Appeal 2007-2097
Application 10/746,644
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Alexander’s claims on appeal relate to a process of treating
waste solids from the processing of titanium bearing ores. (Spec., p.
1, Appeal Br., Claims Appendix, Claim 1). Alexander’s specification
states that the processing of titanium-bearing ores produces significant
quantities of impurity metal chlorides. (Spec., p. 1). The
specification also states that the impurities, predominantly iron
chloride salts, must be isolated and removed prior to processing into a
salable product. (Id.). Typical disposal methods are said to include
neutralization and storage of the resulting neutralized sludge in a pond
or the injection of non-neutralized waste metal chloride solutions into
porous subsurface formations via deep well injection. (Id. at 2). The
use of storage ponds are said to be environmentally problematic.
Furthermore, filtering the accumulated waste solids from the pond is
said to be costly. (Id.).
There are two independent claims on appeal, claims 1 and 4,
each of which is directed to a process where titanium-bearing ore
waste is contacted with an acid to dissolve some of the waste, residual
undissolved wastes are separated and the remainder is injected into a
deep well. Claim 1 is representative of the claims on appeal and reads
as follows:
A process for treating waste solids from the processing of
titanium-bearing ores including waste metal hydroxide
solids, whereby the waste solids are contacted with an
acid under conditions effective to dissolve at least some
of the waste metal hydroxide solids, residual undissolved
solids are separated out and the remainder is injected into
a subterranean waste disposal well.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013