Question: Star Chemical Corporation retains you to obtain patent protection for their invention relating to improved production of ethylene oxide. You prepare and file a patent application in the PTO having a specification satisfying the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112 and the following two claims, which are fully supported by the specification: 1. A process for preparing a silver-supported catalyst for the improved production of ethylene oxide, said process comprising the steps of. (a) forming an aqueous solution of silver salt, (b) immersing completely in said solution a carrier of inert, porous particles, characterized by an average diameter not larger than 3/16 inch, an average pore diameter of 10 to 70 microns, and a surface area less than one square meter per gram, (c) impregnating said particles with said solution; (d) separating the impregnated particles from the remainder of said solution; (e) drying the separated particles, whereby said silver salt is deposited uniformly throughout the pores of said particles; and (f) activating the dried particles by heating them in air at a temperature sufficient to decompose the deposited silver salt. 2. An oxygen-activated catalyst for use in the controlled catalytic oxidation of ethylene to ethylene oxide, said catalyst comprising 5 to 25% by weight of silver, said silver being the thermal decomposition product of a pore solution-deposited silver salt uniformly distributed throughout the pores of inert, porous particles. Claim 1 is rejected in the first Office Action under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Able in view of Baker. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Baker. Able discloses a process for producing a catalyst for oxidation of ethylene to ethylene oxide by impregnating a porous carrier with a solution of a silver salt of an organic acid, separating the excess liquid, drying the impregnated carrier, and decomposing the silver salt by direct heat in an oven. Baker discloses the physical characteristics of the oxygen-activated catalyst. The physical characteristics of the claimed catalyst are indistinguishable from Baker's catalyst. Which of the following represents the best course of action to overcome the rejection and obtain a Notice of Allowance in the application?
A. Cancel Claim I and argue that the inventive catalyst has both high selectivity, i.e., a measure of the ability of a catalyst to prefer the partial oxidation reaction of ethylene over the total oxidation reaction of ethylene to carbon dioxide, and high productivity, i.e., a measure of the amount of ethylene oxide produced per unit of catalyst and per unit of time.
B. Cancel Claim 2 and argue that the combination of references is improper because it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the activation step of Baker for the activation step of Able.
C. Amend Claim 1 to recite that an oxidizing agent is added to the solution to prevent premature reduction of the silver salt.
D. Cancel Claim 1 and amend Claim 2 to recite that the inert, porous particles contain silica-alumina, and argue that such recitation is not disclosed by the references.
(category: patent，Chinese translation: 专利)