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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/7/25 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Ederer et al (USP 2017/0355137) in view of WO2019/113412.
Regarding claim 1, Ederer et al teach:
Claim 1 A method for producing 3D molded parts comprising the steps of,
applying one or more particulate construction materials (Ederer et al: para. 0026; fig 1) in a defined layer onto a construction field by means of a recoater (Ederer et al: recoater 101; fig 1),
selectively applying one or more absorbers or one or more liquids comprising one or more as printed image dots by means of a print head (Ederer et al: paras. 0045 and 0192-0193; fig 1),
inputting energy by means of an energy source (Ederer et al: para. 0031; fig 1) for selectively solidifying the areas with selectively applied absorber (Ederer et al: para. 0045; fig 1), and
lowering the construction field by one layer thickness or raising the the recoater by one layer thickness (Ederer et al: para. 0045; fig 1),
wherein these steps are repeated until the desired 3D molded part is produced,
characterized in that an amount of the one or more absorbers within a layer per printed image dot is set to a predetermined value and wherein different predetermined values are set in two or more of the image dots within a layer (Ederer et al: para. 0045; fig 1).
However, Ederer et al inherently teaches a thickness, a dot volume, and absorber/binder mass within the dot, but does not explicitly teach the claimed layer thickness is set to 10 to 300 micrometers; a printed image dot is set to the claimed volume of between 1.5 and 100 picoliters; and the claimed mass of the one or more absorbers in the printed image dot is between 1 ng and 2 g. WO2019/113412 teach a binder jetting 3D printing process, wherein the thickness of the material is set to 10 to 300micrometers (para. 0033); the droplet volume is set to between 30pL to 80pL (para. 0032; this teaching constitutes the claimed second printed dot having a volume greater than 70pL); and the absorber/binder in the droplet inherently has a mass. Since Ederer et al and WO2019/113412 are analogous with respect to binder jet printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the thickness, the droplet volume, and the mass of the absorber/binder in the droplet of Ederer et al to the values taught by WO2019/113412 in order to ensure the printing of a high quality article. Though Ederer et al (modified) does not explicitly teach the claimed mass, the claimed mass is well-known in the binder jet printing art for its effectiveness and efficiency. Further, it should be noted that binder jet printing parameters such as layer thickness, droplet volume, and binder mass within a droplet are well-known in the binder jet printing art as important molding parameters and the desired values would have been obviously and readily determined through routine experimentation by one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention.
Regarding claim 2, such is taught by the above combination of Ederer et al and WO2019113412 since WO2019113412 teaches binder droplets having a volume of about 30pL (para. 0032).
Regarding claim 3, such is taught by Ederer et al (Ederer et al: paras. 0045,0063,0087,0096; fig 1).
Claim 4 (Original) The method according to claim 3, wherein each printed image dot is set to a predetermined gray level, preferably the gray levels can be set continuously, preferably wherein each printed image dot is set to a black range between 1% and 100%, or/and wherein the printed image dots in an area element or/and volume element are related to the printed 3D molded part and have a proportion of 10% to 95% (Ederer et al: claim 6; fig 1).
Regarding claim 5, such is taught by Ederer et al (Ederer et al: para. 0199; fig 1) .
Regarding claim 6, such is taught by Ederer et al (Ederer et al: paras. 0043; fig 1).
Regarding claim 7, such is taught by Ederer et al (Ederer et al: claim 16).
Regarding claim 8, such is taught by Ederer et al (Ederer et al: emitter; para. 0073; fig 1).
Regarding claim 9, Ederer et al teach the claimed thickness (Ederer et al: para. 0064; fig 1), but does not teach the diameter of the dot. Since the claimed dot diameter is well-known in 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the dots of Ederer et al to have the claimed diameter in order to print precise products.
Regarding claim 10, Ederer et al do not teach claimed volume or concentration or time interval. Since the claimed volume, concentration, and time interval are well-known parameters in 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the claimed volume, concentration, or time interval of Ederer et al within the claimed ranges in order to print precise high-quality products.
Regarding claim 11, such is taught by Ederer et al since Ederer et al teach applying the absorbers in different amounts (Ederer et al: para. 0045; fig 1).
Regarding claims 12-13, Ederer et al do not teach claimed area element, volume element, or amount of imprinted absorber. Since the claimed area element, volume element, or amount of imprinted absorber are well-known parameters in 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the claimed area element, volume element, or amount of imprinted absorber of Ederer et al within the claimed ranges in order to print precise high-quality products.
Regarding claim 14, such is taught by Ederer et al (Ederer et al: para. 0195; fig 1).
Regarding claim 15, such is taught by Ederer et al (Ederer et al: para. 0195; fig 1).
Regarding claim 16, Ederer et al do not teach anti-aliasing and post-processing. Since anti-aliasing and post-processing are well-known in 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate anti-aliasing and post-processing steps in the process of Ederer et al in order to print precise high-quality products.
Regarding claim 17, such is taught by Ederer et al (Ederer et al: volume is set to a predetermined changeable value; para. 0098; fig 1).
Regarding claim 18, Ederer et al teach the claimed particulate material (para. 0074); the one or more carbon particle absorbers (para. 0073); an IR emitter (para. 0051); and the claimed thickness (para. 0064). However, Ederer et al do not teach the claimed dot diameter. Since the claimed dot diameter is well-known in 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the dots of Ederer et al to have the claimed diameter in order to print precise products.
Regarding claim 19, Ederer et al do not teach claimed volume or concentration or time interval. Since the claimed volume, concentration, and time interval are well-known parameters in 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the claimed volume, concentration, or time interval of Ederer et al within the claimed ranges in order to print precise high-quality products. It should be noted that WO2019/113412 teach a binder jetting 3D printing process wherein the droplet volume is set to between 30pL to 80pL (para. 0032; this teaching constitutes the claimed second printed dot having a volume greater than 70pL).
Regarding claim 20, Ederer et al teach printing with different amounts of the absorbers (para. 0045); setting the grey scale to be continuous, wherein each printed dot is set to a black range between 1% and 100% (para. 0195); and printed dot volume of 10% to 95% (para. 0195). However, Ederer et al do not teach the amount of imprinted absorbers per area and per volume. Since the claimed area element and volume element are well-known parameters in gray scale 3D printing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the claimed area element and volume element of Ederer et al within the claimed ranges in order to print precise high-quality products.
Regarding claim 21, Ederer et al do not teach selectively applying both gray scale printing and dithering. Since both grey scale printing and dithering are well-known printing techniques to create the illusion of colors and tones, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use both grey scale printing and dithering in the printing process of Ederer et al to create diverse products having diverse aesthetic appeal.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references teach 3D printing using absorbers having different values within a layer: USP 20180326662, USP 20180065297, and GB2567877. JP3601364 teaching gray scale printing, wherein a first section of drops having drops of approximately 58pL and a second section of drops having drops of approximately 27pL (para. 0025). Stava (USP 2015/0321425) teaches 3D printed products having gradient colors (para. 0049).
Applicant's arguments filed 5/7/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to applicant’s arguments concerning claims 2,19, and 20, Applicant argues Ederer et al do not teach the claimed volumes of the dots. However, this argument is misplaced since the claimed volumes are taught by the combination of Ederer et al and WO2019113412, wherein WO2019113412 teaches binder droplets having a volume of about 30pL to about 80pL. Furthermore, differing dot volumes to form a gray scale are well-known in the grey scale art as evidenced by cited references JP3601364 that teaches a gray scale having a first section of drops having drops of approximately 58pL and a second section of drops having drops of approximately 27pL (para. 0025). Applicant is reminded that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See 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).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDMUND H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1204. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-4PM.
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, Xiao (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.
EHL
/EDMUND H LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights