Question: Egghead filed a patent application on subject matter pertaining to a method of producing a completely hardened metal structural element, such as a roller bearing race. The invention is directed to separating one bearing race from another in the production process. The specification discloses that the method consists essentially of the steps of (1) subjecting the surface of the element along an intended course of fracture to direct high energy radiation, such as a laser beam, to selectively embrittle the metal, and (2) then splitting the element along the intended course of fracture, e.g., by a chilling process, such as quenching, or putting the surface subjected to radiation under tensile stress by applying a force to the structural element to generate the fracture, thereby forming separate bearing races. The specification does not include a definition of the language "completely hardened metal structural element," and notes that the surface of the structural element may be provided with a groove along at least a portion of the intended course of the fracture, but that the groove is not provided to influence the course of the fracture, and hence, in contrast to known methods, it is unnecessary to form the groove as a sharp-edged notch. In the course of prosecution, the examiner issued an Office Action rejecting claims 6 and 10, the remaining claims in the case, as anticipated by Highbrow under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). The Highbrow patent teaches a method of producing a metal structural element by irradiating the surface of such element with high energy radiation along an intended course of fracture which has been provided with a sharp-edged notch, and then splitting the element along the intended course of fracture by quenching. The claims are as follows: 6. A method of fracturing a completely hardened metal structural element, said method consisting essentially of subjecting the surface of the completely hardened structural element at least along a portion of an intended course of fracture and in transverse limitation thereto to a high energy radiation to selectively embrittle the metal, and then splitting the element along the intended course of fracture by a chilling process. 10. The method of Claim 6 comprising providing the surface of the completely hardened metal structural element along at least a portion of the intended course of fracture with a groove, and subjecting said element to said high energy radiation. Which of the following actions should Egghead take that accords with proper PTO practice and procedure and stands the best chance of overcoming the examiner's rejection?
A. Traverse the rejection and argue that Highbrow does not teach the application of "direct" high energy radiation as taught by Egghead.
B. Traverse the rejection and argue that the language "consisting essentially of" recited in Claim 6 excludes the "notching" step taught by Highbrow.
C. Amend Claim 6 by deleting the language "by a chilling process" at the end of the claim and traverse the rejection by arguing that Claim 6 no longer reads on Highbrow's "quenching" step.
D. Traverse the rejection and argue that the language "a completely hardened metal structural element" recited in Claim 6 would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art as defining a metal element which is completely crystalline throughout its structure and that the metal element disclosed by Highbrow does not possess this crystalline structure.
(category: patent，Chinese translation: 专利)