DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 99-120 are pending and presented for examination on the merits.
Claims 99-105, 108-116, 118, 119 are currently amended. Claim 120 is new.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/27/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the non-final Office action on 05/19/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the examiner.
Status of Previous Drawing Objections
The previous objections to the drawings are withdrawn in view of the replacement drawing sheet and amendments to the specification filed on 08/19/2025.
Status of Previous Claim Objections
The previous objection to claim 109 is withdrawn in view of the amendment to the claim.
Status of Previous Claim Rejections Under 35 USC § 112
The previous rejections of claims 104 and 105 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) are withdrawn in view of the amendments to the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 99-105, 110, 112-118, and 120 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0210294 (A1) to Hudelson et al. (“Hudelson”) in view of US 2016/0332236 (A1) to Stoyanov (“Stoyanov”) and further in view of US 2002/0129485 (A1) to Mok et al. (“Mok”).
Regarding claim 118, Hudelson teaches a method of forming a three-dimensional (3D) object (method for printing a three-dimensional (3D) object). Para. [0002], [0003]. The method includes the following steps:
(i) spreading a thin layer of powder onto a powder bed (providing a powder bed comprising powder material, forming a layer of powder material to provide an exposed surface of the powder bed) (para. [0072]);
(ii) depositing a liquid binder in a two-dimensional (2D) pattern or image that represents a single slice of a three-dimensional (3D) shape (applying a binding substance to at least a portion of the exposed surface) (para. [0072]);
(iii) printing a part (positive area that is at least a portion of a positive object) and a sacrificial component (negative area that is at least a portion of a negative object) (para. [0074]-[0076]); and
(iv) removing the part (3D object) after printing (i.e., separating the part and the sacrificial component from each another) (separating the negative object from the 3D object) (para. [0072]).
The process is repeated as necessary to form the 3D shape of bound powder material inside the powder bed and for making the sacrificial component (iteratively performing operations). Para. [0072], [0083].
An embodiment is illustrated in FIG. 12 and described at para. [0102] and [0142]. A part 1210 (positive object) is manufactured with a recessed inner portion. The recessed inner portion of the part 1210 is supported by a raft 1224a and loose unbound powder 1204 (negative objects that make up at least a portion of the negative area, the negative objects acting as a support, at least a portion of the negative object is located within the positive object). The “neck” of part 1210 is adjacent to the raft and loose powder, thereby showing that the negative area is at least partially surrounded by the positive area.
PNG
media_image1.png
519
459
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The lightly bound powder (at least part of the negative object) and the part (positive object yielding a 3D object) are dried/crosslinked such that the lightly bound powder is not held together (curing the positive object to yield a 3D object and having said negative object coupled thereto). Para. [0155]. The part and lightly bound powder can then be removed or decoupled from one another (separating the negative object from the 3D object). Para. [0155].
FIG. 12 of Hudelson shows the profile of part 1210 with a recessed inner portion. However, it is unclear whether the recess is a cavity because the figure is two-dimensional showing only a cross-section, and there is no three-dimensional figure provided.
Stoyanov discloses a method of making a cutting tool by an additive manufacturing process. Abstract. In a form of the invention, the method of producing the cutting tool is by using a binder jetting process. Para. [0005]. Binder jetting is a method of producing a component and includes the steps of selectively spraying liquid binder onto a bed of powder based on a 3D model of a component, solidifying the binder and powder into a cross-section, depositing additional powder and binder to form the next layer of the object, and repeating this process until the green component is finished. Para. [0019].
Binder jetting is able to produce an internal cavity from a starting powder using a binder. Para. [0005]. An interior cavity is defined by one or more inwardly facing surfaces (3D object has a cavity corresponding to at least a portion of the negative object located within the positive object). Para. [0016]. By eliminating unnecessary material, the tool can have decreased total weight, and the manufacturing time and costs can be lowered. Para. [0007].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have built an internal cavity, as taught by Stoyanov, using the method of Hudelson because an internal cavity would lessen the weight of a solid object where excess material is not needed. Furthermore, less material would require less fabrication time and less material, resulting in increased efficiency of the manufacturing costs.
Hudelson teaches applying binder on a powdered layer, which create negative and positive areas in the layer. But Hudelson does not teach using a cutter to generate at least one first boundary to create a positive area and a negative area.
Mok is directed to the fabricating a plastic or metal object of predetermined shape. Para. [0113]. Mok teaches that the contour of the profile of the 3D object is traced or polished by a cutting device. Para. [0120]. Tracing or polishing slanted surfaces creates a 3D object with micron-level accuracy and precision. Para. [0120]; FIG. 2c and 2d. The contouring is repeated until the object is completely built. Para. [0120], [0123].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have added a step of contouring the edges of the part (3D object) of Hudelson during the building process because contouring would improve surface smoothness and dimensional accuracy of the part, enabling the user to manufacture a part as close as possible to desired specifications. Cutting would create at least a first boundary via the separation of material, with the intended part corresponding to the positive object and the waste scraps from the intended part corresponding to at least a portion of the negative object/area.
Regarding claim 99, Hudelson teaches a method of forming a three-dimensional (3D) object (method for printing a three-dimensional (3D) object). Para. [0002], [0003]. The method includes the following steps:
(i) spreading a thin layer of powder onto a powder bed (providing a powder bed comprising powder material, forming a layer of powder material to provide an exposed surface of the powder bed) (para. [0072]);
(ii) depositing a liquid binder in a two-dimensional (2D) pattern or image that represents a single slice of a three-dimensional (3D) shape (applying a binding substance to at least a portion of the exposed surface) (para. [0072]);
(iii) printing a part (positive area that is at least a portion of a positive object) and a sacrificial component (negative area that is at least a portion of a negative object) (para. [0074]-[0076]); and
(iv) removing the part (3D object) after printing (i.e., separating the part and the sacrificial component from each another) (separating the negative object from the 3D object) (para. [0072]).
The process is repeated as necessary to form the 3D shape of bound powder material inside the powder bed and for making the sacrificial component (iteratively performing operations). Para. [0072], [0083].
An embodiment is illustrated in FIG. 12 and described at para. [0102] and [0142]. A part 1210 (positive object) is manufactured with a recessed inner portion. The recessed inner portion of the part 1210 is supported by a raft 1224a and loose unbound powder 1204 (negative object comprising negative areas). By building the raft (at least one of two sub-areas in said negative area) and loose unbound powder (at least one of two sub-areas in said negative area), at least one second boundary is created. The “neck” of part 1210 is adjacent to the raft and loose powder, thereby showing that at least one of the at least two sub-areas is at least partially surrounded by the positive area.
PNG
media_image1.png
519
459
media_image1.png
Greyscale
FIG. 12 of Hudelson shows the profile of part 1210 with a recessed inner portion. However, it is unclear whether the recess is a cavity because the figure is two-dimensional showing only a cross-section, and there is no three-dimensional figure provided.
Stoyanov discloses a method of making a cutting tool by an additive manufacturing process. Abstract. In a form of the invention, the method of producing the cutting tool is by using a binder jetting process. Para. [0005]. Binder jetting is a method of producing a component and includes the steps of selectively spraying liquid binder onto a bed of powder based on a 3D model of a component, solidifying the binder and powder into a cross-section, depositing additional powder and binder to form the next layer of the object, and repeating this process until the green component is finished. Para. [0019].
Binder jetting is able to produce an internal cavity from a starting powder using a binder. Para. [0005]. An interior cavity is defined by one or more inwardly facing surfaces (3D object has a cavity corresponding to one or more of the at least partially surrounded sub-areas). Para. [0016]. By eliminating unnecessary material, the tool can have decreased total weight, and the manufacturing time and costs can be lowered. Para. [0007].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have built an internal cavity, as taught by Stoyanov, using the method of Hudelson because an internal cavity would lessen the weight of a solid object where excess material is not needed. Furthermore, less material would require less fabrication time and less material, resulting in increased efficiency of the manufacturing costs.
Hudelson teaches applying binder on a powdered layer, which create negative and positive areas in the layer. But Hudelson does not teach using a cutter to generate at least one first boundary to create a positive area and a negative area.
Mok is directed to the fabricating a plastic or metal object of predetermined shape. Para. [0113]. Mok teaches that the contour of the profile of the 3D object is traced or polished by a cutting device. Para. [0120]. Tracing or polishing slanted surfaces creates a 3D object with micron-level accuracy and precision. Para. [0120]; FIG. 2c and 2d. The contouring is repeated until the object is completely built. Para. [0120], [0123].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have added a step of contouring the edges of the part (3D object) of Hudelson during the building process because contouring would improve surface smoothness and dimensional accuracy of the part, enabling the user to manufacture a part as close as possible to desired specifications. Cutting would create at least a first boundary via the separation of material, with the intended part corresponding to the positive object and the waste scraps from the intended part corresponding to at least a portion of the negative object/area.
Regarding claim 100, Hudelson discloses post-processing or subsequent processing before or after separation. Abstract; para. [0002], [0072], [0083]. Alternatively, decoupling (step (c)) can be performed via sintering (processing). Para. [0007], [0021], [0097].
Regarding claim 101, Hudelson discloses repeating the process steps to form the 3D shape and sacrificial component layer by layer. Para. [0072], [0083]. In order to form a portion of the part where the cross-section is all positive object (i.e., all part and no negative space), then the steps of forming a layer of powder and applying of binder must take place multiple times (claimed steps (i) and (ii) are repeated) in order to form the solid portion of the object prior to creating the recess or cavity.
Regarding claim 102, Hudelson discloses repeating the process steps to form the 3D shape and sacrificial component layer by layer. Para. [0072], [0083]. In FIG. 12, the raft and loose unbound powder (negative sub-areas) are built under the overhang of part 1210 (positive area). Because the part is built above the raft and unbound powder, the raft and unbound powder project onto the part (i.e., x-y coordinates of negative sub-areas falls on or within x-y coordinates of at least one positive area in layers subsequent to said given layer).
Regarding claim 103, Hudelson discloses that the raft and unbound powder (negative sub-areas) are built under the part (positive area). FIG. 12. They are separated from the part (separating negative sub-objects from positive object). Para. [0155].
Regarding claim 104, Hudelson applies binder to all powders (binding substance is on an entirety of said exposed surface). Para. [0151]-[0155].
Regarding claim 105, Hudelson applies binder to the part (binding substance is on an entirety of said positive area). FIGS. 8A-8D, 9A-9D, 15A-15D.
Regarding claim 110, Hudson, in one embodiment, teaches that the deposition and printing steps include creating the sacrificial component by jetting binder to its corresponding area at a saturation level lower than that deposited to create the part. Para. [0153], [0154]; FIGS. 15C and 15D. In doing so, the sacrificial component is made of lightly bound powder with no separation therebetween (negative object acting as support). Para. [0153], [0154].
The lightly bound powder (negative object) and the part (positive object yielding a 3D object) are dried/crosslinked such that the lightly bound powder is not held together (curing the positive object to yield a 3D object and having said negative object coupled thereto). Para. [0155]. The part and lightly bound powder can then be removed or decoupled from one another (step (c) occurs after curing). Para. [0155].
Regarding claim 112, Hudelson discloses post-processing after separation. Abstract. Subsequent processing includes an operation like sintering (heating said positive object subsequent to step (d)). Para. [0002], [0072], [0083].
Regarding claim 113, Mok discloses that the contour or profile using a high-speed machining spindle system and S-axis CNC system. Para. [0128].
Regarding claims 114-116 and 120, Mok teaches that the contour of the profile of the 3D object is traced or polished by a cutting device. Para. [0120]. Cutters include a rotary cutter or machining spindle (both contact cutters) or a laser-cutting device (non-contact cutter comprising at least one laser, the powder bed or layer of powder material is not in contact with the cutter). Para. [0120]. The cutter can be integrated on a machine with a five-axis configuration (multi-axis machine tool). Para. [0120].
Regarding claim 117, Hudelson discloses applying the binder with a printhead (inkjet head). Para. [0089].
Claim 106 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hudelson in view of Stoyanov and further in view of Mok, as applied to claim 99 above, and further in view of US 2006/0045787 (A1) to Jandeska, Jr. et al. (“Jandeska”) and US 6,585,930 (B2) to Liu et al. (“Liu”).
Regarding claim 106, Hudelson discloses applying a liquid binder (para. [0072]), but does not specify the form of the binder.
Jandeska is directed to a 3D printing rapid prototyping process. Title; abstract. The process involves a layer-by-layer buildup where binder is applied. Para. [0009]. Suitable binders include those that may be deposited as solid particles from a suspension thereof in a suitable vehicle. Para. [0009]. Jandeska refers to US Patent No. 6,585,930 to Liu, which discloses a suitable binder comprising a carbohydrate-based binder containing sugars and starches. Para. [0009].
Liu specifically describes the binder as sugar or other carbohydrate dissolved or suspended in water or other carrier (suspension). Col. 5, lines 41-44. The carbohydrate is usually dissolved or dispersed (i.e., hydrated micelles) in an aqueous carrier solution (suspension of liquid particles). Col. 2, lines 45-49; col. 3, lines 8-13. The binder is used to build up alternating layers to form undercuts, overhangs, and internal volumes. Col. 3, lines 52-67; col. 4, lines 1-4. The binder addresses concerns of improving green strength, being shelf stable, and avoids generation of hazardous waste. Col. 2, lines 18-30; col. 4, lines 28-36.
Given that Hudelson is also directed to 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used a binder, such as one containing liquid particles in suspension, because they have demonstrated that they are capable of binding loose powders together and have the advantage of creating complicated shapes and features in a layer-by-layer process, thereby meeting the objectives of Hudelson of adhering powders in a 3D printing manufacturing process. Furthermore, a suspension of carbohydrate binder does not generate harmful by-products, reducing environmental footprint of post-processing steps like heating and binder burnout.
Claim 107 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hudelson in view of Stoyanov and further in view of Mok, as applied to claim 99 above, and further in view of Jandeska.
Regarding claim 107, Hudelson discloses applying a liquid binder (para. [0072]), but does not specify the form of the binder.
Jandeska is directed to a 3D printing rapid prototyping process. Title; abstract. The process involves a layer-by-layer buildup where binder is applied. Para. [0009]. Suitable binders include those that may be deposited as solid particles from a suspension thereof in a suitable vehicle (binding substance applied as a suspension of solid particles). Para. [0009].
Given that Hudelson is also directed to 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used a binder, such as one containing solid particles suspended in a vehicle, because that form of binder has demonstrated the capability of binding loose powders together in a layer-by-layer process, thereby meeting the objectives of Hudelson of adhering powders in a 3D printing manufacturing process.
Claims 108 and 109 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hudelson in view of Stoyanov and further in view of Mok, as applied to claim 99 above, and further in view of Myerberg.
Regarding claim 108, Hudelson does not teach bringing a compressible or deformable substrate into contact with and applying pressure to the positive object or negative object so as to separate them.
Myerberg is directed to additive manufacturing, with focus on a printer for fused filament fabrication. Abstract; para. [0003]. To produce the additively manufactured object, the object is built on a build plate (substrate) (114) that is capable of receiving metal or other materials from nozzles (bringing an object in contact with a compressible or deformable structure). Para. [0111]. The build plate may be a deformable structure or surface that can bend or otherwise physically deform in order to detach rigid objects formed thereupon (applying pressure to separate object). Para. [0111].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have built the part and sacrificial components of Hudelson on a physically deformable substrate, as taught by Myerberg, because a deformable substrate possesses flexibility that facilitates the removal and retrieval of any objects built thereon. The deformable property would also minimize the pressure applied to the object itself during removal and separation because pressure could be applied to the flexible substrate without concern of breaking it, thereby reducing the chance of fracture of the object.
Regarding claim 109, Myerberg teaches that the object is rigid and build on a deformable build plate, with the rigid object being detachable from the build plate. Para. [0111]. Since the part and/or sacrificial component of Hudelson are rigid and the build plate is deformable, separating (e.g., peeling) one or both of them from the deformable plate would result in the part and/or sacrificial component being depressed into the build plate.
Claim 111 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hudelson in view of Stoyanov and further in view of Mok, as applied to claim 99 above, and further in view of US 2014/0322501 (A1) to Ederer et al. (“Ederer”).
Regarding claim 111, Hudelson is silent regarding the droplet size of the liquid binder when deposited.
Ederer is directed to a method for producing a part layer by layer via deposition of binder on powder. Abstract; para. [0001], [0014]; claim 17. The liquid binder is deposited into droplets having a preferable size ranging from 50 to 100 µm (para. [0041]), which falls within the claimed range. If the droplet is too small (less than about 5 µm), then it is difficult to dependably deposit the droplets due to anti-gravitational forces of the air. Para. [0041].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have shaped the liquid binder droplets of Hudelson into the size taught by Ederer because the range of 50-100 µm facilitates its ability to be dependably deposited over the intended region, ensuring dimensional and shape accuracy.
Claim 119 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hudelson in view of Stoyanov and further in view of Mok and Myerberg.
Regarding claim 119, Hudelson teaches a method of forming a three-dimensional (3D) object (method for printing a three-dimensional (3D) object). Para. [0002], [0003]. The method includes the following steps:
(i) spreading a thin layer of powder onto a powder bed (providing a powder bed comprising powder material, forming a layer of powder material to provide an exposed surface of the powder bed) (para. [0072]);
(ii) depositing a liquid binder in a two-dimensional (2D) pattern or image that represents a single slice of a three-dimensional (3D) shape (applying a binding substance to at least a portion of the exposed surface) (para. [0072]);
(iii) printing a part (positive area that is at least a portion of a positive object) and a sacrificial component (negative area that is at least a portion of a negative object) (para. [0074]-[0076]); and
(iv) removing the part (3D object) after printing (i.e., separating the part and the sacrificial component from each another) (separating the negative object from the 3D object) (para. [0072]).
The process is repeated as necessary to form the 3D shape of bound powder material inside the powder bed and for making the sacrificial component (iteratively performing operations). Para. [0072], [0083].
An embodiment is illustrated in FIG. 12 and described at para. [0102] and [0142]. A part 1210 (positive object) is manufactured with a recessed inner portion. The recessed inner portion of the part 1210 is supported by a raft 1224a and loose unbound powder 1204 (negative objects that make up at least a portion of the negative area, the negative objects acting as a support, at least a portion of the negative object is located within the positive object). The “neck” of part 1210 is adjacent to the raft and loose powder, thereby showing that the negative area is at least partially surrounded by the positive area.
PNG
media_image1.png
519
459
media_image1.png
Greyscale
FIG. 12 of Hudelson shows the profile of part 1210 with a recessed inner portion. However, it is unclear whether the recess is a cavity because the figure is two-dimensional showing only a cross-section, and there is no three-dimensional figure provided.
Stoyanov discloses a method of making a cutting tool by an additive manufacturing process. Abstract. In a form of the invention, the method of producing the cutting tool is by using a binder jetting process. Para. [0005]. Binder jetting is a method of producing a component and includes the steps of selectively spraying liquid binder onto a bed of powder based on a 3D model of a component, solidifying the binder and powder into a cross-section, depositing additional powder and binder to form the next layer of the object, and repeating this process until the green component is finished. Para. [0019].
Binder jetting is able to produce an internal cavity from a starting powder using a binder. Para. [0005]. An interior cavity is defined by one or more inwardly facing surfaces (3D object has a cavity corresponding to at least a portion of the negative object located within the positive object). Para. [0016]. By eliminating unnecessary material, the tool can have decreased total weight, and the manufacturing time and costs can be lowered. Para. [0007].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have built an internal cavity, as taught by Stoyanov, using the method of Hudelson because an internal cavity would lessen the weight of a solid object where excess material is not needed. Furthermore, less material would require less fabrication time and less material, resulting in increased efficiency of the manufacturing costs.
Hudelson teaches applying binder on a powdered layer, which create negative and positive areas in the layer. But Hudelson does not teach using a cutter to generate at least one first boundary to create a positive area and a negative area.
Mok is directed to the fabricating a plastic or metal object of predetermined shape. Para. [0113]. Mok teaches that the contour of the profile of the 3D object is traced or polished by a cutting device. Para. [0120]. Tracing or polishing slanted surfaces creates a 3D object with micron-level accuracy and precision. Para. [0120]; FIG. 2c and 2d. The contouring is repeated until the object is completely built. Para. [0120], [0123].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have added a step of contouring the edges of the part (3D object) of Hudelson during the building process because contouring would improve surface smoothness and dimensional accuracy of the part, enabling the user to manufacture a part as close as possible to desired specifications. Cutting would create at least a first boundary via the separation of material, with the intended part corresponding to the positive object and the waste scraps from the intended part corresponding to at least a portion of the negative object/area.
Hudelson does not teach bringing a compressible or deformable substrate into contact with and applying pressure to the positive object or negative object so as to separate them.
Myerberg is directed to additive manufacturing, with focus on a printer for fused filament fabrication. Abstract; para. [0003]. To produce the additively manufactured object, the object is built on a build plate (substrate) (114) that is capable of receiving metal or other materials from nozzles (bringing an object in contact with a compressible or deformable structure). Para. [0111]. The build plate may be a deformable structure or surface that can bend or otherwise physically deform in order to detach rigid objects formed thereupon (applying pressure to separate object). Para. [0111].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have built the part and sacrificial components of Hudelson on a physically deformable substrate, as taught by Myerberg, because a deformable substrate possesses flexibility that facilitates the removal and retrieval of any objects built thereon. The deformable property would also minimize the pressure applied to the object itself during removal and separation because pressure could be applied to the flexible substrate without concern of breaking it, thereby reducing the chance of fracture of the object.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/19/2025 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Hudelson fails to teach or suggest generating at least one first boundary in the exposed surface by cutting using a perimeter generator after applying binding substance. Applicant notes that Hudelson teaches depositing binder at different saturation levels, not cutting using a perimeter generator.
In response, it is first noted that applying binder to the powder layer, as is recited in the claims, will create two distinct sections on the powder layer. Although Hudelson does not teach a cutting step, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See MPEP § 2145(IV), citing In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Mok is cited to show that it is known to further contour or profile, i.e., machine, grind, or subtract, the edges of each layer in a layered manufacturing process in order to further refine its dimensions and surface. Given the benefits of contouring, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have implemented this step in Hudelson’s process in order to produce a part with increased dimensional accuracy.
Applicant argues that Hudelson does not teach at least one first boundary and at least one second boundary. Applicant states that the example in FIGS. 8D and 9D of Hudelson extend vertically upward and that these figures do not meet the claimed features requiring that the at least one of the two sub-areas is at least partially surrounded by the positive area.
In response, FIG. 12 of Hudelson shows a part 1210 (positive object) having a recessed inner portion. The edges of the part 1210 form “the at least one first boundary.” The recessed inner portion of the part 1210 contains a raft 1224a and loose unbound powder 1204; together, they form the negative object and are each sub-areas in the negative area. The edge of the raft that is flush with the edge of the part forms “at least one second boundary.” Any powders that are loosely bound underneath the overhang of the part also have an “edge” that form “at least one second boundary. The “neck” of part 1210 is adjacent to the raft and loose powder, thereby showing that the negative area is at least partially surrounded by the positive area.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art is made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2017/0341143 (A1) to Abe et al. discloses a method of manufacturing a three-dimensional object. The method includes a step for machining the layers after each layer has been deposited and prior to finishing the build. FIG. 9 – S3, S32.
US 2018/0071987 (A1) to Tsumuraya et al. discloses a sequence of manufacturing a three-dimensional object in which the corrections are made via irradiation unit and/or cutting unit after deposition of each material layer. FIG. 5 – S9, S10; para. [0098], [0099].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANESSA T. LUK whose telephone number is (571)270-3587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM ET.
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, Keith D. Hendricks, can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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.
/VANESSA T. LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
November 29, 2025