Were they going it without APG, page-6

Hi K

My understanding is similar to yours in that I think you need to file a patent in each individual country where you want protection. This is APG's current status in Australia:

		Applicant(s)	Inventor(s)	Filing date	Application status
1	1	2014900322	Direct Reduction	Austpac Resources N.L.	WINTER, John David	2014-02-04	FILED
2
3	2	2008904808	Direct Reduction	Austpac Resources N.L.	Winter, John	2008-09-15	LAPSED
4
5	3	2006257708	Processing of metal chloride solutions and method and apparatus for producing direct reduced iron	Austpac Resources N.L.	Winter, John David	2006-06-15	LAPSED
6
7	4	2005903124	Processing of Metal Chloride Solutions	Austpac Resources NL	Winter, John David	2005-06-15	LAPSED
8
9	5	2002215692	Production of synthetic rutile by continuous leaching	Austpac Resources NL	Winter, John	2001-12-20	GRANTED
10
11	6	2000PR2216	Production of synthetic rutile by continuous leaching	Austpac Resources NL		2000-12-20	LAPSED

It is also my understanding that it wouldn't be too difficult to 'black box' any required parts (those under patent) of a process such as APG's to avoid IP copying in Australia. That would mean hopefully that an o/s Coy would have to invent/re-engineer those parts of the process covered by patent and black boxed by APG. That might make it uneconomical to proceed atm as opposed to waiting to see what APG came up with, and then make a commercial decision once an APG plant is up and running.

Cargill - who own half of this JV with BlueScope are very interesting

''Cargill, Incorporated, is an American privately held, multinational corporation based in Minnetonka, Minnesota, a Minneapolis suburb. Founded in 1865, it is now the largest privately held corporation in the United States in terms of revenue.[2] If it were a public company, it would rank, as of 2013, number 9 on the Fortune 500, behind Valero Energy and ahead of Ford Motor Company.[3]''
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargill