DETAILED ACTION
In Reply filed on 12/16/2025, claims 1-9 and 16-22 are pending. Claim 1 is currently amended. Claims 10-15 are canceled, and no claim is newly added. Claims 16-22 are withdrawn. Claims 1-9 are considered in this office 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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations “said droplet dispenser controls a release of the hydrogel material forming a first droplet to cover only a first subportion of the target surface” (lines 9-10), “the droplet dispenser being controlled to deposit a release of an additional amount of the hydrogel material in the form of a second droplet on a second subportion of the target surface different from the first subportion” (lines 19-21), and “form a second layer of the 3D image onto the second subportion to form the second layer of the product on the target surface independent of the first layer” (lines 24-25). Instant Specification does not support the recited limitations. Instant Specification discloses that “the droplet 20 that has been deposited on substrate 18 has spread to encompasses the entire surface of the substrate 18” ([0068], figs. 1A-D, as published), “After the first layer 28 has solidified, a second droplet 30 is delivered onto the substrate 18 and first layer 28 using the droplet dispenser 22 …… A portion of the droplet 30 is positioned over the first layer 28 and a portion of the droplet 30 is adjacent the first layer 28” ([0071]; Figs. 1E-F, as published), “the extent that the droplet 304 spreads on the portion of the substrate 302 also depends upon the volume and viscosity of the hydrogel material” ([0081]; fig. 3A, as published), and “the extent that the droplet 306 spreads on the portion of the substrate 302 also depends upon the volume and viscosity of the hydrogel material” ([0082]; fig. 3B, as published). Here, the droplet dispenser does not control nor is controlled to form a droplet to cover only a subportion of the target surface. Rather, the dispensed the first/second droplets respectively covers the entire the target surface ([0068], figs. 1C, 1E), and delivery of UV energy form the first/second layers. Also, Instant Specification discloses that a level of spread of the dispensed droplet depends on the volume and viscosity of the hydrogel material. Although the volume of droplets can be controlled by the droplet dispenser, the disclosure does not necessarily support the recited limitations, in particular, the underlined portions – i.e., “to cover only a first subportion,” “a second droplet on a second portion … different from the first subportion,” and “to form the second layer … independent of the first layer.” Thus, Instant Specification does not support the recited limitations.
Claims 2-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as being dependent from claim 1.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gillette (US 5573721) in view of Yost (US 20150375453 A).
Examiner wishes to point out to applicant that claims 1-9 are directed towards an apparatus and as such will be examined under such conditions.
The limitations which are directed to articles or products worked upon by the claimed apparatus are only given patentable weight to the extent which effects the structure of the claimed invention. Please see MPEP 2115 and In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) for further details.
The limitations which are directed to intended uses or capabilities of the claimed apparatus are only given patentable weight to the extent which effects the structure of the claimed invention. Please see MPEP 2114, Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) and Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) for further details.
Regarding claim 1, Gillette teaches an additive manufacturing apparatus for building a product (abstract, figs. 1, 9: system 20), comprising:
at least one three dimensional image of the product (figs. 1, 9 and claim 1: coordinate information defining a 3D objects of required configuration);
a target surface (figs. 1, 9 and col. 7 line 65 – col. 8 line 8: upper surface 52 which is selectively movable from the surface 28 to a base 54);
a UV curable hydrogel material (figs. 1, 9 and col. 13 lines 1-42: reactive liquid media discharged from extrusion die 118; col. 8 lines 12-35: curable by desired wavelength region of interest, including ultraviolet radiation; of note, although Gillette is silent that the UV curable material is hydrogel, the limitation “a UV curable hydrogel material” is considered as articles worked upon by the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2115);
at least one functional constituent (figs. 1, 9 and col. 13 lines 1-42: reactive liquid media discharged from extrusion die 118; of note, the limitation “at least one functional constituent” is considered as articles worked upon by the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2115);
a droplet dispenser [controllable for depositing droplets each being less than 200 µl containing] said hydrogel material and said functional constituent on said target surface, such that said droplet dispenser controls a release of the hydrogel material forming a first droplet to cover only a first subportion of the target surface (figs. 1, 9, 26 and col. 13 lines 1-56: the use of the extrusion die 118 offers the potential of delivering reactive liquid media whose flow characteristics would not permit coating within reasonable times if other methods were used, and the die 138 is translated across the surface of the reactive liquid medium; col. 19 line 45 – col. 20 line 7: an extrusion coating die 268 is employed as a dispenser to directly deposit the thin layer 202 of the reactive liquid medium overlying the upper surface 208 of the most recently solidified layer of the object 204; of note, (1) the limitation “said hydrogel material” is considered as articles worked upon by the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2115, (2) when the die dispenser deposits reactive liquid media over the surface while translating across thereon, any subportions of the target surface can be arbitrarily and respectively selected as a first subportion and a second subportion which is different from the first subportion, and each subportions can be selectively deposited with the reactive liquid media and then selectively irradiated to form a first layer and a second layer as recited, and (3) the limitation “said droplet dispenser controls a release of the hydrogel material forming a first droplet to cover only a first subportion of the target surface” is directed to intended uses or capabilities of the claimed apparatus (i.e., a droplet dispenser) and does not require any further structure of the claimed invention, see MPEP 2114);
a reservoir (figs. 1, 9 and col. 7 line 31-64: reservoir 22);
a carrier fluid in said reservoir (figs. 1, 9 and col. 7 line 31-64: liquid medium 24); and
an energy source including a digital light processor (DLP) configured to modulate UV light onto the first subportion of the target surface, and adapted to deliver UV energy forming a first image representing at least one layer of said at least one three dimensional image of the product onto said droplets of said hydrogel material and said functional constituent on said first subportion of the target surface in said reservoir for building the product to form a first layer of the product (fig. 1 and col. 8 lines 9 – col. 9 line 31: source of synergistic stimulation 26 (e.g., a tungsten halogen bulb) with a programmable mask 34 capable of modulating the projected intensity of individual picture elements, or pixels, in real time (e.g., LCD, micro-mirror arrays) and control signals serving to modulate the image via means of computer, and image translation can be performed by various known ways such as physical translation of the programmable mask/optics across the surface and translation of the projected image by optical means; fig. 10 and col. 12 lines 63-67: imaging mechanism including a panel 114 comprising a plurality of light emitting diodes 116 providing a plurality of individual pixels; of note, (1) the energy source is capable of delivering UV energy, see MPEP 2114; (2) the energy source with programmable mask capable of modulating the projected intensity of individual picture elements, or pixels, in real time, such as LCD or micro mirrors or with a plurality of light emitting diodes satisfies the broadest reasonable interpretation of “an energy source including a digital light processor”; (3) when the image translation can be performed by various ways, any subportions of the target surface, which are arbitrarily and respectively selected as a first subportion and a second subportion which is different from the first subportion, can be selectively and respectively irradiated with a target irradiation image to form a first layer and a second layer as recited, and (4) the limitation “adapted to deliver UV energy forming a first image representing at least one layer of said at least one three dimensional image of the product onto said droplets of said hydrogel material and said functional constituent on said first subportion of the target surface in said reservoir for building the product to form a first layer of the product” is directed to intended uses or capabilities of the claimed apparatus (i.e., an energy source including a DLP) and does not require any further structure of the claimed invention, see MPEP 2114);
the droplet dispenser being controlled to deposit a release of an additional amount of the hydrogel material in the form of a second droplet on a second subportion of the target surface different from the first subportion (figs. 1, 9, 26 and col. 13 lines 1-56: the use of the extrusion die 118 offers the potential of delivering reactive liquid media whose flow characteristics would not permit coating within reasonable times if other methods were used, and the die 138 is translated across the surface of the reactive liquid medium; col. 19 line 45 – col. 20 line 7: an extrusion coating die 268 is employed as a dispenser to directly deposit the thin layer 202 of the reactive liquid medium overlying the upper surface 208 of the most recently solidified layer of the object 204; of note, (1) the limitation “said hydrogel material” is considered as articles worked upon by the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2115, (2) when the die dispenser deposits reactive liquid media over the surface while translating across thereon, any subportions of the target surface can be arbitrarily and respectively selected as a first subportion and a second subportion which is different from the first subportion, and each subportions can be selectively deposited with the reactive liquid media and then selectively irradiated to form a first layer and a second layer as recited, and (3) the limitation “deposit a release of an additional amount of the hydrogel material in the form of a second droplet on a second subportion of the target surface different from the first subportion” is directed to intended uses or capabilities of the claimed apparatus (i.e., a droplet dispenser) and does not require any further structure of the claimed invention, see MPEP 2114), and
the energy source being controlled to modulate the UV light onto the second subportion to project additional UV energy forming a second image to form a second layer of the 3D image onto the second subportion to form the second layer of the product on the target surface independent of the first layer (fig. 1 and col. 8 lines 9 – col. 9 line 31: source of synergistic stimulation 26 (e.g., a tungsten halogen bulb) with a programmable mask 34 capable of modulating the projected intensity of individual picture elements, or pixels, in real time (e.g., LCD, micro-mirror arrays) and control signals serving to modulate the image via means of computer, and image translation can be performed by various known ways such as physical translation of the programmable mask/optics across the surface and translation of the projected image by optical means ; of note, (1) the energy source is capable of delivering UV energy, see MPEP 2114; (2) when the image translation can be performed by various ways, any subportions of the target surface, which are arbitrarily and respectively selected as a first subportion and a second subportion which is different from the first subportion, can be selectively and respectively irradiated with a target irradiation image to form a first layer and a second layer as recited, and (3) the limitation “being controlled to modulate the UV light onto the second subportion to project additional UV energy forming a second image to form a second layer of the 3D image onto the second subportion to form the second layer of the product on the target surface independent of the first layer” is directed to intended uses or capabilities of the claimed apparatus (i.e., an energy source including a DLP) and does not require any further structure of the claimed invention, see MPEP 2114).
Gillette does not specifically teach the bracketed limitation(s) as presented above, i.e., “a droplet dispenser is controllable for depositing droplets each being less than 200 µl,” but Yost teaches the limitation(s) as follows:
Yost teaches a system for 3D printing including a plurality dispensers configured to deposit material from their tips to a printing surface for receiving the materials (abstract, fig. 1). Yost teaches a droplet dispenser controllable for depositing droplets each being less than 200 µl containing (figs. 1, 2 and [0057]: dispensers configured to deposit materials such as any extrudable material including biological materials, each of the dispensers can deposit material having a volume as small as about 0.2 µl (e.g., drops, bricks) through a dispenser tip, a volume grater between 0.2 to 1.0 µl or between 0.2 and 0.4 µl; here, the disclosed range of a dispensing volume anticipates the recited range; [0058]: dispensers controlled by a computing device).
Both Gillette and Yost teaches an apparatus and a method for 3D printing (abstract), and Gillette further discloses that the present invention provides complete control of microstructure for unrestricted object geometry (col. 5 lines 19-21). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify or substitute the extrusion die 118 of Gillette with a known dispenser which can dispense a volume as small as about 0.2 µl as taught by Yost in order to obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of forming a 3D printed object with improved smoothness, resolution, precision, and accuracy by forming an individual layer in a finer manner.
Regarding claim 2, modified Gillette teaches that said droplets of said hydrogel material and said functional constituent contain less than 10 μL of said hydrogel material and said functional constituent (Yost: [0057]: e.g., a volume grater between 0.2 to 1.0 µl or between 0.2 and 0.4 µl; here, the disclosed range anticipates the recited range).
Regarding claims 3-7, modified Gillette does not specifically teach that said functional constituent includes biomolecules for building of artificial organs (claim 3), enzymes (claim 4), nanotubes (claim 5), a multi-color constituent (claim 6), or a tissue growth constituent (claim 7). However, the limitation “said functional constituent” is considered as articles worked upon by the claimed apparatus and does not effect the structure of the claimed invention. See MPEP 2115
Regarding claim 8, modified Gillette teaches that additive manufacturing apparatus for building a product of claim 1 wherein said energy source is a light source (Gillette: figs. 1, 9 and col. 8 lines 13-60, col. 12 lines 55-60: source of synergistic stimulation 26 or source of light 112).
Regarding claim 9, modified Gillette teaches that additive manufacturing apparatus for building a product of claim 1 wherein said energy source is an ultraviolet light source (Gillette: figs. 1, 9 and col. 8 lines 13-60, col. 12 lines 55-60: source of synergistic stimulation 26, for example, having a tungsten halogen bulb, or source of light 112).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. It is noted that the applicants have modified the claims with the latest amendment dated 12/16/2025, and the arguments are based upon these change.
The Applicant argues (see pages 7-8) that Gillette in view of Yost does not disclose or suggest the newly added limitations – “such that said droplet dispenser controls a release of the hydrogel material forming a first droplet to cover only a first subportion of the target surface” (lines 9-10), “an energy source … adapted to deliver UV energy forming a first image representing at least one layer … on said first subportion of the target surface … to form a first layer of the product” (lines 13-18), “the droplet dispenser being controlled to deposit a release of an additional amount of the hydrogel material in the form of a second droplet on a second subportion of the target surface different from the first subportion” (lines 19-21), and “form a second layer of the 3D image onto the second subportion to form the second layer of the product on the target surface independent of the first layer” (lines 24-25).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with this argument.
At first, the underlined phrase of the limitations are not fully supported by Instant Specification. See above, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 1.
Secondly, Gillette in view of Yost teaches all the claimed limitations. See above, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1. When the die dispenser of Gillette deposits reactive liquid media over the surface while translating across thereon, any subportions of the target surface can be arbitrarily and respectively selected as a first subportion and a second subportion which is different from the first subportion, and each subportions can be selectively deposited with the reactive liquid media (Gillette: figs. 1, 9, 26 and col. 13 lines 1-56; col. 19 line 45 – col. 20 line 7). Moreover, when the energy source can generate individual picture elements or pixels in real time and the image translation of the energy source can be performed by various ways, any subportions of the target surface, which are arbitrarily and respectively selected as the first subportion and the second subportion, can be selectively and respectively irradiated with a target irradiation image to form a first layer and a second layer as recited (Gillette: fig. 1 and col. 8 lines 9 – col. 9 line 31). Of note, the first/second subportions and the respectively corresponding first/second layers are not necessarily formed in an additive manner but can be formed in the same level of layer (see Instant Specification: figs. 1A-F), and thus, depositing first/second droplets and projecting UV light to form the first layer and the second layer do not require to be performed in a separate manner. The dispenser which is capable of depositing reactive liquid media over the target surface while translating across the surface and the energy source which can translate individual images over the target portions on the target surface satisfy the recited limitations as any portion of the target surface with reactive liquid media would correspond to the first/second subportion, and the first/second layers are formed thereon upon irradiation individual images such as pixels without being superimposed within a layer. Thus, modified Gillette teaches all the claimed limitations as recited.
Thirdly, the limitations are directed to intended uses or capabilities of the claimed apparatus (i.e., a droplet dispenser and an energy source including a DLP) and do not require any further structure of the claimed invention, see MPEP 2114
The Examiner further argues (see page 8) that (A) Yost does not modulate image of UV light, and (B) the combination of Gillette and Yost would not be obvious as there is no shortcomings in Gillette that would lead to substitute the nozzles of Yost.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with this argument.
Regarding the argument (A), in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, 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). The primary reference, Gillette, already teaches to modulate image of UV light, and thus, the secondary reference, Yost, does not require the same teaching. See above, the 103 rejection of claim 1.
Regarding the argument (B), the Applicant’s statement that there is no shortcomings in Gillette that would lead to substitute the nozzles of Yost is mere allegation. No explicit disclosure of the shortcomings of Gillette is required to be modified with other prior art. As addressed in the 103 rejection of claim 1, upon the substitution of a die dispenser of Gillette with the nozzles of Yost as another known types of dispensers, one of ordinary skill in the art would obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of forming a 3D printed object with improved smoothness, resolution, precision, and accuracy by forming an individual layer in a finer manner.
Thereby, after reconsideration, claim 1 remains rejected.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dean (US 20130304233 A1) teaches a continuous digital light processing device for additive manufacturing (fig. 1, [0024-0026], claim 1).
Zhang (US20050259785A1) teaches a method/apparatus to fabricate 3D complex micro/nano structures by digital light processing using a dynamic mask ([0012], fig. 1).
Ermoshkin (US 20170173871 A1) teaches methods and apparatus for the fabrication of solid three-dimensional objects from liquid materials using a radiation source 11 such as a digital light processor (DLP) providing electromagnetic radiation 12 ([0002, 0089, 0101]).
Schillen (US 8845316 B2) teaches a device for producing at least one three-dimensional object by solidifying a solidifiable material comprising a digital light projector (DLP) (claims 11-13).
Scholz (US 5120476) teaches three-dimensional objects are produced by the polymerization of a photopolymerizable liquid medium with the aid of high-energy radiation by continuously introducing the liquid medium in lamina form from a casting means onto the surface of a carrier liquid (abstract, fig. 1).
Ederer (US 6838035) teaches a rapid-prototyping production method for producing a structural body by deposition (abstract, figs. 1, 2).
Pan (US 20050025905) teaches a stereolithographic method and apparatus for forming three-dimensional structure (abstract, fig. 1).
Serbin (US 5665401) teaches an apparatus for producing an object using stereolithography (abstract, figs. 1, 5, 7).
Aghababaie (US 20140339741 A1) teaches an apparatus for bottom-up fabrication of three dimensional objects (abstract), and the digital projector may be based on Digital Light Processing (DLP), Digital Micromirror Device (DMD), Liquid Crystal Display (LCD), or Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCOS) ([0012]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to INJA SONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1605. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 8 AM - 5 PM.
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.
/INJA SONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1744