Document jENJ95Obzp99ZXmo6eRmx5Q2

Wil l ia m S Da t t h AB2A B Ma r v in - r e t ir e d De a n S Ed mo n d s Fr a n k E- Ba r r o w s W Br o w k Mo r t o n Mj s r t o n W Sa o b Wi l l i8 H Ta y l o r . Jr Er n e s t B. Me r c h a n t Ge o r o eE Mid d l e t o n Mo r r is D Ja c k s o n R Mo r t o n Ad a ms Ra y mo n d F Ad a ms Le s l ie B Yo w o Da n ie l V Ma s o n r y D4571 Co u n s e l l o r s a t , La w 165- Br o a d w a y Ne w Yo r k Wa s h in g t o n Of f ic e s Na t io n a l Pr e s s Bu il d z n o Nov. 7, 1938. Ra y mo n d B. Ciirnu Ba l d w in Gu il d Amb r o s e a Ar n o l d S. Ho w e l l Br o w n . Jr . Lo u is D. Fo r w a r d E-St a n l e y Ma n s f ie l d Ge OROB E. pAITHrULL Do n a l K. Mc Ca r t h y Ha l E. Se a o r a y b s Jo h n Ho j u e Jo h n T. Fa r l ey Cu r t Vo n Botrncnt, J*. Ja k e s B. Ch r is t ie Ja k e s W. La is t Cy r u s S. Ba r o o o d Ro o r r T Mc Le a n Ha r o l d A Tr a t z e Ke n n e t h H. Mu r r a y Ba r r y E. Do w n er Ca r l E. Rik o Mr. Frederick Laist, Vice President, International Smelting & Refining Co., 25 Broadway, Room 1720, New York, N.Y. Re: Johnson et al. Appln. Ser. No. 178,352 Filed Dec. 6, 1937 For "Method of Producing White Lead."_________________ Dear Mr. Laist; Enclosed are two copies of an amendment Just forward ed to the Patent Office in response to the Office action of May 12, 1938. In preparing this amendment, we selected for prosecu tion a group of claims different from the group suggested by Mr. Knox in his memorandum of June 9, 1938 and forwarded with your letter of July 16, 1938. The art which the Examiner had cited against the application was quite close and it seemed to us that the claims which we selected for further prosecution provided the best scope of protection that we can reasonably hope to secure for the invention. Veiy truly yours. Eels* \ 8NVC00008497 D4947 4 70 nb IN THE UNITED STATES ATENT OFFICE In re application of : Gununrd E. Johnson et si: Method of Producing ffhlte Filed Dec. 6, 1937 : Lead. Ser. No. 178,35? : Div. 56 Room 4725 : New York, N.Y., Nov. 7, 1938. Hon. Com:. lsnioner of Fatente, Washiiigton, D. C. Sir; In response to the office action of Ury 12, 1938, please amend the above-identified application ae follows; Claim 2, line 13, after "incorporating* insert --hydroxyl ions--. Lines 13 and 14, striae out "an alknli metal hydroxide* and substitute --in an amount sufficient--. Claim 4, line 13, after "anolyte" ineert --a sufficient amount of--. Line 14, change "sodium hydroxide" to --hydroxyl ions--. Cancel claims 1, 3, 6 to 10, and 1? to 22 without prejudice. REyRKS Reconsideration of this application in its emended form la respectfully requested. The claims originally presented in the case were rejected on the ground of undue multiplicity. With this amendment applicantshav1 a restricted the number of claims in the case to four, w.lch number is believed not to be excessive, .1 PNC00003498 N11452.01 The claims remaining In the oase, two of which have been amended, were rejeoted as substantially met by Johnson et al. and by Sperry. Each of the olr.lras remaining in the case is limited to a process in which the eatholyte is subjected to excess cnrbonatlon, with the excess of oarbonate so intro duced into the eatholyte being compensated for by inooi-poration of hydroxyl lone in sufficient amount in the anolyte. This procedure greatly slmpllfiee former Known methods, in which control of carbonatlon of the eatholyte had to be governed with a high degree of accuracy in order to insure production of a white lead of uniform quality. The new crocedure eliminates the necessity for accurate (and difficultly governed) control over cnrbonatlon by providing for excess carbonatlon of the eatholyte and appropriate easily regulated additions to the anolyte. The advantages of the new procedure are fully pointed out in the specification. The Johnson et al. patent does not disclose or suggest the claimed procedure involving excess carbonatlon, nor does the Sperry patent. In both of these patented pro cesses control over the composition of the product is secured by careful control over the carbonatlon operation, which is difficult to control. The Examiner's observation that Sperry discloses control over the acidity of the anolyte, and that addition of alKali to the anolyte in the Johnson et al. patent would be obvious, does not affect "the patent ability of the claims because the claims are specifically limited to a procedure involving excess carbonatlon of the eatholyte. This procedure is not suggested by the references. .2 PNYC00008499 The Jackson et al. patent referred to in the fourth paragraph of the Office action le not Identified, but Judging from the Examiner's comments concerning It, It eeem8 to be directed to a process Involving Just what the present Invention Is designed to avoid, that Is, accurately controlled deficient oarbonatlon. The Rosenstein patent seems to have no bearing on the patentability of the olalms, for It discloses no more than the Known conversion of bicarbonats to oarbonate by means of an alkali. Although this reaction Is Involved In the present process. It Is not regarded or claimed per se as new. The new and inventive feature of the nrooees Is ths provision of an effective procedure permitting of easily regulated excess carbonation of the catholyte In place of heretofore necessary accurately and difficultly controlled exact or deficient carbonation. This feature Is not discloses In any . referenoe. It is believed that this application Is In condition to be passed to Issue, and that all of the claims are patentable and should be allowed. Early allowance of the application le therefore respectfully requested. Respectfully submitted. Attorneys for Applicants. PNYC00008500