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 .
Claims 1-15 are pending
Claims 9 and 13 have been amended
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 8-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipate by Tochimoto et al. US 2002/0090410 (US’410).
Regarding claim 1, US’410 teaches a 3D printing module to remove un-solidified build material attached to a 3D printed part (apparatus for removing unbonded powder material remaining around a three dimensional mode, abstract), the 3D printing module comprising: a platform within a housing to support a 3D printed part (tray 9/stage 62, para, 50-55, 160-174, see fig. 5-6, 9-11); a vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform (in the powder removing apparatuses of the first and second embodiments, a vibrator for generating fine vibrations maybe connected to the meshed tray to increase powder flowability para. 217); a cleaning element to apply a cleaning stream within the housing to clean the 3D printed part and remove the un-solidified build material (a pipe 74A extending from the air outlet of the blower driving unit 73 and branching into two pipes which terminate at the vertical inner wall 61a, and two blower valves 74v and nozzles connected to each pipe, see fig. 9-11, para. 160-167); and a controller having a processor and a memory, where the controller has specific control instructions to be executed by the processor (The control unit 10 comprises a computer 11, a drive control unit 12, the computer 11 is an ordinary desk top computer or the like which contains a CPU, memory, timer, etc. para. 40-43, see fig. 10-11), wherein the controller is coupled to the vibrating mechanism, the cleaning element, and the platform; the controller to: cause the vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform; cause the cleaning element to generate a plurality of cleaning streams in the housing (The drive control unit 12 centrally controls the operation of the powder removing apparatus 70 in the model forming unit 6 for removing powder particles left unbonded after completing the model forming, para. 40-43, para. 10-11); and control at least one of the platform and the cleaning element to apply the plurality of cleaning streams to different portions of a 3D printed part on the platform (powder removal apparatus includes a blower connected to a plurality of pipes includes valves and nozzles that activate by responding to a command signal from the control unit 10. The air blow direction of the blower nozzle 701 can be varied within the XZ plane by means of a motor or the like incorporated in the nozzle driver 70 or the platform can be moved while activating the blower, para. 56-67, 166-174 and 192-196, see fig. 5-6, 10-11 and 14a-b).
Regarding claim 3, the apparatus of US’410 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. US’410 further teaches wherein the controller is to control the platform to move vertically within the housing (stage 62 is moved vertically by drive unit 64, para. 49-55).
Regarding claim 5, the apparatus of US’410 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. US’410 further teaches wherein the cleaning element is fixed with respect to the housing, and the controller is to control the platform to move vertically during a cleaning operation (while the model forming stage 62 is being lowered, air is first blown from the upper blower aperture 70b, generating an air stream Af, and powder is drawn into the upper suction aperture 70c with an air stream Ag (FIG. 14(a)). As the model forming stage 62 is further lowered, air streams Af flowing out of the middle and lower blower apertures 70b and air streams Ag flowing into the middle and lower suction apertures 70c are sequentially added (FIG. 14(b)), para. 194, see fig. 14a-b).
Regarding claim 8, the apparatus of US’410 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. US’410 further teaches wherein the cleaning element is an airknife (the blower apertures may each be formed in the shape of a slit extending parallel to the model forming stage, para. 223)
Regarding claim 9, the apparatus of US’410 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. US’410 further teaches a plurality of cleaning elements in the housing coupled to the controller, the controller to control each cleaning element to apply simultaneously an independent cleaning stream with another independent cleaning stream to clean the 3D printed part (the plurality of pipes and corresponding valves and nozzles supply independent cleaning streams).
Regarding claim 12, the apparatus of US’410 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. US’410 further teaches a build bed receiving interface to receive a build bed on the platform (model forming bath 61, see fig. 1), the build bed to comprise un-solidified build material and 3D printed parts (powder 92 surrounding 3D model 91, see fig. 1, para. 47-51); a plurality of apertures in the platform to remove the un-solidified build material (mash stage/tray, para. 51-54, see fig. 1-2a-b); a hopper to receive the removed un-solidified build material (a collection chamber 71); the controller to: cause the vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform for a first period of time to remove un-solidified build material to the hopper upon receiving a build bed on the platform through the build bed receiving interface; generate the plurality of cleaning streams during a second different period of time in the housing; and control, during the second period of time, at least one of the platform and the cleaning element to apply the plurality of cleaning streams to different portions of 3D printed parts on the platform to remove build material attached to the 3D printed parts (the controller controls the vibrating mechanism, the platform and the cleaning elements during the cleaning process, as discussed above, para. 56-67, 166-174 and 192-196, see fig. 5-6, 10-11 and 14a-b, the first and second time periods do not negate the use of any elements during different time periods such that for example, the vibrator can be used during time periods other than the first period).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 6-7, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Hutchinson et al. US 2019/0202126 (US’126) in view of Tochimoto et al. US 2002/0090410 (US’410).
Regarding claims 1 and 4, US’126 teaches a 3D printing module to remove un-solidified build material attached to a 3D printed part (an apparatus and method for removing support material from and/or smoothing surfaces of an additively manufactured part, abstract), the 3D printing module comprising: a platform within a housing to support a 3D printed part (tray 13, para. 40-46, see fig. 1); a cleaning element to apply a cleaning stream within the housing to clean the 3D printed part and remove the un-solidified build material (nozzles 25 supply SF/SR, surface finishing and/or support removal, fluid, para, 7 and 40, fig. 1 ); and a controller having a processor and a memory, where the controller has specific control instructions to be executed by the processor, wherein the controller is coupled to the cleaning element (general-purpose computer including logic controller 99 and sends and receives communications signals to/from components of the apparatus 8 during the SF/SR process, para. 41 and 78-79); the controller to: cause the cleaning element to generate a plurality of cleaning streams in the housing; and control at least one of the cleaning element to apply the plurality of cleaning streams to different portions of a 3D printed part on the platform (Both the first and second plurality of nozzles 25 (e.g., top and bottom nozzles 25A, 25B) may be connected to a pump 33, which may be located within the second section 47 of the housing 41. After drawing fluid 22 from the tank 31, the pump 33 can force the fluid 22 through pipes 50 (which may be a flexible hose) to the nozzles 25, para. 45-52, see fig. 1), with regard to claim 1 and wherein the controller is to control the plurality of cleaning streams to rotate (the individual nozzles 25, including individual nozzles secured to the tubes/piping, may be constructed to rotate independently, using motors, in order to spray parts 10 within the chamber 16 at a variety of angles, the upper nozzles 25A may oscillate when the associated valves 59 are open and allow fluid 22 to flow to the nozzles 25A, and those nozzles 25A may rotate or otherwise move in accordance with the selected settings, para. 51 and 72), with regard to claim 4.
US’126 does not teach a vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform, the controller is coupled to the vibrating mechanism and the platform, the controller to: cause the vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform.
US’410 teaches a removing apparatus for removing unbonded powder material remaining around a three dimensional model which is a bonded structure of the powder material (abstract). In the powder removing apparatuses of the first and second embodiments, a vibrator for generating fine vibrations maybe connected to the meshed tray to increase powder flowability and thereby make unbonded powder to fall therethrough efficiently (para. 217). An orientation changing unit 65 capable of changing the orientation of the three dimensional model 91 allowing the 3D printed part to rotate and tilted for more efficient powder removal (para. 178-186). A control unit 10 comprises a computer connected to a control device 12 for controlling the process of the apparatus (para. 40-43). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would know that they could modify the tray of US’126 to include an orientation changing unit and a vibrator for vibrating the tray to increase the efficiency of the powder removal process of US’126.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of US’126 to include a vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform, the controller is coupled to the vibrating mechanism and the platform, the controller to: cause the vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform because US’410 teaches it increases the efficiency of the powder removal process.
Regarding claim 2, the modified apparatus of US’126 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. US’126 further teaches wherein the cleaning element is in a position towards a top portion of the housing and is to generate the plurality of cleaning streams towards the platform (the top nozzles 25A spray toward the platform under them, para. 40-49, see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, the modified apparatus of US’126 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. The modified apparatus of US’126 further teaches wherein the controller is further to: control the platform to move to a predetermined position with respect to the housing (the stage can be rotated or tilted according to US’410, as discussed above); and control the cleaning element to rotate while the platform is maintained in the predetermined position, such that the plurality of cleaning streams is applied to different parts of a 3D printed part during a cleaning operation (the nozzles are rotated according to US’126, as discussed above, with regard to claim 4).
Regarding claim 7, the modified apparatus of US’126 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. The modified apparatus of US’126 further teaches wherein the controller is to move the plurality of cleaning streams and the build platform such that the plurality of cleaning streams is applied to different parts of the 3D printed part during a cleaning operation (the stage can be rotated or tilted according to US’410, as discussed above and the nozzles are rotated according to US’126, as discussed above, with regard to claim 4)
Regarding claim 9, the modified apparatus of US’126 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. The modified apparatus of US’126 further teaches a plurality of cleaning elements in the housing coupled to the controller, the controller to control each cleaning clement to apply simultaneously an independent cleaning stream with another independent cleaning stream to clean the 3D printed part (nozzles 25 provide independent cleaning streams controlled by the controller, as discussed above).
Regarding claim 11, the modified apparatus of US’126 teaches the apparatus of claim 1. The modified apparatus of US’126 further teaches a tilting mechanism and wherein the controller is to control the tilting mechanism to modify the orientation of the platform with respect to an air stream (the stage can be tilted during cleaning for improving the powder removal efficiency, as discussed above).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’410 or US’126 in view of US’410 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Craft et al. US 2018/0009007 (US’007).
Regarding claim 10, US’410 or the modified apparatus of US’126 teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
US’410 or the modified apparatus of US’126 does not teaches wherein the controller is to control the cleaning element to generate the plurality of cleaning streams as a series of pulses of a predetermined period.
US’007 teaches an apparatus for removing particulates from the surface of a 3D printed workpiece using a pressurized fluid (abstract, para. 6-7). In one embodiment, pressurized fluid nozzle 164 is autonomous and programmable to pulse at a desired frequency. The optimum pulse frequency may be dependent on the geometry of 3D printed workpiece 11 (para. 21). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would know that the cleaning process of US’410 can be modified to pulse the air streams, depending on the geometry of the 3D part for effective powder removal.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of US’410 or the modified apparatus of US’126 to include wherein the controller is to control the cleaning element to generate the plurality of cleaning streams as a series of pulses of a predetermined period because US’700 teaches pulsing the air stream can be beneficial in removing powder depending on the geometry of the part and combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (A).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipate by Tochimoto et al. US 2002/0090410 (US’410).
Regarding claim 13, US’410 teaches a method comprising: vibrating a vibrating mechanism to vibrate a platform from a 3D printing module housing (in the powder removing apparatuses of the first and second embodiments, a vibrator for generating fine vibrations maybe connected to the meshed tray to increase powder flowability, abstract, para. 217, see fig. 5-6 and 8-11); generating a plurality of cleaning streams simultaneously in the housing by a cleaning element (pipes and valves supply a plurality of streams of fluid to perform cleaning, see fig. 5-6, 9-11, para. 56-67, 166-174 and 192-196); operating a controller that has a processor and a memory, where the controller is connected to the platform; and moving at least one of the platform and/or the cleaning element to apply the plurality of cleaning streams to different portions of a 3D printed part located on the platform (The control unit 10 comprises a computer 11, a drive control unit 12 controlling powder removal apparatus includes a blower connected to a plurality of pipes includes valves and nozzles that activate by responding to a command signal from the control unit 10, the air blow direction of the blower nozzle 701 can be varied within the XZ plane by means of a motor or the like incorporated in the nozzle driver 70 or the platform can be moved while activating the blower, para. 40-43, 56-67, 166-174 and 192-196, see fig. 5-6, 10-11 and 14a-b) wherein the controller is also connected to the vibrating mechanism and the cleaning element (The control unit 10 comprises a computer 11, a drive control unit 12, the computer 11 is an ordinary desk top computer or the like which contains a CPU, memory, timer, etc. the apparatus is constructed so as to be able to automatically remove the unbound powder adhering to the three dimensional, the steps are carried out with the control unit 10 controlling the various units para. 40-61, 87, 102-115,135, 161-174 see fig. 10-11, therefore the computer of US’410 automatically controls all the units of the apparatus including the vibrating mechanism and the cleaning element).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Tochimoto et al. US 2002/0090410 (US’410).
Regarding claim 14, the method of US’410 teaches the method of claim 14.
US’420 does not teaches a tilting mechanism within the above discussed embodiment such that the method further comprises tilting the platform through a tilting mechanism to modify the orientation of the 3D printed part with respect to one of the plurality of cleaning streams.
However, US’410 further teaches an orientation changing unit 65 comprising a tilting table 65a and a rotating table 65bin embodiment 3. Since the three dimensional model 91 is tilted and rotated about the axis Rc, as shown in FIG. 13, efficient powder removal can be achieved (para. 179-186, see fig. 13). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the tilting mechanism of embodiment 3 with embodiments 1 and 2 to more efficiently remove the powder.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of US’410 to include a tilting mechanism within the above discussed embodiment such that the method further comprises tilting the platform through a tilting mechanism to modify the orientation of the 3D printed part with respect to one of the plurality of cleaning streams because US’410 teaches it can achieve more efficient powder removal and it is prima facie obvious to combine two methods each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third method to be used for the very same purpose the idea of combining them flows logically from their having been individually taught in the prior art, see MPEP 2144.06.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipate by Tochimoto et al. US 2002/0090410 (US’410).
Regarding claim 15, US’410 teaches an apparatus comprising: a platform within a housing with apertures, the platform to receive a build bed thereon including 3D printed parts and un-solidified build material (tray 9/stage 62 holds powder 92 surrounding 3D model 91 and have apertures, para, 47-55, 160-174, see fig. 1, 2a-b 5-6, 9-11); a vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform (in the powder removing apparatuses of the first and second embodiments, a vibrator for generating fine vibrations maybe connected to the meshed tray to increase powder flowability para. 217); a cleaning element to apply a plurality of continuous cleaning streams simultaneously within the housing to clean the 3D printed parts (pipes and valves supply a plurality of streams of fluid to perform cleaning, see fig. 5-6, 9-11, para. 56-67, 166-174 and 192-196); and a controller having a processor and a memory, where the controller has specific control instructions to be executed by the processor (The control unit 10 comprises a computer 11, a drive control unit 12, para. 40-43, see fig. 10-11), wherein the controller is coupled to the vibrating mechanism, the cleaning element, and the platform: the controller to: cause the vibrating mechanism to vibrate the platform for a first period of time to remove an amount of build material through the apertures of the platform; cause the cleaning element generate the plurality of continuous cleaning streams during a second different period of time in the housing (The drive control unit 12 centrally controls the operation of the powder removing apparatus 70 in the model forming unit 6 for removing powder particles left unbonded after completing the model forming, the controller controls the vibrating mechanism, the platform and the cleaning elements during the cleaning process, as discussed above, para. 10-11, 40-43, 56-67, 166-174 and 192-196, see fig. 5-6, 10-11 and 14a-b, the first and second time periods do not negate the use of any elements during different time periods such that for example, the vibrator can be used during time periods other than the first period); and control, during the second period of time, at least one of the platform and the cleaning element to apply the plurality of continuous cleaning streams to different portions of a 3D printed part on the platform to remove build material attached to the 3D printed parts (powder removal apparatus includes a blower connected to a plurality of pipes includes valves and nozzles that activate by responding to a command signal from the control unit 10. The air blow direction of the blower nozzle 701 can be varied within the XZ plane by means of a motor or the like incorporated in the nozzle driver 70 or the platform can be moved while activating the blower, para. 56-67, 166-174 and 192-196, see fig. 5-6, 10-11 and 14a-b).
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to independent claim 13 has changed the scope of claim 13. Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 102 as anticipated by US’410 including additional discussion of the teachings of US’410 applicable to the amendments made to claim 13.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12-18-25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants’ arguments that Tochimoto does not anticipate the limitation “wherein the controller is coupled to the vibrating mechanism, the cleaning element and the platform” has been considered but is not deemed persuasive. Applicants’ arguments rely on a narrow reading that ignores what Tochimoto explicitly and inherently discloses. Paragraphs 40- 43 of Tochimoto states “The computer 11 is an ordinary desk top computer or the like which contains a CPU, memory, timer, etc. Based on the cross section data supplied from the computer, the drive control unit 12 controls the operation of various units. When the cross section data is acquired from the computer 11, the drive control unit 12, based on the cross section data, issues drive commands to the various units to centrally control the operation of the model forming apparatus 60 in the model forming unit 6 for sequentially forming bonded structures of powder material on a layer by layer basis. The drive control unit 12 also centrally controls the operation of the powder removing apparatus 70 in the model forming unit 6 for removing powder particles left unbonded after completing the model forming”. In the context of the teachings of Tochimoto “centrally controls” necessarily requires the controller is coupled in some way so as to communicate command signals to every operational component within apparatus 70 that performs the powder removal function. “Coupled” broadly reads on any type of connection, physical or wireless, and does not necessitate specific wiring or structural components, only a connection. Further, Applicants specification describes general connection coupling without describing any specific structural examples of the coupling. The connection between the controller computer of Tochimoto and the processing units is further reinforced throughout the specification of Tochimoto such as by paragraphs 102 and 135, which make clean that the entire powder removal process is automatic and in para. 87 and 115 which states that “steps are carried out with the control unit 10 controlling the various units” and “the control unit 10 issues commands to stop powder removal operation”. Paragraph 102 states that “the apparatus is constructed so as to be able to automatically remove the unbound powder adhering to the three dimensional model 91” and paragraph 135 confirms that “removal of the unbounded powder can be performed automatically as part of the series of operations in the three dimensional modeling system 1” such that “the user need not remove the unbounded powder by hand”. An automated system in which no manual intervention is required, necessarily requires that the controller be coupled in some way to, and communicate with, every component participating in the removal process. Paragraph 217 discloses that a vibrator may be connected to the meshed tray to increase powder flowability during removal. Because this vibrator operates as part of the powder removing apparatus 70, and because the entire removal process is automatic with no human intervention, the vibrator must be driven by the controller. There is no other control mechanism disclosed or suggested, and introducing a manually operated vibrator into an otherwise fully automated sequence would contradict the express teachings of Tochimoto, discussed above. Similarly, the cleaning elements, blower unit and nozzles, is expressly controlled by command signals from the control unit 10 (para. 40-61 and 161-174), and the stage is moved in the Z-direction by moving unit 63 via driving unit 64, which is also controlled by control unit 10 (para. 87 and 105-109). Under MPEP 2131, anticipation requires that each element be found either expressly or inherently in the reference. A controller that “centrally controls the operation” of a fully automated powder removing apparatus, as discussed above, inherently controls via some sort of connection each operational sub-component within that apparatus, including the vibrator, the cleaning elements, and the platform. The applicant has not identified and alternative control mechanism for the vibrator, nor explained how the vibrator could function in the disclosed fully automated sequence without being coupled to the controller. The examiner therefore maintains that the anticipation is proper.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN FLANAGAN BERGNER whose telephone number is (571)270-1133. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached on 571-270-3176. 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.
/ERIN F BERGNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713