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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/19/2023, and 11/20/2025 are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-18, drawn to an apparatus, an arrangement for processing an aqueous metal-containing slurry, without traverse in the reply filed on 06/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Group II, claims 19-38, drawn to a process, a method for processing an aqueous metal-containing slurry to separate undesired fractions therefrom, are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Therefore, claims 1-18 are currently under examination on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (b)
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 1-18 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 1 recites the following limitations,
"the lines" in line 2,
"the liquid stream" in line 2,
"the leaching unit" in line 7,
"the water" in line 12,
"the slurry" in line 12,
"the solids" in line 14,
"the solution" in line 15.
There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "the slurry" two times in line 12, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the slurry is “a metal-containing slurry” or “an atmospheric leach slurry” or a different slurry.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "the leaching unit" in line 7, renders the claim indefinite because, claim recites “a pressure leaching unit” in line 4, then "the leaching unit" in line 7, and then again “a pressure leaching unit” in line 17, therefore it is unclear whether "the leaching unit" in line 7, is the pressure leaching unit or a different leaching unit.
Claim 2, 3, 4, 8, and 9 also recites "the leaching unit" and renders the claim indefinite for the same reason above.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "optionally" in line 18, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention or not. [See MPEP § 2173.05(d)].
Claim 1 also recites the limitation "vessel(s)” in line 7 and 11, use of parenthesis renders the claim indefinite as this is not clear whether the limitations in the parenthesis is required or not, in this case, whether one or multiple vessel is required or not, however, claim already recites “one or more flash vessels” in line 6, therefore, this is suggested to remove the parenthesis and read the limitation as “flash vessel”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation, "the form" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 2 the phrase, "the form of pulping unit" in line 2, renders the claim indefinite because, it is unclear which form of pulping unit, or what does "the form of” before “pulping unit” mean, whether it is a special form and/or type of system or device that acts as a pulping unit or any regular or conventional pulping unit as known to the ordinary skill in the art. The specification does not provide any other information about the pulping unit.
Claim 3 recites the limitation, "the feed line" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation, "the air feed" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the following limitations, "the lower half" in line 2, and "the height" in line 3. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the following limitations, "the mixing reactor" in line 2, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the mixing reactor is same as the atmospheric mixing reactor or different.
Claim 7 recites the following limitations, "used mixing gear" in line 2, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what does the used mixing gear mean.
Regarding claims 8, the phrase "preferably" in line 3 and "more preferably" in line 4, both render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations of the following the phrases are part of the claimed invention or not. [See MPEP § 2173.05(d)].
Regarding claim 8, the phrase, "the form of scrubber" in line 4, renders the claim indefinite because, it is unclear what does "the form of” before “scrubber” mean, whether it is a special form and/or type of system or device that is not the scrubber but acts similar as scrubber or refers to a regular or conventional scrubber as known to the ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claims 9, 15, 17, and 18 the phrase "preferably" in line 2, in line 3, in line 3, and in line 4 respectively, render the corresponding claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention or not. [See MPEP § 2173.05(d)].
Regarding claim 9, the term “high-pressure off-gas handling system” in line 3, the phrase “high-pressure” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-pressure” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Because it is unclear which pressure value will be treated as high pressure. The [0030] paragraph of the instant specification of the disclosure describes the high-pressure off-gas handling system but does not provide any pressure value or any suggestions about which pressure will be treated as high-pressure.
Claim 11 recites the limitation, "the washing water" and “the separated solution” in line 3. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claims 13 and 14 both recite the limitation, "the form" in line 2 of each claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the corresponding claim.
Regarding claims 13 and 14 the phrase "possibly" in line 2 of each claim, render the corresponding claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention or not. [See MPEP § 2173.05(d)].
Regarding claim 13 and 14 the phrase, "the form of steam" in line 2 and "the form of moist air" in line 2, renders the claim indefinite because, it is unclear what does "the form of” before “steam” and/or “moist air” mean, whether this has any special meaning for the claimed steam or moist air or regular or conventional meaning of water vapor/steam/air with water vapor, as known to the ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 16 recites the limitation, "the water recovered" in line 3 and “the recirculated solution” in line 4. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Regarding claim 17, the phrase, "the form of metal recovery unit" in line 4, renders the claim indefinite because, it is unclear what does "the form of” before “metal recovery unit” mean, whether it is a special form and/or type of system or device that acts as metal recovery unit or a regular or conventional metal recovery unit as known to the ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 18 recites the limitation, "the solids obtained for the separation unit" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 4, 10 and 12 are dependent on claim 1 and therefore rejected for the same reason.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, and 8-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over, Richard Hunwick [US20170175228A1] (Hunwick hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Hunwick discloses an arrangement for processing an aqueous metal-containing slurry (an arrangement for processing a metal-containing (lithium-containing) mineral, see Hunwick’s [0001, 0073]), passing through an in-line mixer 9, to be slurried with concentrated nitric acid from the nitric acid plant 7 and process water as required to achieve the appropriate conditions, to form a slurry or paste containing insoluble solids (the calcined spodumene), in the mixing vessel, i.e. continuously stirred tank reactor, see Hunwick’ Fig. 3 [0001, 0073], [0095]-[0096] [0148]), including the lines for recirculating at least a fraction of the liquid stream passing through the arrangement (the dense slurry after solid liquid separation, are recirculated through the flue gas scrubber (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0139]), and the nitric acid plant 7, and then to the leaching feed line see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0148]) which arrangement comprises:
a pressure leaching unit for leaching the metal-containing slurry at an elevated pressure and elevated temperature, to provide a leached slurry (the slurry passes into the digestion reactor 10, under the prevailing conditions of pressure and 100-120°C temperature, the metal values in the mineral ore to be leached, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0150]);
one or more flash vessels, for providing an atmospheric leach slurry (Hunwick’s one or more vessels for terminating leaching, (see Hunwick’s [0021]), which may be simple covered tanks (i.e., flash tank for atmospheric leach slurry), with air sparging equipment in the tanks (see Hunwick’s [0024]) and in an embodiment, the slurry can be neutralized (see Hunwick’s [0108] [0103]), in a neutralization vessel, a continuously stirred tank reactor, or a series of such reactors, wherein the exit stream from the digestion reactor can be mixed with the neutralization solution in an in-line mixer, see Hunwick’s [0103], [0108], [0109]).
With respect to “the pressure and temperature of the leached slurry are decreased”, the instant claim directed to an apparatus, and “the pressure and temperature of the leached slurry are decreased” comprises an intended use of flash vessels, and an apparatus in the prior art need only be capable of performing the intended use to read upon the claim. As Hunwick’s one or more vessels for terminating leaching include simple covered tanks (after the pressure leaching unit, i.e. digestor/reactor) with air sparging equipment and continuously stirred tanks, Hunwick’s tanks are capable to have the pressure and temperature of the leached slurry are decreased, and therefore, teaches the limitation in its entirety. [See MPEP § 2114 (II)].
Hunwick also teaches an atmospheric mixing reactor, with an air inlet and mixing gear, for dispersing air into the atmospheric leach slurry, conducted to the atmospheric mixing reactor from the flash vessel as well as for causing air-induced evaporation of a fraction of the water in the slurry and simultaneously cooling of the slurry, thus providing a concentrated slurry and a fraction of off-gas containing moist air (as shown in FIG. 3, the vessel 13, wherein the vapor is recompressed and evaporation is occurring at close to atmospheric pressure for re-use in the heating calandria (an internal part of the evaporation vessel not shown on FIG. 3), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0158]), the evaporator includes a section where the contents are slowly cooled (e.g. cooled in turn by an air-cooled condenser, or by an evaporative cooling tower) (air induced cooling), whereupon more solids (lithium nitrate) crystallizes from solution to form a dense (concentrated) slurry, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0119]), with respect to an “air inlet and mixing gear” it would have been obvious that an “air-cooled condenser or by an evaporative cooling tower” would inherently possess air inlet and air flow through the air inlet would capable to mix, and therefore, teaches the limitation in its entirety. [See MPEP § 2114 (II)].
Hunwick teaches a solid-liquid-separation unit, for separating the solids of the concentrated slurry from the solution (the slurry circulating through the evaporator and cooling, much of the solid (lithium nitrate) remaining in solution precipitates and a slurry now containing a solution. A centrifuge such as of the solid-bowl decanter type (solid-liquid-separation unit) is employed to separate the solids (crystals) from the aqueous phase (liquid), see Hunwick’ Fig. 3, [0159]), and
-a recirculation line for carrying at least a fraction of the solution obtained from the solid-liquid separation unit back to the pressure leaching unit, optionally via one or more intermediate treatment units (solution after solid liquid separation is conveyed (e.g. pumped from the tank using separate pumps, i.e. intermediate treatment units) in appropriate quantities to be recycled to the nitric acid distillation dryer (intermediate treatment units), and to the pH neutralization of any remaining, and/or surplus, and/or excess nitric acid in the products of digestion/leaching in the termination substage transfer to the nitric acid plant (intermediate treatment units), the off-gases and distilled vapors are also absorbed in a circulating stream of a continuously chilled solution of nitric acid in water to manufacture more nitric acid, suitable for recirculation to the digestion/leaching reactor, via a recirculation line, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0134]).
Hunwick discloses the particulars of the present invention, as disclosed above, but does so through the collective teachings of their disclosure, rather than in one neatly packaged embodiment. However, the examiner notes that simply utilizing Hunwick for all that it teaches and looking to various portions of the reference would have been obvious for an arrangement for processing an aqueous metal-containing slurry. As the MPEP § [2143. A.] notes that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is a matter of obviousness and the foregoing amounts to picking and choosing known apparatuses, units and systems all from within the same reference document.
Regarding claim 2, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 2, in addition, Hunwick further discloses the arrangement includes an intermediate treatment unit in the form of a pulping unit, positioned upstream from the leaching unit (the calcined spodumene solids passes to a mixing vessel in the form of an in-line mixer 9 (i.e. pulping unit), to be slurried with concentrated nitric acid from the nitric acid plant 7 and process water as required to form a slurry or paste containing insoluble solids (the calcined spodumene), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0148]).
Regarding claim 3, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 3, in addition, Hunwick further discloses wherein the recirculation line is combined with the feed line leading to the leaching unit, at a position either upstream or downstream from any intermediate treatment units, or at both positions (the solution after solid liquid separation is conveyed (e.g. pumped from the tank using separate pumps, i.e. intermediate treatment units) to be recycled to the nitric acid distillation dryer (intermediate treatment units), and to the pH neutralization of any remaining/surplus/excess nitric acid in the products of digestion/leaching in the termination substage transfer to the nitric acid plant (intermediate treatment units), wherein the off-gases and distilled vapors are also absorbed in a circulating stream of a continuously chilled solution of nitric acid in water to manufacture more nitric acid, suitable for recirculation to the digestion/leaching reactor, via element 9, upstream of the leaching unit, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0134]).
Regarding claim 4, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 4, in addition, Hunwick further discloses wherein the leaching unit is an autoclave (a digestion reactor, such as an autoclave, such as a single or continuous autoclave, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0018], [0099]).
Regarding claim 8 all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 8, in addition, Hunwick further discloses wherein at least one of the leaching unit, the flash vessel and the atmospheric mixing reactor is connected to an off-gas handling system, each off-gas handling system preferably being in the form of a scrubber, more preferably a wet scrubber (as shown in Hunwick’s Fig. 3, H2O, HNO3 vapor from the digestion reactor 10 (the pressure leaching unit), passing through boiler feedwater (BFW, off-gas handling system), combines with free oxygen present in the combustion gases to form nitrogen dioxide, (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0165]), and to the nitric acid plant 7, and then to the scrubber 30 (off gas handling system), see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4 [0119], [0133]-[0135]). Hunwick’s evaporator/crystallizer 13 (atmospheric mixing reactor) having vapor recompression mechanism and air cooling section to condense water (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0119], [158]) would also read on the off gas handling system as it handles the vapor.
It is to be noted, the claim recites “preferably” and the limitations after the phrase “preferably” has been interpreted as optional limitation and not required by the claim language.
Regarding claim 9 all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 9, in addition, Hunwick discloses wherein at least one, or preferably both, of the leaching unit and the flash vessel is connected to a high-pressure off-gas handling system (as shown in Hunwick’s Fig. 3 and 4, H2O, HNO3 vapor from the digestion reactor 10 (the pressure leaching unit), passing through boiler feedwater (BFW, off-gas handling system), combines with free oxygen present in the combustion gases to form nitrogen dioxide, (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0165]), and to the nitric acid plant 7 (off gas handling system, wherein nitrogen dioxide condensed to nitric acid), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0119], [0133]-[0135]) and then to the scrubber 30 (off gas handling system), through some intermediate treatment units, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3 and 4, [0192]).
Hunwick also discloses the mixture from a neutralization vessel (flash vessel), can flow for evaporation to the evaporator 13 (see Hunwick’s [0108]-[0111]), comprise a mechanical vapor recompression mechanism, wherein the water vapor (steam) is compressed by the vacuum pump and returned as an adiabatically heated vapor to the shell-side of the calandria in the vessel, (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4, [0119]) passing through boiler feedwater (BFW, off-gas handling system), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0165]). Hunwick’s vacuum pumps in evaporator reads on high-pressure off-gas handling system.
It is to be noted, the claim recites “preferably” and the limitations after the phrase “preferably” has been interpreted as optional limitation and not required by the claim language.
Regarding claims 10, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 10, in addition, Hunwick further discloses wherein the atmospheric mixing reactor is connected to an atmospheric off-gas handling system (in the evaporator 13 wherein the vapor is re-compressed and evaporation is occurring at close to atmospheric pressure for re-use in the heating calandria (an internal part of the evaporation vessel not shown on FIG. 3), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0158]), wherein the water vapor is compressed by the vacuum pump and returned as an adiabatically heated vapor to the shell-side of the calandria in the vessel (off gas handling system system) (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4, [0119]).
Regarding claims 11, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 11, in addition, Hunwick further discloses wherein the solid-liquid separation unit is equipped with a washing section having a water inlet, the washing section being capable of washing the solids of the slurry and adding the washing water to the separated solution (the thickened slurry may be handled by e.g. filtering (solid-liquid separation) and washing it to produce a dewatered cake largely free of soluble lithium values, see Hunwick’s [0035]), and separated solid (lithium oxide, lithia) are quenched in a mixing vessel/agitated storage tank 19, wherein a controlled volume of distilled water (i.e. water inlet) is added to storage tank 19 (including e.g. condensate from the evaporator/crystallizer 13), to converted to lithium hydroxide: see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0170]).
Regarding claims 12, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 12, in addition, Hunwick further discloses the arrangement comprises a line for carrying off-gas from the pressure-leaching unit to an off-gas handling system (as shown in Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4, H2O, HNO3 vapor from the digestion reactor 10 (the pressure leaching unit), along with the flue gas NO, NO2, O2, and water vapor passing through boiler feedwater (BFW, off-gas handling system), combines with free oxygen present in the combustion gases to form nitrogen dioxide, (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0165]), to the nitric acid plant 7(off gas handling system, wherein nitrogen dioxide condensed to nitric acid), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0119], [0133]-[0135]), and then to the scrubber 30 (off gas handling system), see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4).
Regarding claims 13, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 13, in addition, Hunwick further discloses the arrangement comprises a line for carrying off gas in the form of steam, possibly including spent reaction gases, from the flash vessel to an off-gas handling system (after neutralization in a neutralization vessel (flash vessel), the mixture can flow for evaporation to the evaporator 13 (see Hunwick’s [0108]-[0111]), comprise a mechanical vapor recompression mechanism, wherein the water vapor (steam) is compressed by the vacuum pump and returned as an adiabatically heated vapor to the shell-side of the calandria in the vessel, (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4, [0119]).
It is to be noted, the claim recites “possibly” and the limitations after the phrase “possibly” has been interpreted as optional limitation and not required by the claim language.
Regarding claims 14, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 14, in addition, Hunwick further discloses the arrangement comprises a line for carrying the off-gas in the form of moist air, possibly including spent reaction gases, from the mixing reactor to an off-gas handling system (evaporator 13 (the mixing reactor), comprise a mechanical vapor recompression mechanism, wherein the water vapor (moist air) is compressed by the vacuum pump and returned as an adiabatically heated vapor to the shell-side of the calandria in the vessel (i.e. off gas handling system), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4, [0119]), which is further passing through boiler feedwater (BFW, off-gas handling system), combines with the combustion gases (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0165]), to the nitric acid plant 7 (off gas handling system, wherein nitrogen dioxide condensed to nitric acid), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0119], [0133]-[0135]) and then to the scrubber 30, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3 and 4).
It is to be noted, the claim recites “possibly” and the limitations after the phrase “possibly” has been interpreted as optional limitation and not required by the claim language.
Regarding claims 15, all the discussions above claim 1 and 12 are applicable for claim 15, in addition, Hunwick further discloses the arrangement wherein a line leads further from the off-gas handling system to the solid-liquid separation unit, preferably to a washing section therein, for reuse of at least a fraction of the water recovered from the off-gas handling system (from pressure leaching reactor, the leaching solution is neutralized in a neutralization vessel (flash vessel), the mixture can flow for evaporation to the evaporator 13 (see Hunwick’s [0108]-[0111]), comprise a mechanical vapor recompression mechanism, wherein the water vapor (steam) is compressed by the vacuum pump and returned as an adiabatically heated vapor to the shell-side of the calandria in the vessel (i.e. off gas handling system), condensed water then collected (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4, [0119]), this condensate from the evaporator/crystallizer 13 is reused in a mixing vessel/agitated storage tank 19 with the separated lithium oxide (lithia) are quenched, wherein a controlled volume of distilled water (i.e. water inlet) is added to storage tank 19, to converted to lithium hydroxide: see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0170]).
It is to be noted, the claim recites “preferably” and the limitations after the phrase “preferably” has been interpreted as optional limitation and not required by the claim language.
Regarding claims 16, all the discussions above claim 1 and 12 are applicable for claim 16, in addition, Hunwick further discloses the arrangement wherein a line leads further from the off-gas handling system to the recirculation line, wherein at least a fraction of the water recovered from the off-gas handling system is combined with the recirculated solution in the recirculation line (as shown in Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4, H2O, HNO3 vapor from the digestion reactor 10 (the pressure leaching unit), along with the flue gas NO, NO2, O2, and water vapor passing through boiler feedwater (BFW), (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0165]), to the nitric acid plant 7 (see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, and 4 [0119], [0133]-[0135]), wherein the off-gases and distilled vapors are absorbed in a circulating stream of a continuously chilled solution of nitric acid in water to manufacture more nitric acid, suitable for recirculation to the digestion/leaching reactor, via a recirculation line, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0134]).
Regarding claims 17, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 17, in addition, Hunwick further discloses the arrangement includes one or more intermediate treatment units in the form of metal recovery unit, preferably for recovering one or more of copper, nickel and cobalt from the solution obtained from the solid-liquid separation unit (slurry withdrawn from the crystallizer is sent to a centrifuge 21 (solid-liquid separation unit), the solid crystalline cake of lithium is separated and can be further processed (equipment not shown in FIG. 3), i.e. may be dried, then packaged for dispatching see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0172]-[0173]).
Hunwick also discloses the leaching process conditions may be controlled and adjusting the conditions in the termination sub-stage, so that the transition metals including nickel, cobalt and that are leached into the aqueous phase. If leached out, the non-lithium values may be separated (e.g. precipitated, etc.) out of the aqueous phase, (see Hunwick’s [0016], [0102]).
It is to be noted, the claim recites “preferably” and the limitations after the phrase “preferably” has been interpreted as optional limitation and not required by the claim language.
Regarding claims 18, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 18, in addition, Hunwick further discloses the arrangement wherein the separation unit is connected from a solids recovery area therein to a solids recovery line, intended to carry the solids obtained from the separation unit to one or more metal recovery units, preferably for recovering either lithium or gold from said solids (slurry withdrawn from the crystallizer is sent to a centrifuge 21 (solid-liquid separation unit), the solid crystalline cake of lithium is separated and can be further processed (equipment not shown in FIG. 3), i.e. may be dried, then packaged for dispatching see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0172]-[0173]).
It is to be noted, the claim recites “preferably” and the limitations after the phrase “preferably” has been interpreted as optional limitation and not required by the claim language.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over, Richard Hunwick [US 20170175228 A1] (Hunwick hereafter) as applied to claim 1, and then further in view of Thomas, Kenneth G et.al. [CA2209559C] (Thomas hereafter).
Regarding claims 5-7, all the discussions above claim 1 are applicable for claim 5-7, in addition, Hunwick further discloses wherein the atmospheric mixing reactor is connected to a gas pressurizer for pressurizing the contents (the vessel 13 (the evaporator) comprises a mechanical vapor recompression mechanism, a vacuum pump (gas pressurizer) lowers the pressure over the contents of the vessel, until such time as the aqueous phase begins to boil, see Hunwick’s Fig. 3, [0119]) and Hunwick’s evaporator, air cooling condenser would have the air inlet.
But Hunwick is silent about the air inlet of the atmospheric mixing reactor is connected to a gas pressurizer for pressurizing the air feed.
Thomas discloses an arrangement for processing an aqueous metal-containing slurry (processing a metal-containing (copper and gold) mineral, (see Thomas’s Abstract), wherein the system comprises a pressure oxidation is carried out in an autoclave 15, with an oxygen partial pressure of at least about 20 psi and a total pressure of between about 400 and about 500 psia at a temperature of between about 185°C and about 235°C, (see Thomas’s page, 12, line 5-27), oxidized slurry leaving the autoclave is passed to a series of flash tanks 17, 18, and 19, for flashing of the steam is to cool the slurry (i.e. temperature is decreased), wherein the steam from each flash tank is recycled to the autoclave feed slurry through condenser, operated at the same pressure as the flash tank, the last flash tank 19 is coupled with the condenser 9, (see Thomas’s page, 14, Fig.2, line 1-13), and the last tank 19 is operating at atmospheric pressure same as condenser 9, i.e. pressure is decreased to atmospheric pressure at flash tank 19, providing an atmospheric leach slurry, (see Thomas’s page, 11, Fig.2 line 26-29).
Thomas teaches in case of the gold-bearing mineral slurry, the gold-bearing lixiviant and solid residue are subjected to resin-in-pulp (RIP) (see Thomas’s page, 19, line 25-29). Thomas then teaches the air inlet of the atmospheric mixing reactor is connected to a gas pressurizer for pressurizing the air feed (a stirred tank reactor vessel, preferably, in a Pachuca tank (atmospheric mixing reactor), that being an air-agitated (mixing gear), conical-bottom, solid-liquid mixing vessel in which the air is injected (a gas pressurizer for pressurizing the air feed) into the bottom of the cone. An advantage of the Pachuca system is reduced resin bead breakage and improved dispersion of the resin beads in the slurry as compared to mechanically agitated systems, see Thomas’s page, 21, line 8-19, Fig.2, 3 and 4).
With respect to claim 6, Thomas’s air is injected from the bottom of conical bottom vessel reads on “the air inlet of the atmospheric mixing reactor is positioned at the lower half of the mixing reactor, as indicated by the height of the reactor”.
With respect to claim 7, Thomas’s air is injected from the bottom of conical bottom vessel reads on “the air inlet of the atmospheric mixing reactor is positioned below used mixing gear”.
Thomas is directed to an arrangement for processing an aqueous metal-containing slurry, and therefore, analogous to the instant claim and Hunwick.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the present invention to have Thomas’s teachings air blown from the bottom of the conical-bottom, solid-liquid mixing vessel to combine with the Hunwick’s arrangement to have improved dispersion within the metal-containing slurry.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yuan Zhang, et.al. [CN212025427U] (machine translation, original provided in the IDS, used for the restriction requirement, Yuan hereafter).
Yuan discloses a method (see Yuan’s Fig.1 and description, p.4-5, §[0013]-§[0014]) a method for processing an aqueous metal-containing slurry (same as leachate of molybdenum ore) to separate undesired fractions (e.g. an amount of water) therefrom and to recirculate (see Yuan’s Fig.1, line on the right side, from last process unit to the first) at least a fraction of the liquid stream being passed through the steps of the method, which method comprises
leaching the metal-containing slurry at an elevated pressure and elevated temperature (see Yuan’s Fig.1, the 5th process unit (autoclave) from the top direction), to provide a leached slurry,
flashing (see Fig.1, the 6th process unit (flash tank) from the top direction) the leached slurry to decrease its pressure and temperature and provide an atmospheric leach slurry, agitating the atmospheric leach slurry while simultaneously feeding air into the slurry, to disperse the air into the slurry, as well as to cause air-induced evaporation of a fraction of the water in the slurry (an atmospheric pressure preheating tank, a pre-leaching tank, a slurry buffer tank, a two-stage feed pump, a high pressure autoclave, a flash evaporation tank, and a cooling tank, all connected by pipelines, see, Yuan’s [0010], separating the solids of the slurry from the solution (see Fig.1, below the last process unit (cooling tank) from the top direction a statement on sending the slurry to filter press), and further recirculating (see Fig.1, line on the right side, from last process unit to the first) at least a fraction of the solution obtained from the solid-liquid separation step to the pressure leaching step.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZMUN NAHAR SHAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-5421. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 AM - 7:00PM (EST).
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, Merkling Sally can be reached on (571)2726297. 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.
/NAZMUN NAHAR SHAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 1738
Prosecution Insights