DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 16, 18-19 and 22 are examined.
Claims 24-30 are withdrawn without traverse.
Claims 1-15, 17, 20-21, and 23 are cancelled.
Response to Amendment
The claims filed September 15, 2025 contain amendments that are blurry and difficult to read. Applicant is requested to file a clearer version.
The amendments to the claims overcome the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 and 112 (b) rejections; therefore, the previous rejections have been withdrawn. However, see new grounds of rejection, necessitated by amendment.
Claim Interpretation
As noted in the interview summary by applicant filed November 3, 2025, the limitation “at least one linear drive” in claim 1, third to last line will be interpreted as “at least one further linear drive”, reciting another “at least one linear drive” separate from “at least one linear drive” recited in claim 16, line 15.
Claim 16, line 35-37 recites “at least two parts of the discharge opening, which are separated from one another by the at least one cover element, are uncovered, and/or wherein the interruption extends over the full, maximum opening height”. The word “and/or” will be interpreted as “or” and the limitation recites two options, i.e. “at least two parts of the discharge opening, which are separated from one another by the at least one cover element, are uncovered,” or “wherein the interruption extends over the full, maximum opening height”.
Claim 16, fifth to last line recites “the setting apparatus configured to move the at least one cover element in/counter to a second peripheral direction has at least one setting motor”. The instant specification recites in ¶ [0083] that “the at least one setting apparatus 217a, 217b, 218a, 218b is designed for the variable setting of the at least one in particular variably settable cover element 8, 8a, 8b and/or of the at least one in particular variably settable peripheral wall 7a, 7b”, in ¶ [0085] “the setting apparatus 218a for moving the at least one cover element 8a, 8b in/counter to the second peripheral direction z” and ¶ [0089] “the at least one setting apparatus 217a, 217b for moving the at least one peripheral wall 7a, 7b in/counter to the first peripheral direction y”. As depicted in instant Fig. 3-4 and 7-8, the setting apparatus are two separate “setting apparatuses” each comprising separate structure: 217a, 217b for moving the cover element 8a, 8b in a second peripheral direction (i.e. along Z axis) and 218b for moving the peripheral wall 7a, 7b in a first peripheral direction (i.e. Y axis).
PNG
media_image1.png
577
1145
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
515
1000
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Instant FIG. 3-4 and 7-8
Therefore, for claim interpretation and for examination purpose, the “at least one setting apparatus” is two separate “setting apparatuses”, one “configured to move at least one of the multiple peripheral walls in and counter to a first peripheral direction, and ii) has at least one setting motor and at least one movement deflecting mechanism and at least one linear drive” (claim 1, L. 13-15) and another “configured to move the at least one cover element in/counter to a second peripheral direction has at least one setting motor, and a rotary drive or at least one further linear drive wherein the at least one setting motor is connected in terms of movement to the at least one cover element via the rotary drive or the at least one linear drive” (claim 1, last five lines).
Claim Objections
Claim 16 objected to because of the following informalities:
claim 16, lines 13-15 - “at least one setting apparatus” should read “a plurality of setting apparatuses comprising a first setting apparatus” for clarity that there are multiple setting apparatuses where one setting apparatus of the at least one setting apparatus moves the peripheral walls, see above claim interpretation
accordingly, claim 16, fifth to last line - “the setting apparatus” should read “a second setting apparatus of the plurality of setting apparatuses” to recite to “plurality of setting apparatuses” in claim 16, line 12 and clarify that another setting apparatus moves the cover elements, see above claim interpretation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16, 18-19, and 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites “at least one setting apparatus that: i) is configured to move at least one of the multiple peripherals walls in and counter to a first peripheral direction, and ii) has at least one setting motor and at least one movement deflecting mechanism and at least one linear drive” in line 13-15. It is unclear whether “has at least one setting motor and at least one movement deflecting mechanism and at least one linear drive” is recited as structure for each of the “at least one setting apparatus” (i.e., the “setting apparatus configured to move at least one of the multiple peripheral walls” previously recited and the “setting apparatus configured to move the at least one cover element” in the last five lines of the claim) or for the previously recited setting apparatus “configured to move at least one of the multiple peripheral walls, rendering the claim indefinite. See claim interpretation above. For examination purposes and in line with ¶ [0086] and [0089], the limitation will be interpreted as each setting apparatus comprises “has at least one setting motor and at least one movement deflecting mechanism and at least one linear drive”.
Similarly, claim 16 recites “the setting apparatus … has at least one setting motor” in the fourth and fifth to last line. It is unclear whether “at least one setting motor” is reciting to “at least one setting motor” in line 14, 15 or a separate “setting motor”, rendering the claim indefinite. For examination purposes and in line with ¶ [0086] and [0089], the limitation will be interpreted as another “setting motor” for the “setting apparatus configured to move the at least one cover element”.
As claims 18-19 and 22 depend on claim 16, claims 18-19 and 22 are rejected for indefiniteness.
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 16, 19, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozar (US 2019/0001544 A1), alternatively in view of Nardick (US 5950988), in view of Bin (KR 101948547, an English machine translation was provided in a previous Office Action) and Giessauf (AT 406660 B, an English machine translation is provided in this Office Action).
Regarding claim 16, Kozar discloses an extruder apparatus (¶ [0038] – apparatus 110) for extrusion of a strand of building material for 3D printing of a structural part (¶ [0038] – 110 for shaping extrudable material 140), comprising:
an extruder nozzle 110, wherein the extruder nozzle has a discharge opening (¶ [0038] – outlet 132) for discharge of the strand of building material out of the extruder apparatus (¶ [0038] – extrudable material 140 exits through 132);
the extruder nozzle has multiple peripheral walls (¶ [0038] – sleeve 126, see annotated; Fig. 5 depicts 126 has walls) wherein the multiple peripheral walls peripherally define the discharge opening (Fig. 5 and 6 depict 126 peripherally define 132), and at least two of the peripheral walls are designed to be variably settable (Fig. 5 depicts at least two of the walls of 126 can be variably settable) for purposes of variable arrangement with respect to one another for purposes of variably setting the discharge opening (¶ [0043] - change of at least one of the size or the shape of 132 of 126); and
PNG
media_image3.png
773
610
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
677
621
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 5-6 of Kozar
at least one setting apparatus (¶ [0043] – actuation mechanism 172 comprising actuators 122) that:
i) is configured to move at least one of the multiple peripheral walls in and counter to a first peripheral direction (¶ [0113]-[00114] - 122 changes size or the shape of 132; Fig. 5 depicts the push and pull is in a first peripheral direction), and
ii) has at least one setting motor (¶ [0045] – each of 122 comprises a motor) and at least one movement deflecting mechanism (¶ [0043-0044] – plurality of cables 128) and at least one linear drive (¶ [0045] - screw-type linear actuators), wherein
the at least one setting motor is connected in terms of movement to the at least one of the multiple peripheral walls (¶ [0038] – 172 changes size or shape of 132) via the at least one movement deflecting mechanism (128) and the at least one linear drive (112),
the discharge opening is peripherally closed in/counter to (¶ [0043] - change of size or the shape of 132) at least one peripheral direction which is orthogonal with respect to a discharge direction by at least one peripheral wall of the multiple peripheral walls (Fig. 5 and 6 depicts the push and pull is in a peripheral direction that is orthogonal to discharge direction),
PNG
media_image5.png
773
610
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
699
641
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 5-6 of Kozar
the at least one movement deflecting mechanism is a lever mechanism (¶ [0043-0044] – plurality of cables 128; ¶ [0046] – in a example, each 128 can be a straight non-flexible rod)
the extruder nozzle specifies the discharge direction of the strand of building material out of the discharge opening (¶ [0038] – extrudable material 140 enters sleeve 126 through sleeve inlet 148 and exits through 132)
in arguendo, Kozar does not disclose wherein the at least one movement deflecting mechanism is a lever mechanism as presented above, Nardick is applied.
Analogous art Nardick discloses a concrete boom discharge valve apparatus for controlling the flow of concrete having an end of the nozzle member defining a contoured valve seat which is operatively associated with a spring biased gate face element of a gate valve member for controlling the flow (Abstract).
Nardick further teaches the at least one movement deflecting mechanism is a lever mechanism (c. 3, L. 26-38, Fig. 4 - actuator lever 35).
Kozar and Nardick disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function for discharging material and control the flow of materials from the discharged end. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the actuator lever in Nardick to modify the plurality of cables in Kozar to control the opening of the valve member which will result in variably control the shape and size of the discharged end and thus the amount of materials being discharged from the discharged opening (c. 2, L. 12-19). Furthermore, the combination of the known elements provides a predictable result, namely, another known way to control the size and shape of the discharged end. See MPEP 2143.
Bin further depicts the actuators 122 move the “walls” in a multiple directions as depicted in Fig. 6 above, and therefore also move in “a second peripheral direction”.
Kozar does not disclose:
at least one cover element, wherein the at least one cover element is designed to cover at least a part of the discharge opening such that an opening cross section of at least one uncovered part of the discharge opening specifies a strand cross section of the discharged strand of building material, and
the at least one cover element has at least one cover surface for partially covering the discharge opening, wherein the at least one cover surface is designed for orthogonal orientation with respect to the discharge direction
the at least one cover element is designed to be variably settable for purposes of variably settably covering the discharge opening for purposes of variably setting the opening cross section for purposes of variably setting the strand cross section
the setting apparatus configured to move the at least one cover element in/counter to a second peripheral direction has:
at least one setting motor and at least one movement deflecting mechanism and at least one linear drive
a rotary device or at least one linear drive wherein the at least one setting motor is connected in terms of movement to the at least one cover element via the rotary drive or the at least one linear drive.
Analogous art Bin discloses a 3D printing nozzle 100 (¶ [0010]) with rails 27 (movement deflecting mechanism) where the first and second deformable section blocking members 21 and 22 can be slid along 27 where a power member 29 such as a motor moves shielding plate 28 of 21, 22 (¶ [0031]).
Bin further discloses:
at least one cover element (¶ [0029-0031] – shielding plate 28 of first variable section blocking member 21), wherein the at least one cover element is designed to cover at least a part of the discharge opening (¶ [0030] – 21 to cover upper portion of discharge port 11, 22 to cover lateral portions of 11) such that an opening cross section of at least one uncovered part of the discharge opening specifies a strand cross section of the discharged strand of building material (¶ [0030] – 21 with concave portion 19, 22 with convex portion 18, cross-sectional shape of discharged 1 where 18 and 19 are present) and
the at least one cover element has at least one cover surface for partially covering the discharge opening (¶ [0030] – 21 covers portions of 11), wherein the at least one cover surface is designed for orthogonal orientation with respect to the discharge direction (¶ [0017] – vary shape of 11 in different directions; as 21 moves and covers lateral portions, the surface of 22 is “designed for orthogonal orientation with respect to the discharge direction”)
PNG
media_image7.png
760
691
media_image7.png
Greyscale
FIG. 14 of Bin
the at least one cover element 21, 22 is designed to be variably settable for purposes of variably settably covering the discharge opening (¶ [0017] – vary shape of 11) for purposes of variably setting the opening cross section for purposes of variably setting the strand cross section (¶ [0030] – 21 in the shape of the concave portion 19 at 10; 1 is discharged in a longitudinal cross-sectional shape in which 18 are present according to 21).
the setting apparatus configured to move the at least one cover element in/counter to a second peripheral direction (¶ [0031] – power member 29 for moving 28 of 21; FIG. 14 of Bin depicts a second peripheral direction), has:
at least one setting motor (¶ [0031] – 29 such as a motor) and at least one movement deflecting mechanism (¶ [0031] – 21 slid on rails) and at least one linear drive (¶ [0031] – motor), and
a linear drive (¶ [0031] – power member 29 such as a motor) wherein the at least one setting motor is connected in terms of movement to the at least one cover element via the rotary drive (¶ [0031] – 29 for moving 28 of 21, 22, operation of 29 changes the degree (area and shape) of 28 to cover the exhaust port, thereby changing the size and shape of the exhaust port)
Kozar and Bin disclose apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function in same field of additive manufacturing with a nozzle with an adjustable exit section. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied first and second variable blocking member at the discharge port in the manner discussed above in Bin to the outlet the apparatus in Kozar to change the size and shape of the exhaust port and change the shape and size of the concave and convex portions formed in the 3D print strip (¶ [0031]).
Modified Kozar does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the at least one cover element is designed to cover the at least one part of the discharge opening such that the opening cross section is at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction,
wherein the interruption extends over the full, maximum opening height.
However, Bin discloses 21 covers upper portion of discharge port 11 (¶ [0030]) and as depicted in Fig. 14, the 21 is long enough to reach the bottom of 11 and will cause 11 to be at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction, wherein the interruption extends over the full, maximum opening height.
PNG
media_image8.png
653
581
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Fig. 14 of Bin
A person of ordinary skill in the art, upon reviewing that 21 covers 11 (¶ [0030]) to vary shape of 11 in different directions (¶ [0017) would have recognized 21 moved to bottom of 11 and will cause 11 to be at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction, wherein the interruption extends over the full, maximum opening height, is one of a finite number of ways known to be useful for vary shape of 11 in different directions. The finite ways are the various extents of moving 21 in the range from a minimum covering of 11 where 21 is retracted to the top of 11 to 21 at a maximum covering of 11 where 21 reaches the bottom of 11. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try 21 moved to bottom of 11 and cause 11 to be at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction in Bin in the apparatus in modified Kozar because a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but or ordinary skill and common sense." See MPEP § 2143.
Kozar does not disclose the extruder apparatus has a deflecting device, wherein the deflecting device is arranged upstream of the discharge opening and is designed to deflect a flow of building material in the direction of the discharge opening.
Bin discloses the extruder apparatus has a deflecting device, wherein the deflecting device is arranged upstream of the discharge opening and is designed to deflect a flow of building material (¶ [0010] – discharge end 10 with a downward slope in the longitudinal direction through which the 3D printing nozzle advances) in the direction of the discharge opening (¶ [0010] – 10 provided with discharge port 11, laminate material discharged in an inclined state to the 3D printed strip 1 through the discharge port and is successively laminated).
PNG
media_image9.png
839
799
media_image9.png
Greyscale
FIG. 5 of Bin
Kozar and Bin disclose apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function in same field of additive manufacturing with a nozzle with an adjustable exit section. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the discharge end with the above mentioned deflecting device in Bin to apparatus in Kozar to discharged material in an inclined state through the discharge port and successively laminate the printed strip (¶ [0010]).
Kozar discloses 122 comprises screw-type linear actuators (¶ [0045]). Bin discloses a powder member such as a motor for moving 28 of 21, 22 (¶ [0031]).
Modified Kozar does not disclose wherein the at least one linear drive is at least one threaded spindle drive.
Giessauf discloses wherein the at least one linear drive is at least one threaded spindle drive (L. 55-61 – cover plates moved by means of separate spindle drives). This allows different outlet cross-sections to be achieved (L. 55-61).
Kozar and Giessauf disclose apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function in same field of a nozzle with an adjustable exit section. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the cover plates moved by separate spindle drives in Giessauf to the apparatus in Kozar to allow different outlet cross-sections to be achieved (L. 55-61).
Regarding Claim 19, modified Kozar teaches the extruder apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein the at least one cover element (Bin 21) is designed for variably settable arrangement on the discharge opening (Bin ¶ [0017] – vary shape of 11) so as to be in contact with the extruder nozzle (Bin Fig.14 where 21 is arranged on 11 and in contact with 10).
Regarding Claim 22, modified Kozar teaches the extruder apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein an extent of the extruder apparatus in a vertical direction is defined by at least one peripheral wall of the multiple peripheral walls (Kozar Fig. 6 depicts an extent of 132 of 110 in vertical direction is defined by a wall of 126) and wherein the discharge opening is peripherally partially defined by the at least one peripheral wall of the multiple peripheral walls (Fig. 6 depicts 132 is partially defined by a wall of 126)
PNG
media_image10.png
699
641
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 of Kozar
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozar (US 2019/0001544 A1), alternatively in view of Nardick (US 5950988), in view of Bin (KR 101948547) and Giessauf (AT 406660 B), as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Gardiner (US 2018/0370117 A1).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Kozar teaches the extruder apparatus as claimed in claim 17, with a cover element (Bin 21) that is variable settable (Bin ¶ [0030-0031] – moving shielding plate 28 of 21 to change area and shape to cover exhaust port).
Modified Kozar does not teach that the at least one cover element is designed to be variably settable for purposes of separating off the discharged strand of building material from the extruder apparatus at the discharge opening.
Gardiner teaches an apparatus for fabricating objects by discharging build material (¶ [0011]) wherein a nozzle (¶ [0093], Fig. 17A-17D – nozzle 140) configured to discharge the building material is covered by cover elements (¶ [0093] – orifice adjustment mechanism includes flaps 142)
Gardiner discloses the at least one cover element (142) is designed to be variably settable for purposes of separating off the discharged strand of building material from the extruder apparatus at the discharge opening (¶ [0093] – 142 pivoted toward each other to seal the orifice; thus separating off the discharged strand of building material).
Kozar and Gardiner disclose an apparatus with the same or similar components performing the same or similar function. A person of ordinary skill in the art, upon reading that flaps are pivotally movable toward each other to seal the orifice, would have recognized that narrowing the space between two flaps by variable setting the position of the cover elements is one of a finite number of ways known to be useful for separating the build material from the nozzle to stop the flow of material and thus cutting the strand to define an end point. The finite ways are various extent of pivot in the range of pivoting of the flaps from a minimum pivot where the flaps are along the housing of the nozzle, and a maximum pivot where the flaps abut each other to close off and seal the orifice. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try the flaps pivotally movable toward each other to seal the orifice for purposes of separating off the discharged strand of building material in Gardiner in the apparatus in modified Kozar because a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but or ordinary skill and common sense." See MPEP § 2143.
Double Patenting
Claim 16, 18-19 and 22 of this application is patentably indistinct from claim 16, 27, and 29 of Application No. 17440570. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant or assignee contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 23 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16, and 26-27 of copending Application No. 17440570 (‘570) in view of Bin (KR 101948547), Giessauf (AT 406660 B), and Gardiner (US 2018/0370117 A1).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. The claims filed January 21, 2025 are used in this double patenting rejection.
Regarding claim 16, claim 27, which depends on claim 16, of ‘570 recites an extruder head for extrusion of a strand of building material for 3D printing of a structural part, comprising:
an extruder nozzle, the extruder nozzle having a discharge opening configured to discharge the strand of building material out of the extruder head in a discharge direction;
at least one specification element, the at least one specification element being configured to be variably adjustable and thereby variably settably specify at least a part of a strand cross section of the strand of building material being discharged; and
at least one setting apparatus, the at least one setting apparatus being configured to variably set the at least one specification element, and the at least one setting apparatus is designed and arranged such that, in at least one second extent direction which differs from the discharge direction, extends to a side of the discharge opening, in the case of a maximum opening width, by at most the maximum opening width, wherein
the at least one setting apparatus has at least one setting motor,
the at least one setting motor is configured to variably set the at least one specification element,
the at least one setting apparatus has at least one movement deflecting mechanism, the at least one setting motor being connected in terms of movement to the at least one specification element by way of the at least one movement deflecting mechanism, and
the at least one movement deflecting mechanism is a lever mechanism, and
the at least one setting apparatus has at least one linear drive and/or at least one rotary drive, the at least one setting motor being connected in terms of movement to the at least one specification element by way of the at least one linear drive and/or by way of the at least one rotary drive, and at least one of:
(i) the extruder nozzle has multiple peripheral walls, the multiple peripheral walls peripherally defining the discharge opening, the at least one specification element has at least one of the multiple peripheral walls, the at least one peripheral wall being configured to be variably settable and thereby variably settably define an outer edge of a flow cross section of building material within the extruder nozzle and variably settably specify an outer edge of the strand cross section during the discharge of the strand of building material, and/or
(iii) the at least one specification element has at least one cover element, the at least one cover element is configured to be variably settable and thereby variably settably cover at least a part of the discharge opening and variably settably specify at least a part of the strand cross section by way of at least one uncovered part of the discharge opening during the discharge of the strand of building material.
(iii) the at least one specification element has at least one cover element, the at least one cover element is configured to be variably settable and thereby variably settably cover at least a part of the discharge opening and variably settably specify at least a part of the strand cross section by way of at least one uncovered part of the discharge opening during the discharge of the strand of building material
the at least one cover element is configured to be variable settable and thereby separate off the discharge strand of building material from the extruder head at the discharge opening.
Claim 27 of ‘507 does not recite the extruder apparatus has a deflecting device, wherein the deflecting device is arranged upstream of the discharge opening and is designed to deflect a flow of building material in the direction of the discharge opening.
Bin discloses the extruder apparatus has a deflecting device, wherein the deflecting device is arranged upstream of the discharge opening and is designed to deflect a flow of building material (¶ [0010] – discharge end 10 with a downward slope in the longitudinal direction through which the 3D printing nozzle advances) in the direction of the discharge opening (¶ [0010] – 10 provided with discharge port 11, laminate material discharged in an inclined state to the 3D printed strip 1 through the discharge port and is successively laminated).
Claim 27 of ‘507 does not recite wherein the at least one linear drive is at least one threaded spindle drive.
Giessauf discloses wherein the at least one linear drive is at least one threaded spindle drive (L. 55-61 – cover plates moved by means of separate spindle drives). This allows different outlet cross-sections to be achieved (L. 55-61).
‘540 does not recite wherein the at least one cover element is designed to cover the at least one part of the discharge opening such that the opening cross section is at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction.
Bin teaches at least one cover element (¶ [0029-0031] – shielding plate 28 of first variable section blocking member 21).
Bin does not explicitly teach:
wherein the at least one cover element is designed to cover the at least one part of the discharge opening such that the opening cross section is at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction,
wherein the interruption extends over the full, maximum opening height.
However, Bin discloses 21 covers upper portion of discharge port 11 (¶ [0030]) and as depicted in Fig. 14 (see above), the 21 is long enough to reach the bottom of 11 and will cause 11 to be at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction.
A person of ordinary skill in the art, upon reviewing that 21 covers 11 (¶ [0030]) to vary shape of 11 in different directions (¶ [0017) would have recognized 21 moved to bottom of 11 and will cause 11 to be at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction, is one of a finite number of ways known to be useful for vary shape of 11 in different directions. The finite ways are the various extents of moving 21 in the range from a minimum covering of 11 where 21 is retracted to the top of 11 to 21 at a maximum covering of 11 where 21 reaches the bottom of 11. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try 21 moved to bottom of 11 and cause 11 to be at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction in Bin to the covering elements in ‘540 because a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but or ordinary skill and common sense." See MPEP § 2143.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 15, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Bin does not meet the claimed “cover element” as they do not “’cover surfaces’ oriented orthogonally to the discharge direction” and instead “alter the shape of the strip being extruded”.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
The claim 1 recites in line 5-6 that “the at least one cover element is designed to cover at least a part of the discharge opening” and in line 27-28 “the at least one cover element has at least one cover surface for partially covering the discharge opening”. As Bin discloses shielding plate 28 of first variable section blocking member 21 covers upper portion of discharge port 11 (¶ [0029-0031]) to vary shape of 11 (¶ [0017]) and depicts the shielding plates to move orthogonal to a discharge direction, it meets the limitations of the claim (i.e., cover a part and partial covering of the discharge opening).
PNG
media_image11.png
760
691
media_image11.png
Greyscale
FIG. 14 of Bin
Applicant argues Bin does not teach “a division of the opening cross-section with horizontal interruption”, does not teach or suggest “the at least one cover element is designed to cover the at least one part of the discharge opening such that the opening cross section is at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction”, teaches the blocking members of Bin are solely to create concave/convex shaping of the strand for mechanical interlocking, does not teach divide or orthogonally cover the discharge opening and remains a single continuous port, and does not teach “interruption over the full, maximum opening height” and the suggestion is hypothetical and unsupported.
Bin discloses 21 covers upper portion of discharge port 11 (¶ [0030]) and as depicted in Fig. 14, the 21 is long enough to reach the bottom of 11 and will cause 11 to be at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction, wherein the interruption extends over the full, maximum opening height.
PNG
media_image8.png
653
581
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Fig. 14 of Bin
Although Bin does not explicitly disclose “the opening cross section is at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction”, a person of ordinary skill in the art, upon reviewing that 21 covers 11 (¶ [0030]) to vary shape of 11 in different directions (¶ [0017) would have recognized 21 moved to bottom of 11 and will cause 11 to be at least divided into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction, wherein the interruption extends over the full, maximum opening height, is one of a finite number of ways known to be useful for vary shape of 11 in different directions. Therefore, Bin suggests “divided the opening cross section into two parts with an interruption in a horizontal direction”. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but or ordinary skill and common sense." See MPEP § 2143.
In response to applicant's argument that Bin does not teach or suggest diving the discharge port into two, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
Applicant argues the cited prior art does not teach “deflecting device”
See the updated 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections above, necessitated by amendment.
Applicant argues the cited prior art does not teach “the setting apparatus configured to move the at least one cover element in/counter to a second peripheral direction has at least one setting motor”.
See the updated 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections above, where the limitation is addressed and meet in the disclosure of Bin, and necessitated by amendment. Furthermore, see updated claim interpretation.
Applicant argues the cited prior art does not teach “a rotary drive or at least one linear drive, wherein the at least one setting motor is connected in terms of movement to the at least one cover element via the rotary drive or the at least one linear drive”.
See updated claim interpretation, necessitated by amendment, where “at least one setting apparatus” is interpreted as multiple, separate “setting apparatuses”, one for moving the peripheral walls and one for moving the covering element.
See the updated 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections above, where the limitation is addressed and meet in the disclosure of Bin, and necessitated by amendment.
Applicant argues Kozar does not teach “a covering element”.
Bin is used in obviousness for meeting the limitation, not Kozar.
Applicant argues Kozar does not disclose “lever mechanism”
See the updated 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections above, necessitated by amendment.
Kozar discloses the at least one movement deflecting mechanism is a lever mechanism (¶ [0043-0044] – plurality of cables 128; ¶ [0046] – in an example, each 128 can be a straight non-flexible rod).
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 JONATHAN B WOO whose telephone number is (571)272-5191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
/JONATHAN B WOO/Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754