annotation to Fig. 1 of Rosenberg reproduced below), and wherein, the dual-chamber apparatus enables safe shredding of Lithium-ion batteries by providing a temperature-controlled fluid environment inside the chambers (col. 5, line 33-48 disclose waste, preferably lithium batteries mentioned at col. 6, line 31-34, is heated in a controlled atmosphere before it is fed to shredding chamber 3);
a shredder, wherein the shredder is placed at the neck of the dual-chamber apparatus, and wherein, the width of the shredder is adjusted for size characterization of shredded material (Fig. 1 shows a shredder placed at the Neck Region as annotated below. Col. 5, line 49-58 discloses the size of the shredder is adjusted according to the material being shredded.);
a sieve, wherein the sieve is housed in the lower chamber of the dual-chamber apparatus (sieve filter apparatus 7 in Fig. 1 is housed at the bottom of lower reaction chamber 4; col. 6, line 19-23);
a plurality of conveyors, wherein the conveyors are provided to transport material within the system for safe shredding (col. 5, line 45-48 disclose a conveyor is used to transport material within heating chamber 2 in Fig. 1), and from the system for safe shredding to any external equipment attached to the system for safe shredding (pump 7a in Fig. 1 conveys the liquid phase of the shredded material from the system; col. 6, line 23-30);
PNG
media_image1.png
1118
1234
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Rosenberg does not expressly disclose a motor is connected to the shredder and a plurality of sensors and actuators for sensing parameters and actuating operations in the system are present. However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention a motor is used to drive the shredder in shredding chamber 3 and sensors and actuators are used to control and actuate the system, such as a temperature sensor sensing temperature within heating chamber 2 and an actuator which actuates gate 1a.
Regarding claim 3, Rosenberg renders the system as claimed in claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. Rosenberg further teaches the lower chamber of the dual-chamber apparatus (lower reaction chamber 4 in Fig. 1) houses a sieve placed in the middle of the lower chamber with a tilt (sieve filter apparatus 7 in Fig. 1 is placed in the middle of the bottom of lower reaction chamber 4 at a tilt) and includes a shaking mechanism (shaking mechanism mixing device 5 in Fig. 1; col. 6, line 4-10), and wherein, the sieve is configured to classify solid and liquid material (sieve filter apparatus 7 in Fig. 1 classifies solids from liquids by sending the solids to solid waste chamber 8; col. 6, line 19-25), and wherein, the sieve is also configured to classify the shredded material based on their size (sieve filter 7 in Fig. 1 classifies shredded material based on their size in that material small enough to pass through filter 7 is allowed to pass therethrough while larger material which cannot pass through the filter is not allowed to pass through the filter), and wherein, the classification of shredded material is also enabled outside the system using external equipment (Fig. 1 shows separating means 9 and 10 outside of the system; col. 6, line 23-30).
Regarding claim 7, Rosenberg renders the system as claimed in claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. Rosenberg further teaches the gases exhausted during shredding operation are collected at the top of the dual-chamber apparatus and are then sent to a scrubber to neutralize any gases (col. 6, line 10-19 teach gases are exhausted at the top of shredding chamber 3 in Fig. 1 and sent to scrubbing system 13), and wherein, this function is accomplished using a control valve, a pressure sensor, the placement of chamber and pump above it to create a negative pressure (Fig. 1 shows scrubbing system 13 placed above shredding chamber 3 to create a negative pressure created by pump fan blower system 14), and wherein, the organic gases left after scrubbing were compressed and stored (scrubbing system 13 compresses and stores scrubbed organic gases).
Regarding claim 8, Rosenberg renders the system as claimed in claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. Column 5, line 58-62 Rosenberg further teaches lower reaction chamber 4 in Fig. 1 is made of polymer material which will withstand the chemical reaction taking place. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend protection against the chemical reaction taking place in the system to upper shredding chamber 3 and the shredder components to protect those components in the same way lower reaction chamber 4 is protected.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenberg in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2021/0069763 A1 by Formaggio, hereinafter “Formaggio”.
Regarding claim 5, Rosenberg renders the system as claimed in claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. However, Rosenberg is silent regarding how the shredder in shredding chamber 3 is driven and a mechanism measuring slippage of the system as claimed in claim 5.
In the same field of comminution apparatus, Formaggio teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a belt-driven pulley to drive grinding apparatus wherein a protection sensor is configured to detect slippage of the system. See the abstract.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a belt-driven pulley system with protection sensor to drive Rosenberg’s shredder in the same way Formaggio teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Formaggio to Rosenberg’s system would achieve the predictable result of adding choking monitoring to Rosenberg’s system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL DEREK PRESSLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-6658. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 3:30pm Eastern.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/P DEREK PRESSLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights