CTNF 17/599,671 CTNF 91873 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 07-42-04 AIA A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/23/2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 2/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Liu does not teach the claim step (b) and that “the Office provides no evidence that the nozzle temperature and the temperature of the composition at the point of printing are the same” but this is moot. The rejection below no longer relies on this assumption. The rejection clarifies that the nozzle temperature is one factor in the composition temperature. As described in Applicant’s disclosure, pg. 26-27, Tables 1-3, a nozzle temperature of 235-265 °C and build plate of 75-120 °C achieve the internal temperature desired. Applicant’s disclosure further states “it is believed that if a higher internal temperature could be reached via a hotter build plate or heated chamber” a low haze could be achieved, see pg. 27, lines 21-22. Given the above temperature values, the claimed step (b) is achieved in a process of Liu as modified by Hikmet. Applicant argues that Hikmet “paragraph [0067] described the temperature of the annealing environment, not the internal temperature of the composition” but this is not found persuasive. Hikmet clearly teaches in paragraph [0013] that any such heating method may occur during printing which renders the temperature in paragraphs [0054] and [0067] applicable to printing steps, excerpt below: [0013] Heating can be done in different ways. In embodiments, heating comprises one or more of providing a hot gas to the 3D printed material, providing IR radiation to the 3D printed material, and heating the 3D printed material in a heating chamber. The heating can be executed after the 3D item has been provided, or after part thereof has been 3D printed. Hence, the finishing stage comprising heating may take place during printing or after printing or both. Heating may be done locally, e.g. local radiation, of a just printed part, or heating may be executed to the entire 3D printed item. Combinations of heating methods may also be applied. Hence, the printing stage and finishing stage may in time be combined or may be executed one after the other . Regarding claim 19, Liu teaches the temperature of the nozzle was set between 230-250 C, pg. 15, line 14. Examiner notes that as described in Applicant’s disclosure, pg. 26-27, Tables 1-3, a nozzle temperature of 235-265 °C and build plate of 75-120 °C achieve the internal temperature desired. Therefore, the internal temperature different from the nozzle temperature, is presumed inherent, see MPEP 2112. Regarding claims 14 and 18, Applicant argues that Liu does not teach a layer thickness greater than 0.2 mm or 0.3 mm. This argument is moot because the limitation is met by Hikmet teaching samples had a layer thicknesses (h1+d23) of 200, 400, 600, and 800 μm, Fig. 3A, [0067] . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-13 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (WO 2017/210286 A1) in view of Hikmet (US 2020/0009786 A1), as evidence by Pollen "PMMA - Poly(methyl methacrylate)" https://www.pollen.am/standard_thermoplastics_pmma/ . Regarding claim 1, Liu meets the claimed material extrusion additive manufacturing process, comprising the steps of: a) selecting an amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition, said composition as a whole having a single Tg, (Acrylic copolymers are preferred, and copolymers with a Tg of less than 100°C, pg. 6, lines 3-5. Examiner notes that Liu does not state if the polymers are crystalline or amorphous but the claimed “amorphous” is presumed inherent. This is because Liu teaches acrylic polymer is a copolymer having 70 - 99.5 weight percent of methyl methacrylate units and from 0.5 to 30 weight percent of one or more C1-8 straight or branched alkyl acrylate units, pg. 5, lines 6-10. This material is amorphous by definition per https://www.pollen.am/standard_thermoplastics_pmma/) c) melt extrusion printing said amorphous thermoplastic polymer to form an article, wherein the article has an internal haze of less than 25%, (Liu teaches it is desirable to achieve a haze of less than 10%, preferably less than 4%, pg. 12, lines 1-5) Liu does not explicitly teach b) selecting conditions sufficient to provide an internal temperature of the composition at the point of printing, wherein the Tg of the composition as a whole is at least 25°C greater than the Tg of the composition, wherein the internal temperature of a given printed dot or is at least 25°C greater than the Tg of the composition for at least 5 minutes, following printing. Liu teaches the temperature of the nozzle was set between 230-250 C, pg. 15, line 14. Liu teaches acrylic copolymers are preferred, and copolymers with a Tg of less than 100°C, pg. 6, lines 3-5. Liu teaches it is desirable to achieve a haze of less than 10%, preferably less than 4%, pg. 12, lines 1-5. Liu teaches that haze results show that increasing nozzle temp and decreasing viscosity lead to lower haze, pg. 17, line 8. Liu teaches a build plate heated to 75°C, pg. 15, line 15. Therefore, the nozzle temperature is taught by Liu to be a result-effective variable, the build plate to be heated, and the haze to be optimized. Hikmet teaches providing IR radiation to the 3D printed material, and heating the 3D printed material in a heating chamber. The heating can be executed after the 3D item has been provided and heating may take place during printing [0013]. Hikmet teaches the control system C may include a heater which is able to heat the receiver item 550 to at least 200° C, [0054], such as maintaining a temperature of 130°C for 2 hours [0067]. Examiner notes that as described in Applicant’s disclosure, pg. 26-27, Tables 1-3, a nozzle temperature of 235-265 °C and build plate of 75-120 °C achieve the internal temperature desired, depending on layer thickness. Applicant further discloses a heated chamber may produce the desired result, pg. 27, lines 20-22. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the heating system of Hikmet with the build plate and nozzle temperature of Liu to achieve 25°C greater than the Tg of the composition for at least 5 minutes as claimed because maintaining high temperatures improves the quality of the 3D printed product and achieves a relative smooth surface, see Hikmet [0070]. Regarding claim 2, Liu as modified meets the claimed wherein said selection of conditions to provide the desired internal temperature, involves one or more of the following: a) selection of a build plate temperature above the amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition Tg, b) selection of a heated chamber temperature of at least 30°C, c) use of an radiant heating, conductive heating, or forced convective heating source to supplement the heat at the point of printing; (Hikmet teaches heating comprises one or more of providing a hot gas to the 3D printed material, providing IR radiation to the 3D printed material, and heating the 3D printed material in a heating chamber, [0013]) d) little or no fan or active cooling; e) use of selected additives in the composition to lower the Tg of the composition, (intermediate layer or layers are elastomeric, having a Tg of less than 0°C, and preferably less than -20°C, pg. 7, lines 15-20) or to help maintain the temperature of the composition for an increased period of time; f) use of a pre-heated airflow that interacts with the part being printed to reduce cooling or cooling rate and even actively heat the printed article. Regarding claim 3, Liu as modified does not meet the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein said heated chamber temperature, radiant heating and/or heating fan speed is varied over time. Hikmet meets the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein said heated chamber temperature, radiant heating and/or heating fan speed is varied over time. (Hikmet teaches printing stage and finishing stage may in time be combined or may be executed one after the other. [0013], and maintaining a temperature of 130C for 2 hours [0067]. Examiner notes that ending the heat after 2 hours meets the claimed varied over time, as well as the printing stage being different than the finishing stage meets the claim). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the heating chamber varied time of Hikmet with the 3D printing process of Liu because it improves the quality of the 3D printed product and achieves a relative smooth surface, see Hikmet [0070]. Regarding claim 4, Liu as modified by Hikmet meets the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition comprises a polymer selected from the group consisting of a (meth)acrylic polymer, co-polyester, (polyester, pg. 6, line 9) and polycarbonate, amorphous polyamides. Regarding claim 5, Hikmet as modified meets the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition has a Tg of less than 160 °C. (Liu does not give a combined Tg but each material is below 100C, Acrylic copolymers are preferred, and copolymers with a Tg of less than 100°C, pg. 6, lines 3-5, intermediate layer or layers are elastomeric, having a Tg of less than 0°C, and preferably less than -20°C, pg. 7, lines 15-20). Regarding claim 6, Liu as modified meets the claimed wherein said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition is selected from the group consisting of: a) a copolymer having Tg of less than 160 °C. ( Acrylic copolymers are preferred, and copolymers with a Tg of less than 100°C, pg. 6, lines 3-5) b) a blend of a polymer having a Tg of greater than 160°C and a low viscosity polymer, c) a blend of a polymer having a Tg of greater than 160°C, and an additive capable of lowering the Tg, or increasing the open time of the polymer composition. Regarding claim 7, Liu as modified meets the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein said composition has a viscosity at a shear of 1 sec -1 of less than 100,000 Pa-sec, as measured by a rotational viscometer according to ASTM C965. (preferably of less than 10,000 Pa-s, pg. 11, lines 13-15). Regarding claim 8, Liu as modified does not teach wherein said composition has a transparency processing range of greater than 40°C, as defined by the difference in temperature of the L-S transition and the first cross-over temperature, as measured by rheology. Liu teaches acrylic copolymers are preferred, and copolymers with a Tg of less than 100°C, pg. 6, lines 3-5. Liu teaches the temperature of the nozzle was set between 230-250 C, pg. 15, line 14. Liu teaches it is desirable to achieve a haze of less than 10%, preferably less than 4%, pg. 12, lines 1-5. Liu teaches increasing nozzle temp and decreasing viscosity led to lower haze, pg. 17, lines 8-10. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to vary the nozzle temperature and viscosity of Liu to achieve the claimed transparency processing range because lower haze is desired in the article made, see Liu, pg. 12. Regarding claim 9, Liu meets the claimed wherein said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition further comprises impact modifiers at a level of 5 to 60 weight percent, based on the weight of the total composition. (Liu teaches impact modifies 20 to 45 weight percent, pg. 7, lines 1-5). Regarding claim 10, Liu modified meets the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition temperature is provided and/or maintained by one or more means selected from the group consisting of: a) low or no fan or active cooling, b) a heated build plate, (build plate heated to 75°C, pg. 15, line 15) c) a heated chamber, and d) a radiant heat source. Regarding claim 11, Liu as modified does not explicitly teach the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein said 3D printed article contains said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition with a density of at least 95%, of the bulk density of the polymer as measured by ASTM D792. Liu teaches if fillers are added, they represent most preferably from 0.05 to 25 volume percent of the total volume of the acrylic alloy composition, see pg. 9, lines 23-29. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to vary percentage amorphous polymer to achieve 95% bulk density and filler 5% or less as claimed in order to optimize low shear viscosity range to optimize the optical clarity, tensile elongation at break, warpage, and yield stress, see pg. 12, lines 1-14. Regarding claim 12, Liu as modified meets the claimed , wherein said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition comprises an acrylic polymer. (Acrylic copolymers are preferred, and copolymers with a Tg of less than 100°C, pg. 6, lines 3-5) Regarding claim 13, Liu as modified meets the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition is printed at a layer height of >0.05 mm. (0.2mm / layer thickness, pg. 15, lines 13). Regarding claim 19, Liu as modified meets the claimed additive manufacturing process of claim 1, wherein a nozzle temperature is not the same as the internal temperature of the given printed dot or line of the composition. (Liu teaches the temperature of the nozzle was set between 230-250 C, pg. 15, line 14. Examiner notes that as described in Applicant’s disclosure, pg. 26-27, Tables 1-3, a nozzle temperature of 235-265 °C and build plate of 75-120 °C achieve the internal temperature desired. Therefore, the internal temperature different from the nozzle temperature, is presumed inherent, see MPEP 2112) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (WO 2017/210286 A1) in view of Hikmet (US 2020/0009786 A1) . Regarding claim 14, Liu meets the claimed internally clear 3-D printed article, wherein said article comprises an amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition (thermoplastic composition, pg. 10, lines 10-15) Liu does not teach having a printing layer thickness of greater 0.2 mm, Hikmet teaches samples had a layer thicknesses (h1+d23) of 200, 400, 600, and 800 μm, Fig. 3A, [0067]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary layer thickness of Liu to be 400 μm (0.4 mm) or greater as taught by Hikmet because thickness can affect adhesion between filaments [0028]. Liu does not explicitly teach wherein the internal haze is less than 25%. Liu teaches it is desirable to achieve a haze of less than 10%, preferably less than 4%, pg. 12, lines 1-5. Liu teaches increasing nozzle temp and decreasing viscosity led to lower haze, pg. 17, lines 8-10. Hikmet teaches providing IR radiation to the 3D printed material, and heating the 3D printed material in a heating chamber. The heating can be executed after the 3D item has been provided and heating may take place during printing [0013]. Hikmet teaches the control system C may include a heater which is able to heat the receiver item 550 to at least 200° C, [0054], such as maintaining a temperature of 130°C for 2 hours [0067]. Examiner notes that as described in Applicant’s disclosure, pg. 26-27, Tables 1-3, a nozzle temperature of 235-265 °C and build plate of 75-120 °C achieve the internal temperature and haze desired, depending on layer thickness. Applicant further discloses a heated chamber may produce the desired result, pg. 27, lines 20-22. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the heating system of Hikmet with the build plate and nozzle temperature of Liu to achieve internal haze less than 25% as claimed because maintaining high temperatures improves the quality of the 3D printed product and achieves a relative smooth surface, see Hikmet [0070], and because lower haze is desired in the article made, see Liu, pg. 12. Regarding claim 15, Liu as modified meets the claimed 3D printed article of claim 14, wherein said amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition comprises an acrylic composition, (acrylic composition, pg. 12, lines 22-25) a co-polyester, a polycarbonate, or an amorphous polyamide. Regarding claim 16, Liu as modified meets the claimed internally clear 3D printed article of claim 14, wherein said article is clear, wherein a 3-D printed part of 2 mm thickness, (0.2mm / layer thickness, pg. 15, lines 12-15) Liu does not explicitly teach has a total white light transmittance of greater than 80% as measured according to ASTM D1003. Liu teaches it is desirable to achieve a transmittance of greater than 80%, pg. 12, lines 1-15, of haze of less than 10%, preferably less than 4%, pg. 12, lines 1-5. Liu teaches increasing nozzle temp and decreasing viscosity led to lower haze and higher transmittance, pg. 17, lines 8-10. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to vary the nozzle temperature and viscosity of Liu to achieve the claimed transmittance greater than 80% because lower haze and higher transmittance is desired in the article made, see Liu, pg. 12. Regarding claim 17, Liu as modified meets the claimed internally clear 3D printed article of claim 14, wherein said article is selected from the group consisting of automotive articles, building and construction articles, (Liu teaches the product to have “weather resistance”, pg. 2, lines 1-5. Therefore, it can be interpreted to be a construction article such as a brick) capstock articles, aeronautic articles, aerospace articles, photovoltaic articles, medical articles, computer-related articles, telecommunication articles, wind energy articles, exterior paneling, automotive body panels, auto body trim, recreational vehicle body panels or trims, exterior panels for recreational sporting equipment, marine equipment, exterior panels for outdoor lawn, garden and agricultural equipment, exterior paneling for marine use, aerospace structures, aircraft, public transportation applications, interior paneling applications, interior automotive trims, components for head lights, tail lights on vehicles, lenses, prototyping, display panels, interior panels for marine equipment, interior panels for aerospace and aircraft, interior panels for public transportation applications, and paneling for appliances, furniture, and cabinets, recreational vehicle, sporting equipment, marine, aerospace, decking, railing, siding, window and door profiles, dishwasher and dryers, refrigerator and freezers, appliance housing or doors, bathtubs, shower stalls, spas, counters, and storage facilities, decorative exterior trim, molding side trim, quarter panel trim panels, fender and fender extensions, louvers, rear end panels, caps for pickup truck back, rearview mirror housings, accessories for trucks, buses, campers, vans, and mass transit vehicles, b pillar extensions, and the like; appliances and tools such as lawn and garden implements, bathroom fixtures for mobile homes, fencing, components of pleasure boats, exterior components of mobile homes, lawn furniture, lawn chairs, table frames, pipe and pipe end caps, luggage, shower stalls, toilet seats, signs, spas, air conditioner and heat pump components, kitchen housewares, bead molded picnic coolers, picnic trays and jugs, and trash cans, venetian blind components, sporting goods, sailboards, sailboats, plumbing parts, lavatory parts, construction components, architectural moldings, door molding, louvers, shutters, mobile home skirting, residential or commercial doors, siding accessories, window cladding, storm window frames, skylight frames, end caps for gutters, awnings, medical devices, car port roofs, lamp, lighting equipment, sensor, consumer items, silverware, trim for cars, prototypes, figurines, dentures, hardware, cabinet, ball-joint, hosing, glasses, cage, UV protector screen, window, signage, toys, medical equipment, implants, equipment components, lighting appliques, luminares, window coverings, surface modification, visualization aids, medical imaging models, architectural models, topographic data models, mathematical analysis models, education aids, props, costumes, park benches, robotics components, electrical enclosures, 3D printer components, jigs, fixtures, manufacturing aids, molds, sculptures, statues, board games, miniatures, dioramas, trophies, drones, medical devices in Class I, Class II, and Class III according to FDA Code of Federal regulations Title 21, light guides, internal lighting, integrated optical components, display components, instrumentation, see through components, solar cells, fixtures and rigging for solar power generating systems, artificial nails, dosimeters, jewelry, footwear, fabric, firearm components, cell phone cases, packaging. Regarding claim 18, Liu does not meet the claimed internally clear 3D printed article of claim 14, wherein the amorphous thermoplastic polymer composition has a printing layer thickness of greater than or equal to 0.3 mm. Hikmet teaches samples had a layer thicknesses (h1+d23) of 200, 400, 600, and 800 μm, Fig. 3A, [0067]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to vary layer thickness of Liu to be 400 μm (0.4 mm) or greater as taught by Hikmet because thickness can affect adhesion between filaments [0028]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL M. ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0467. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM. 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, Sam Zhao can be reached on (571)270-5343. 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. /MICHAEL M. ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 2 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 3 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 4 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 5 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 6 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 7 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 8 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 9 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 10 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 11 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 12 Art Unit: 1744 Application/Control Number: 17/599,671 Page 13 Art Unit: 1744
Prosecution Insights