Appeal 2006-2419
Application 10/238,297
with other chlorides to make titanium alloys” at temperatures of about 220 to
about 700 șC., a sodium side pressure of from about 40 kpa to about 300
kpa, and a titanium tetrachloride flow rate of about “0.44 kg/m to about 5.5
kg/m” a gel is formed (¶ 5). However, the claims on appeal are not limited
to these specific reactants and reaction conditions (e.g., see claim 24 on
appeal which is not limited a chloride salt or liquid sodium, much less any
specific reaction conditions; see the Specification 15). Additionally, we
determine that the Declarant states that “[u]pon filtration of the slurry
produced by the Armstrong Process, a gel forms that is an inherent property
of the process, as a gel always occurs” (¶ 10, italics added). Therefore the
Declarant finds that a gel is always “formed on the filter” (¶ 8, italics added).
However, the use of a filter in a step of separating the liquid metal from the
titanium powder and salt is not required by the claims. See Appellants’
Specification, where it is taught that the product can be removed from the
bulk sodium stream by “conventional separators” such as cyclones,
particulate filters, magnetic separators, or vacuum stills (Specification 7-8).
Accordingly, we do not find that the Jacobsen Declaration evinces that gel
formation always, or inherently, occurs in the process as claimed. We do
not find that Appellants have met their burden of establishing that gel
formation always will occur with any reactant, carrier, or process condition
as claimed.
Finally, we find that Appellants’ Specification contradicts the
Jacobsen Declaration in that there is a specific disclosure that “[i]n the third,
and preferred option for product removal, the solid cake of salt [sic,] Ti, and
Na is vacuum distilled to remove the Na” (Specification 8, italics added).
Accordingly, this disclosure is evidence that the powder elemental material
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007