EX 1029
`EX 1029
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`URT UMWELT UND RECYCLINGTECHNIK GMBH
`Petitioner,
`v.
`
`DUESENFELD GMBH
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2024-00887
`U.S. Patent No. 11,050,097
`____________
`PATENT OWNER RESPONSE
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.120
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 2213-1450
`
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 1
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`2.
`
`i
`
`IV.
`V.
`
`Page
`PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO INSTITUTED GROUNDS ........... 1
`I.
`TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW ........................................................................ 3
`II.
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ’097 PATENT AND ASSERTED PRIOR ART ....... 4
`A.
`The ’097 Patent ..................................................................................... 4
`B.
`LithoRec ................................................................................................ 5
`C.
`Perry ...................................................................................................... 6
`D.
`DIN 28400 ............................................................................................. 7
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ............................................. 7
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................ 8
`A.
`“inactivate” and “inactivated” ............................................................... 8
`B.
`“drying device configured to inactivate the comminuted material” ... 12
`A.
`“drying the comminuted material” ...................................................... 13
`VI. GROUND 3: Claims 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 19 as anticipated by LithoRec 14
`A.
`LithoRec does not disclose “a vacuum installation connected to the
`drying device and configured to generate a vacuum in the drying
`device” ................................................................................................. 16
`1.
`There is no express disclosure of “a vacuum installation…”
`element ...................................................................................... 16
`LithoRec does not inherently disclose “a vacuum
`installation…” ........................................................................... 19
`LithoRec does not disclose “an inactivation device comprising a
`drying device configured to inactivate the comminuted material” ..... 21
`LithoRec does not provide an enabling disclosure of “a vacuum
`installation connected to the drying device and configured to
`generate a vacuum in the drying device” nor “an inactivation
`device comprising a drying device configured to inactivate the
`comminuted material” ......................................................................... 25
`Dependent Claim 13: “The battery processing installation
`according to claim 12, wherein the drying device is configured to
`dry the comminuted material until an electrolyte content in the
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 2
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`comminuted material is so low that an electrochemical reaction is
`impossible.” ......................................................................................... 39
`VII. GROUND 4: Claim 17 for obviousness over LithoRec and Hanisch ........... 39
`VIII. GROUND 1: Claims 1-3, 7-8, and 10 for obviousness over LithoRec, DIN
`28400, and Perry. ........................................................................................... 40
`A.
`LithoRec does not disclose “inactivating comminuted material
`such that inactivated comminuted material is obtained” .................... 41
`LithoRec does not disclose vacuum drying or drying “at a
`maximum pressure of 300hPa.” .......................................................... 42
`LithoRec in view of Perry does not disclose drying “at a maximum
`pressure of 300 hPa.” .......................................................................... 43
`LithoRec in view of DIN 28400 does not disclose drying “at a
`maximum pressure of 300 hPA.” ........................................................ 45
`Petitioner does not support its proposed motivation to combine
`LithoRec with Perry or DIN. ............................................................... 47
`The asserted combination is not enabled. ........................................... 48
`F.
`G. Dependent Claims 2-3, 7-8, and 10 are not obvious because Claim
`1 is not obvious. ................................................................................... 48
`H. Dependent Claim 2: “The method according to claim 1, wherein
`the comminuted material is dried until an electrolyte content in the
`comminuted material is so low than an electrochemical reaction is
`impossible.” ......................................................................................... 49
`Dependent Claim 7: “The method according to claim 1, wherein
`the drying of the comminuted material is only completed if one or
`more of the following conditions is met: no flammable or
`explosive gas mixture is formable above the comminuted material
`in the transport container, and the comminuted material is so dry
`that no flammable or explosive gas mixture is able to emerge in the
`transport container.” ............................................................................ 50
`IX. GROUND 2: Claim 9 for obviousness over LithoRec, Perry, DIN 28400,
`and Hanisch ................................................................................................... 51
`Secondary Considerations Compel a Finding of Non-Obviousness ............. 53
`A. Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness Support Patentability .............. 53
`B.
`Long-Felt but Unmet Need and Unexpected Results .......................... 54
`
`X.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`I.
`
`ii
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 3
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`C.
`
`Duesenfeld’s Battery Recycling Processes Practice the Challenged
`Claims .................................................................................................. 56
`D. Duesenfeld’s Battery Recycling Processes Have Been
`Commercially Successful .................................................................... 56
`Rebuttable Presumption of Nexus ....................................................... 58
`E.
`XI. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 61
`
`
`
`iii
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 4
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
` Page(s)
`
`Cases
`Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Affymetrix, Inc.,
`567 F.3d 1366,1383 (Fed. Cir. 2009) ................................................................. 19
`Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC,
`987 F.3d 1080 (Fed. Cir. 2021) .......................................................................... 35
`Apple Inc. v. Corephotonics, Ltd.,
`861 F. App’x 443 (Fed. Cir. 2021) ..................................................................... 29
`Apple v. Int’l Trade Comm’n,
`725 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2013) .............................................................. 27, 28, 29
`Ascend Elements, Inc. v. Duesenfeld GmbH,
`IPR2024-00948 (PTAB Nov 22, 2024) ................................................................ 8
`C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Medline Indus., Inc.,
`IPR2015-00511, Paper 9 (PTAB July 15, 2015). ......................................... 47, 50
`CAE Screenplates Inc. v. Heinrich Fiedler GmbH,
`224 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2000) .......................................................................... 10
`Chemours Co. FC v. Daikin Indus.,
`4 F.4th 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2021) ............................................................................. 60
`Comaper Corp. v. Antec, Inc.,
`596 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2010) .......................................................................... 10
`DeSilva v. DiLeonardi,
`181 F.3d 865 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ............................................................................ 50
`Duesenfeld GmbH v. Ascend Elements, Inc.,
`No. 1:23-cv-01194-JFM (D. Del. Oct. 30, 2024) ............................................... 13
`Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Calgene, Inc.,
`188 F.3d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ........................................................ 29, 36, 42, 49
`
`iv
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 5
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Estee Lauder Inc. v. L'Oreal,
`129 F.3d 588, 44 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1610 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ....................... 44, 47
`Forest Lab'ys, Inc. v. Ivax Pharms., Inc.,
`438 F. Supp. 2d 479 (D. Del. 2006), aff'd, 501 F.3d 1263 (Fed. Cir.
`2007) ................................................................................................................... 26
`Forest Lab’ys. Inc. v. Ivax Pharms., Inc.,
`501 F.3d 1263 (Fed. Cir 2007) ............................................................... 27, 28, 29
`Fox Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC,
`944 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2019) .......................................................................... 59
`Gambro Lundia AB v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.,
`110 F.3d 1573 (Fed. Cir. 1997) .......................................................................... 61
`Impax Lab'ys, Inc. v. Aventis Pharms., Inc.,
`545 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2008) .............................................................. 25, 26, 35
`In re Antor Media Corp.,
`689 F.3d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2012) .......................................................................... 26
`In re GPAC Inc.,
`57 F.3d 1573 (Fed. Cir. 1995) ............................................................................ 58
`In re Huang,
`100 F.3d 135 (Fed. Cir. 1996) ............................................................................ 59
`In re Oelrich,
`666 F.2d 578 (CCPA 1981) ................................................................................ 19
`In re Piasecki,
`745 F.2d 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1984) .......................................................................... 53
`In re Wands,
`858 F.2d 731 (Fed. Cir. 1988) ............................................................................ 35
`Microsoft Corp. v. Biscotti, Inc.,
`878 F.3d 1052 (Fed. Cir. 2017) .......................................................................... 15
`Nidec Motor Corp. v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co. Ltd,
`851 F.3d 1270 (Fed. Cir. 2017) .................................................................... 15, 19
`
`v
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 6
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Ortho-McNeil v. Mylan Lab,
`520 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2008) .......................................................................... 48
`Raytheon Techs. Corp. v. Gen. Elec. Co.,
`993 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2021) .......................................................................... 48
`Sanofi-Synthelabo v. Apotex, Inc.,
`550 F.3d 1075 (Fed. Cir. 2008) ........................................................ 15, 22, 27, 39
`Seymour v. Osborne,
`78 U.S. 516 (1870) .............................................................................................. 30
`SightSound Techs., LLC v. Apple,
`809 F.3d 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2015) .......................................................................... 58
`Star Sci. Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.,
`655 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2011) .............................................................. 27, 28, 29
`Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.,
`723 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2013) .......................................................................... 59
`
`Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling, Inc. v. Maersk Drilling
`USA, Inc.,
`699 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2012) .......................................................................... 53
`Trintec Inds., Inc. v. Top-U.S.A. Corp.,
`295 F.3d 1292 (Fed. Cir. 2002) .................................................................... 19, 23
`Vivid Technologies, Inc. v. American Science & Eng’g, Inc.,
`200 F.3d 795 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ............................................................................ 49
`Volvo Penta of the Ams., LLC v. Brunswick Corp.,
`81 F.4th 1202 (Fed. Cir. 2023) ..................................................................... 59, 60
`Wasica Fin. GmbH v. Cont'l Auto. Sys., Inc.,
`853 F.3d 1272 (Fed. Cir. 2017) .............................................................. 15, 16, 18
`WBIP, LLC v. Kohler Co.,
`829 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2016) .............................................................. 58, 59, 60
`Yita LLC v. MacNeil IP LLC,
`69 F.4th 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2023) ........................................................................... 60
`
`vi
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 7
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C.
`§ 102 .................................................................................................................... 14
`§ 103 ........................................................................................................ 39, 40, 51
`§ 311 .................................................................................................................... 23
`§ 312(a)(3) .................................................................................................... 44, 47
`§ 316 .................................................................................................................... 61
`§ 316(e) ................................................................................................................. 2
`Other Authorities
`Duesenfeld Company Website
`https://www.duesenfeld.com/recycling_en.html ................................................ 60
`Regulation 2023/1542, 2023 O.J. (L191/1) (EU) .................................................... 58
`
`
`
`
`
`vii
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 8
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`PATENT OWNER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`(CUMULATIVE)
`Ex. 2001 U.S. Patent No. 9,843,077 (“Hayashi”)
`
`Ex. 2002 U.S. Patent No. 9,450,277 (“Dunagan”)
`
`Ex. 2003 DE 102012024876 A1 to Electrocycling GmbH (“Electrocycling”)
`(German)
`
`Ex. 2004 DE 102012024876 A1 to Electrocycling GmbH (“Electrocycling”)
`(English)
`
`Ex. 2005 Certification of Translation of the Electrocycling Patent
`
`Ex. 2006 Gao Liu et al., Binder Interactions in the Electrodes of the Lithium-
`ion Batteries, TFUG Conference, February 17, 2009
`Ex. 2007 WO 2010/149611 A1 to LiMotive Company Ltd. (“LiMotive”)
`(German)
`
`Ex. 2008 WO 2010/149611 A1 to LiMotive Company Ltd. (“LiMotive”)
`(English)
`
`Ex. 2009 Certification of Translation of the LiMotive Patent
`
`Ex. 2010 Declaration of Vani Dantam in support of Patent Owner’s
`Preliminary Response to the Petition
`
`Ex. 2011 U.S. Patent No. 7,198,865 to Sloop (“Ecobat”)
`
`Ex. 2012 Kinergy Corporation, Transferring Heat with a Vibratory Bed Dryer
`(2013)
`[https://web.archive.org/web/20131015131016/https://kinergy.com/u
`ploads/documents/Transferring%20Heat%20with%20a%20Vibratin
`g%20Fluidized%20Bed%20KDVFB-1.pdf]
`
`Ex. 2013 MEWA User Manual (German)
`
`Ex. 2014 MEWA User Manual (English)
`
`Ex. 2015 Certification of Translation of the MEWA User Manual
`
`viii
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 9
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Ex. 2016 Cross-flow hogger image [https://www.cutmetall.com/us/innovative-
`cross-flow-hogger-chain-head-set-p47892/] (last visited on August
`17, 2024)
`
`Ex. 2017 Commercial Air Filtration System Manual
`
`Ex. 2018
`
`ISO 3529-1 (1981)
`
`Ex. 2019
`
`ISO 3529-1 (2019)
`
`Ex. 2020
`
`J. West, Special Communication from the American Physiological
`Society, Barometric Pressure on to Mt. Everest: New Data and
`Physiological Significance at 1063 (1999) (Downloaded from
`journals.physiology.org/journal/jappl (075.061.098.021) on August
`7, 2024)
`
`Ex. 2021 Duesenfeld GmbH Website – Recycling
`(https://www.duesenfeld.com/recycling_en.html)
`[https://perma.cc/3CG6-BDU9]
`Ex. 2022 Ascend Technology Inc. Press Release
`
`Ex. 2023 Ascend Element, Inc.’s Answer to Complaint, Case No. 1-23-cv-
`01194 (D. Del.)
`
`Ex. 2024 Scheduling Order in Case No. 23-1194-JFM
`
`Ex. 2025 Declaration of Vani Dantam in Support of the Patent Owner’s
`Response to Petition for Inter Partes Review, Case No. IPR2024-
`00887 (“Dantam POR Decl.”)
`
`Ex. 2026 Sinothermo website available at:
`https://www.sinothermo.com/product-category/
`https://www.sinothermo.com/news/different-types-of-convection-
`dryers/
`https://www.sinothermo.com/products/ribbon-conical-vacuum-dryer/
`
`
`ix
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 10
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Ex. 2027 V-ECO Series Rotary Shredders Brochure by Vecoplan
`
`Ex. 2028 Amos Manufacturing Dual Shaft Shredders Brochure
`
`Ex. 2029 Amos Manufacturing Quad Shaft Shredders Brochure
`
`Ex. 2030 N. Somsuk et al., Design and Development of a Rotary Airlock Valve
`for using in Continuous Pyrolysis Process to Improve Performance,
`2010 International Conference on Manufacturing Science and
`Technology (ICMST 2010)
`
`Ex. 2031 Duesenfeld GmbH v. Ascend Elements, Inc., No. 1:23-cv-01194-JFM
`(D. Del. Oct. 30, 2024), ECF No. 62
`
`Ex. 2032 Boiling point for DMC available at:
`https://www.univarsolutions.com/dimethyl-carbonate-
`5004710?srsltid=AfmBOorjj92rfTGG8ShR_L1YJ7zHq_
`g7jd5HIM9uvXuqBooKXSIVZw8a
`
`Ex. 2033 Boiling point for EMC available at:
`https://www.msesupplies.com/products/high-purity-ethyl-methyl-
`carbonate-c-4-h-8-o-3-99-99-
`4n?srsltid=AfmBOoqUr1g_4hUH5zYLI-kjf8M3Z-
`cqlnYULkbD2h_WRok0GU30TOI
`
`Ex. 2034
`
`[Reserved]
`
`Ex. 2035 Confidential Appendix C to Declaration of Vani Dantam
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2036 Confidential Appendix D to Declaration Vani Dantam
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2037 Screenshots of YouTube Duesenfeld plant video found at
`https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Ij4Emz8XQ (“How to recycle
`lithium-ion batteries? – Closing the loop in e-mobility”, Dec. 6,
`2023)
`
`x
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 11
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Ex. 2038
`
`[Reserved]
`
`Ex. 2039
`
`[Reserved]
`
`Ex. 2040 Declaration of Lydia Grote in support of Patent Owner’s Response
`to the Petition (“Grote POR Declaration”)
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2041 Duesenfeld GmbH Wendeburg plant processing conditions
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2042 German regulations available at
`https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Abfal
`lwirtschaft/kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz_en_bf.pdf
`(English translation)
`
`Ex. 2043 Certification from Braunschweig State Trade Supervisory Office to
`Duesenfeld (German)
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2044 Certification from Braunschweig State Trade Supervisory Office to
`Duesenfeld (English)
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2045 Translation Certification of Certification from Braunschweig State
`Trade Supervisory Office to Duesenfeld
`
`Ex. 2046 Duesenfeld GmbH Preliminary Financial Statements 2021 and 2022
`(German)
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2047 Duesenfeld GmbH Preliminary Financial Statements 2021 and 2022
`(English)
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2048 Translation Certificates - Duesenfeld GmbH Preliminary Financial
`
`xi
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 12
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Statements 2021 and 2022
`
`Ex. 2049 License Agreement
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2050 License Agreement
`[PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL]
`
`Ex. 2051 Press Release: Seval and Riplastic will be the first industrial
`operators in Italy for the recycling of lithium-ion batteries, dated
`June 11, 2024
`
`Ex. 2052 Press Release: Andritz and Duesenfeld sign cooperation agreement
`for battery recycling, dated February 10, 2025
`
`Ex. 2053 Duesenfeld Brochure: Ecofriendly Recycling of Lithium-Ion
`Batteries
`
`xii
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 13
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`I.
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO INSTITUTED GROUNDS
`Patent Owner Duesenfeld GmbH (“Patent Owner” or “Duesenfeld”) submits
`
`this Patent Owner Response to the petition filed by URT Umwelt und
`
`Recyclingtechnik GmbH (“URT” or “Petitioner”) on May 1, 2024 requesting inter
`
`partes review of claims 1-3, 7-10, 12-13, and 15-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,050,097
`
`(Ex. 1001, “the ’097 patent”) (Paper 2, “Pet.” or the “Petition”).
`
`The inventors of the ’097 patent pioneered an elegant solution that
`
`hazardous battery material could be rendered inactive by shredding these batteries
`
`and drying away the electrolyte solvents under vacuum, rather than attempting to
`
`detoxify the batteries with a variety of additives. Ex. 2025, ¶¶57-59. The LithoRec
`
`prior art cited by Petitioner shows only that there was a conceptualized system for
`
`battery shredding and packaging, but the conceptualized system did not incorporate
`
`vacuum drying. Id., ¶¶94-145. In fact, the prior art cited by Petitioner does not
`
`even demonstrate that conceptualized system can preliminarily process shredded
`
`batteries to an inactivated state. Instead, the prior art proposed a conceptualized
`
`system that employed equipment using conventional convection heat and positive
`
`pressure gas movement to dry shredded recyclable batteries.
`
`Nevertheless, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) instituted this
`
`proceeding on November 20, 2024 on the following grounds:
`
`1
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 14
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Ground 1: Claims 1-3, 7, 8,19 as obvious over LithoRec (Ex. 1016,
`“LithoRec”) in view of DIN 28400 -1 (Ex. 1018, “DIN 28400”)
`or Perry (Ex. 1006, “Perry”).
`Ground 2: Claim 9 as obvious over LithoRec in view of DIN 28400 and/or
`Perry and Hanisch (Ex. 1020, “Hanisch”).
`Ground 3: Claims 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 19 as anticipated by LithoRec.
`Ground 4: Claims 17 as obvious over LithoRec in view of Hanisch.
` (Paper 10 (“Inst. Dec.” or “Institution Decision”).) While instituting review on all
`
`challenged claims, the Board found that Petitioner did not show a reasonable
`
`likelihood that it would prevail in demonstrating that the challenged claims were
`
`unpatentable for Grounds 1 and 2. Inst. Dec. at 21, 22.
`
`Petitioner bears “the burden of proving a proposition of unpatentability by a
`
`preponderance of the evidence.” 35 U.S.C. § 316(e). As set forth herein, Petitioner
`
`has failed to meet its burden. In relation to claims 12, 13, 15, 16, 18-20, the
`
`Board’s Institution Decision is based upon a finding that claim 12 expressly or
`
`inherently discloses a “vacuum installation connected to the drying device” based
`
`on a single sentence that suggests “drying under vacuum” Inst. Dec. at 14), but
`
`where the entire remainder of the reference offers no disclosure on how that could
`
`be accomplished. Not only does the reference not disclose all of the elements of
`
`claim 12, but there is no direction, and too much experimentation required, to
`
`anticipate the claimed invention. Moreover, the references do not disclose a battery
`
`processing method or installation that inactivates the battery material.
`
`2
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 15
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`II. TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
`Rechargeable batteries used for consumer electronics and electric vehicles
`
`(EVs) contain valuable metals that facilitate the storage of energy. Ex. 2025, ¶¶40-
`
`46; Ex. 2006 at 005. Although a rechargeable battery can easily be replaced, the
`
`depleted battery comprises toxic materials, including the rare earth metals, binders,
`
`and solvents contained in the battery cells. Id, ¶48.
`
`In the early 2010’s, an increased reliance on portable consumer electronics
`
`and an anticipated and growing market for EVs prompted consideration of how to
`
`safely recycle depleted rechargeable batteries. Ex. 2001 at 1:18-21. It was
`
`contemplated that rechargeable battery recycling would occur at centralized
`
`locations because of the environmental and industrial challenges related to battery
`
`recycling. Ex. 1016 at 24, 51-53, Figure A-18; Ex. 2025, ¶48. Centralized
`
`processing would require transporting the used batteries, which itself presented a
`
`challenge. Ex. 2025, ¶48.
`
`Shipment and storage of used batteries could cause hazardous chemical
`
`reactions between their rare earth metal and chemical solvents components. Ex.
`
`Ex. 2025, ¶¶48-49; Ex. 2004 at [0002]; Ex. 2016 at 33. In order to make depleted
`
`rechargeable batteries more amenable to storage and transport, the depleted
`
`batteries were shredded (i.e., comminuted). Ex. 2025, ¶48. Thereby the batteries
`
`are converted into an unstructured bulk, resulting in an uncontrolled mixture of
`
`3
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 16
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`their chemical components. Ex. 2025, ¶¶48-49. The comminuted batteries, while
`
`more transportable, can be toxic and explosive. Id. At the time of the ’097 patent,
`
`chemical additives were applied to the comminuted batteries to mitigate the
`
`explosive and toxic nature of the material. Id., ¶¶50-56. But in doing so, the
`
`chemical additives also contaminated the potentially recyclable material. Id., ¶56.
`
`III. OVERVIEW OF THE ’097 PATENT AND ASSERTED PRIOR ART
`A. The ’097 Patent
`The inventors of the ’097 patent recognized that comminuted batteries could
`
`be inactivated through a drying process by vacuum drying at a maximum pressure
`
`of 300 hPa. Ex. 2025 at ¶57. This meant that inactivation via additives, as in the
`
`prior art, was unnecessary. Id. Furthermore, the vacuum drying process was safer
`
`because it avoided the use of high heat, preventing or reducing the formation of
`
`toxic gases, particularly hydrogen fluoride. Ex. 1001 at 2:5-12; Ex. 2025 at ¶57.
`
`Surprisingly, the inventors were able to vacuum-dry the comminuted
`
`material at a maximum pressure of 300 hPa and achieve inactivation of the
`
`material without any additive chemicals. Ex. 2025 at ¶57. Comminuted material is
`
`rendered “inactivated” after the drying process is complete. See Ex. 1001 8:54-55;
`
`Ex. 2025 at ¶¶57-59. The ’097 patent explains this goal of inactivating the battery
`
`material. Ex. 1001 at 1:63-2:4. The inactivated comminuted material can be
`
`4
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 17
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`shipped to a central facility for further processing. Ex. 1001 at 5:46-6:15; Ex. 2025
`
`at ¶59.
`
`The specification teaches how to obtain inactivated comminuted material
`
`that is suitable for transport—i.e., via drying under low atmospheric pressure and
`
`temperatures. Id. at 1:64-2:12, 3:5-14; Ex. 2025 at ¶¶63-64.
`
`LithoRec
`B.
`LithoRec is a study of EV battery techniques published in April 2012 by a
`
`group of researchers from Technical University Braunschweig and several EV
`
`industry partners (together, the “LithoRec Partners”). Ex. 2025 at ¶¶65-66. The
`
`authors investigated storage and transport constraints (Ex. 1016 at 32-33),
`
`disassembly techniques (Ex. 1016 at 1-2), and synthesis of new electrodes from
`
`recycled materials (Ex. 1016 at 143-155). Ex. 2025 at ¶67.
`
`The authors proposed a concept design for a pilot plant for comminuting
`
`batteries for subsequent processing. Ex. 2025 at ¶68. Described in a section titled
`
`“Conceptual design of a recycling pilot plant,” it says that “a possible recycling
`
`plant was conceptualized,” though there was “no existing facility.” Ex. 1016 at
`
`222; Ex. 2025 at ¶68.
`
`LithoRec contemplates processing shredded batteries, and also suggests
`
`drying the shredded batteries as one of the processing steps, but expressly noted
`
`that “there is no reliable data” that would allow drying to be “reliably designed,”
`
`5
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 18
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`especially since no drying manufacturers provided information in response to
`
`requests. See Ex. 1016 at 226; Ex. 2025 at ¶68.
`
`LithoRec proposes specific equipment to perform each of the processing
`
`steps of the controlling embodiment. For example, LithoRec discloses a specific
`
`dryer: a vibratory fluidized bed dryer. Ex. 1016 at 227; Ex. 2025 at ¶69. A
`
`vibratory fluidized bed dryer is a machine that uses hot gases blown at high
`
`velocity to agitate and dry the material. Ex. 2012 at 1; Ex. 2025 at ¶¶69-72, 95-99.
`
`It is not a vacuum dryer. Ex. 2012 at 1; Ex. 2025 at ¶¶95-99. LithoRec specifies
`
`that the drying system contains a “blower,” which generates positive pressure,
`
`contrary to a vacuum. Ex. 1016 at 235; Ex. 2025 at ¶¶71, 74 & 98. For
`
`comminuting the batteries, LithoRec specifies the use of a “cross-flow hogger,”
`
`which does not work under vacuum. Ex. 1016 at 235; Ex. 2025 at ¶¶100-108.
`
`LithoRec teaches conducting the drying in a continuous process, rather than a
`
`batch process. Ex. 1016 at 226. A POSITA would understand that the continuous
`
`process avoids the accumulation of hazardous materials. Ex. 2025 at ¶115.1
`
`Perry
`C.
`Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook is a reference book. Ex. 1006; Ex.
`
`2025 at ¶78. The portion of Perry relied on by Petitioner is entitled “Batch
`
`Through-Circulation Dryers.” Ex. 1006 at 12-44; Ex. 2025 at ¶78. This section is
`
`dedicated entirely to batch drying. Ex. 1006 at 12-44; Ex. 2025 at ¶¶78, 81-82.
`
`6
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 19
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`Where Perry does talk about a vacuum dryer, it is expressly directed to small
`
`items, such as pharmaceuticals, that are placed on shelves and dried in small
`
`batches. Ex. 1006 at 12-44; Ex. 2025 at ¶81. Perry discloses nothing about EV
`
`battery recycling. Ex 1006 at 12-44; Ex. 2025 at ¶82. Perry is also silent as to the
`
`continuous drying systems recommended in LithoRec. Ex. 1016 at 226; Ex. 2025
`
`at ¶¶78, 82.
`
`D. DIN 28400
`DIN 28400 is a German glossary of terms related to vacuum technology. Ex
`
`1018; Ex. 2025 at ¶83. DIN 28400 lists different ranges of vacuum pressures, from
`
`low vacuum to ultra-high vacuum. Ex. 1018 at 1 DIN 28400 Part 1, Section 1; Ex.
`
`2025 at ¶¶83-84, 86-87. DIN 28400 defines the pressure range for a low vacuum as
`
`extending from 1000 hPa to 1 hPa (or 1000 mbar to 1 mbar). Ex. 1018 at 1 DIN
`
`28400 Part 1, Section 1, Table 1; Ex. 2025 at ¶¶84-88. The mention in DIN 28400
`
`of “300 mbar” (i.e., 300 hPa) is merely a reference to the “lowest atmospheric
`
`pressure on the Earth’s surface,” i.e., atop Mount Everest, which is inapposite here.
`
`Ex. 2025 at ¶¶130-136. DIN 28400 provides no teachings related to any particular
`
`application of vacuum technology. Ex. 2025 at ¶¶89, 129-137.
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`The Board adopted a definition of the person of ordinary skill in the art for
`
`purposes of this inter partes review as “hav[ing] a B.S. degree in electrical
`
`7
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 20
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`engineering, materials science, chemical engineering, or an equivalent field, as
`
`well as at least 2 to 3 years of academic or industry in the recycling or processing
`
`of lithium-ion batteries.” Pet. at 14; POPR at 19; Inst. Dec. at 7-8. This definition
`
`was also adopted by the Board in the related proceeding brought by Ascend. See
`
`Ascend Elements, Inc. v. Duesenfeld GmbH, IPR2024-00948 (“Ascend IPR”),
`
`Paper 10 at 7-8 (PTAB Nov. 22, 2024). Petitioner agrees that this level of skill is
`
`appropriate. Ex. 2025, ¶¶17, 17.1.
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`In the Institution Decision, neither party requested construction and the
`
`Board did not expressly construe any terms of the challenged claims. However, in
`
`its discussion of Claim 12, the Board provided guidance that the term
`
`“inactivation” should be equivalent to the term “drying,” and thereafter provided a
`
`definition for these terms. Inst. Dec. at 12-13. Given this discussion, and to inform
`
`the Board of the rulings by the District Court, Duesenfeld respectfully requests
`
`construction of the below terms, solely for purposes of this proceeding.
`
`“inactivate” and “inactivated”
`A.
`The Board equated “inactivation” and “drying,” agreeing with Petitioner that
`
`“inactivating and drying are used synonymously in the ’097 patent.” Inst. Dec. at
`
`12-13. The Board stated that the meaning of both terms referred “to the removal of
`
`at least one solvent, such as dimethyl carbonate or ethyl methyl carbonate, from the
`
`8
`
`Ascend Elements EX1029 Page 21
`
`

`

`IPR2024-00887
`Patent 11,050,097
`
`conductingsalt[.]” Inst. Dec. at 13. Duesenfeld respectfully states that this
`
`guidanceis inconsistent with the teachings of the ’097 patent, which distinguishes
`
`the concepts of drying and inactivating, inconsistent with the co-pending IPR2024-
`
`00948, and inconsistent with the District Court’s claim construction. Instead, the
`
`Board should adopt the express constructions below.
`
` inactivated
`
`Claims 1, 2, 7, 13
`
`ordinary meaning, which
`is rendered safe for
`
`
`
`transport
`inactivate Claims 12, 13, 15, 16, 18,|ordina