Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8 and 16-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goel (US 2019/0039288 A1, hereinafter Goel) in view of Blacker (US 2018/0001551 A1, hereinafter Blacker).
With regards to claims 1, 18, and 23, Goel teaches a system for 3D printing comprising a processor and memory storing instructions that are configured to perform an application of printing (Fig. 1, computing device 102). Goel teaches that the computer accesses print data of a virtual build volume including a plurality of 3D objects to be printed (object location determination module 202, ¶ 0063-0064). Goel teaches modifying the print data to include a 3D structure (hint) at a location in the build volume such that the 3D structure (128-P1) is positioned between a first object 126-1 and a second object 126-2 through the use of the hint generation module (Fig. 9, ¶ 0065). The hints are described as providing protection for the 3D object (¶ 0053) and provide a shield to protect it (¶ 0055). The hints are generated with a minimum gap that can be preset or calculated (¶ 0083, Fig. 8) and thus the object is not in contact with the structure of the hint. Goel teaches that when a hint or structure is placed between two objects there is ample cushioning space for intervening granules (¶ 0087). Goel then causes the printer to print the multiple 3D objects and hints (structures) within the build volume (Abstract, ¶ 0007-0009, 0050-0051). Goel teaches that the printing operation is a binder jetting printing operation in which binder is deposited on powder or granules (¶ 0003, 0026). In a binder jet printing operation a layer of powder is provided, binder is selectively applied to bind together granules in a given layer (¶ 0003). The hints or structures of Goel are printed along with objects in a printing operation such that the printer bed build volume contains both the hints and the 3D objects as one of the benefits includes protection during extraction from the powder (Fig. 9, ¶ 0031-0032). Goel does not explicitly teach that the binding agent comprises a solvent or performing a curing operation after printing of the objects and structure such that the structure or hint would protect the first 3D object from solvents of the binder agent migrating from the second 3D object during the curing operation after printing.
In a similar field of endeavor, binder jetting printing, Blacker teaches that the binder jetting process is known to include the application of a binding agent whose physical properties can be adjusted through the appropriate use of solvents (¶ 0022). After selectively depositing a curable binder on a powder material a heating operation can be performed for a time and temperature sufficient to cure the binder (¶ 0011). This layer-by-layer process is the printing process (¶ 0007). Blacker teaches that it is known in the art to perform post-build processing (i.e. the build volume contains both powder and the printed articles) of 3D printed articles in which further processing such as heating while the article is still supported by the powder bed can be necessary to strengthen or densify the part as a first step and only then removing objects from the powder (¶ 0008).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have utilized known binder jetting techniques such as the use of a binder dissolved in a solvent and post-processing in which the objects are heated in a state still supported by the powder in Goel as taught by Blacker as both relate to binder jetting presenting a reasonable expectation of success, Goel does not disclose specifics of the binding agent prompting one of ordinary skill to look to related art, the use of a solvent for the binder can adjust the physical properties of the binder and post-processing can strengthen or densify the part while it is supported yielding predictable results.
With regards to the limitation of protection from solvent migration, even if the Goel hint/structure is not specifically disclosed as protecting the first/lower 3D printed object from the solvent in a second/upper 3D printed object, the configuration would have inherently achieved this result when combined with the Blacker printing process that utilizes a solvent and post-build heating while in the powder bed.
Regarding Claim 2, the previous combination remains as applied above, and Goel teaches in [0066] that the same binder 312 used for both object 126 and hint 128.
Regarding Claims 3, 5-8, 19-22, and 24-27, as seen in Figure 1 of Goel, the 3D hint structure vertically coincides with the first 3D object and spans substantially a fully horizontal section of the first 3D object, wherein the shelf/leg structures provides a concave feature facing the first 3D object that at least partially encapsulates the first 3D object such that the 3D structure is vertically located between the first 3D object and the second 3D object without horizontally coinciding with any 3D object.
Regarding Claim 4, the previous combination’s binder jet that causes the solvent/binder combination to flow is considered a solvent flow generator, thus the 3D structure would be between the solvent flow generator and the first 3D object.
Regarding Claims 16-17, Goel teaches in [0058] that processor and memory can be made either part of the of 3D printer or separate from the 3D printer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8 and 16-27 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN M OCHYLSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-7009. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-6.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at (571) 270-5516. 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.
/RYAN M OCHYLSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743