DETAILED ACTION
In Request for Continued Examination filed on 10/30/2025, claims 1, 4-6, 8-9, 11, 13, and 15-24 are pending. Claims 15-21 are withdrawn based on the restriction requirement. Claim 2 is cancel. Claims 22-24 are newly added. Claims 1 and 5-6 are currently amended. Claims 1, 4-6, 8-9, 11, 13, and 22-24 are considered in the current 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 .
Status of Previous Objections/Rejections
Previous claim objections are withdrawn based on the Applicant’s amendment.
Previous 35 USC 103 rejections are withdrawn based on the Applicant’s amendment. However, new rejections are made.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/30/2025 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 22-24 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 recites “said generator” in line 4 should read as “said pattern generator” for the purpose of consistency.
Claim 6 recites “said generator connection means” in lines 5 and 7 should read as “said pattern generator connection means” for the purpose of consistency.
Claim 6 recites “said holder is itsel surrounded by” in line 8 should read as “said holder is itself surrounded by”.
Claims 22-24 recites “Device according to…” should read as “The patterning device according to…” for the purpose of consistency.
Claim 24 recites “said flexible arms” should read as “said one or more flexible arms” for the purpose of consistency.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the function they perform, as per MPEP §2114. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. As the apparatus of the prior art and the claimed apparatus are patentably indistinguishable in terms of structure, the apparatus of the prior art is reasonably expected to be able to perform the claimed functionalities. Furthermore, Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the material worked upon as per MPEP §2115).
Claims 6 and 23 recite the limitation “holder connection means” has been interpreted as any structure that perform the function of connecting to the pattern generator which is consistent with [0023] of the instant specification.
Claims 6 and 23 recite the limitation “generator connection means” has been interpreted as any structure that perform the function of cooperate with the holder connection means and to maintain the holder in position which is consistent with [0023] of instant application.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “lateral damping means” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The corresponding structure from the specification is the lateral damping device 51a of Figures 4a-4c and Figure 5a-5c and are arranged to prevent the lateral vibrations of the holder and the sample ([0039]).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the edge" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "the holder connection means" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "the generator connection means" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "said intermediate connector" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 is depended upon claim 23 and are rejected for the same reason.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 9, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US2016/0145566 (“Chen et al” hereinafter Chen).
Regarding Claim 1, Chen teaches a patterning device (Figure 21A) for the preparation of three-dimensional structures of a sample ([0085]) comprising a matrix and particles free to migrate in the matrix ([0059] and [0074], the apparatus is used to generate ordered particle arrangement within a carrier solution in an open square chamber which implied that the particles are freely moved within the carrier solution in order to generate the desired pattern), wherein the sample is contained in a sample container (Figure 21A, carrier solution chamber), the patterning device (Figure 21A) comprising:
a pattern generator (Figure 21A, vibration generator), comprising at least one vibration generator allowing to apply sound or other vibrational waves to the sample ([0059]), so as to generate a pattern ([0059]), said pattern being a non-homogeneous arrangement of the particles in the matrix (Figure 4A and [0021], the pattern generated can be various pattern and some of the patterns are non-homogeneous. Thus, the apparatus disclosed by Chen is capable of being used as intended as discussed above and thus meets all of the structural limitations as claimed. Limitations directed toward the capabilities or intended uses of the apparatus are given patentable weight to the extent which effects the structure of the apparatus. MPEP 2114),
a holder (Figure 21A, metric tilt platform) connected to the pattern generator ([0085], the vibration generator was fixed on a metric tilt platform) and adapted to hold said sample container comprising the sample (Figure 21A and [0085], metric tilt platform holds the carrier solution chamber which comprises of the sample solution), in such a way to transmit the vibration waves generated by the pattern generator to the sample container ([0059] and [0085]), the sample container being placed on the holder (Figure 21A),
wherein the patterning device (Figure 21A, vibration generator) further comprises at least one transformation device (Figure 21A, LED lamp) adapted for the transformation of the matrix into a modified matrix wherein the particles are no longer free to migrate ([0102]), while remaining non-linked to each other and arranged according to the pattern ([0102]),
a picture recorder (Figure 21A, camera) adapted to monitor the pattern ([0084]), and
a control unit ([0028], a dynamic process of pattern formation and transformation controlled through adjustment of the input vibrational parameters which implied the present of a control unit to perform such process) adapted for controlling one or more of the pattern generator ([0059], vibrational parameter from the vibration generator are controlled) and at least one transformation device ([0102]), and the picture recorder ([0111], topography can be controller), and wherein the at least one transformation device comprises a light emitting system arranged above or surrounding the holder (Figure 21A and [0086]).
Regarding Claim 4, Chen teaches the patterning device according to claim 1, wherein the at least one transformation device can be used sequentially to the pattern generator ([0102], the assembled pattern are exposed to UV light in order to fix the pattern which means the at least one transformation device is used sequentially to the pattern generator).
Regarding Claim 5, Chen teaches the patterning device according to claim 1, wherein the holder comprises at least one vibration sensor ([0098], an accelerometer, which is an example of vibration sensor, was employed to measure vertical acceleration of the carrier-solution chamber and correlate the acceleration with the driving voltage amplitude from the function generator. Thus, it is implied that the accelerometer must be placed upon the metric tilt platform to measure vertical acceleration).
Regarding Claim 6, Chen teaches the patterning device according to claim 1, wherein said patterning device comprises one or more lateral damping means ([0085], vibration damper) arranged to absorb at least part of the reflected waves and resonance frequencies interfering with the pattern generation ([0085], the metric tilt platform was fixed to a vibration damper to prevent external perturbation. Function of vibration damper is to reduce or eliminate vibrations in mechanical systems), wherein said holder comprises holder connection means (Figure 21A, adapter fitting and [0085]) and said generator comprises generator connection means (Figure 21A and [0085], it is implied that the vibration generator comprises a structure that connects the generator with the metric tilt platform) and wherein said holder connection means are essentially directly surrounded by said lateral damping devices (Figure 21A).
Regarding Claim 9, Chen teaches the patterning device according to claim 1, further comprising an illumination system allowing to visualize and record the pattern of the sample ([0086], a high speed monochrome video camera was used to record the topography of the standing waves and to quantify the dynamic process of the bead assembly).
Regarding Claim 11, Chen teaches the patterning device according to claim 1, wherein the at least one vibration generator or set of vibration generators emits waves from positions lateral to the sample ([0085], a vibration generator and a function generator was used to generate vertical vibration which is lateral vibration movement).
Regarding Claim 13, Chen teaches the patterning device according to claim 1, further comprising at least one injection device adapted for a 3D-bio-injection of biomaterial ([0088], a pipetted is used as an injection device for injection biomaterials).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2016/0145566 (“Chen et al” hereinafter Chen) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO2020/236657 (“Christiansen et al” hereinafter Christiansen).
Regarding Claim 8, Chen teaches the device according to claim 1. Chen further teaches a control unit adapted to automatically determine the conditions to produce a predetermined pattern ([0070], assembled structures can be controlled through manipulation of the vibrational parameters and [0134]), but fails to teach wherein said control unit comprises or is connected to an artificial intelligence unit.
However, Christiansen discloses it is well known in the art to have control unit comprises or is connected to an artificial intelligence unit ([0288]).
Chen and Christiansen are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the same field of using a three-dimensional manufacturing apparatus to manufactured a three-dimensional sample. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the apparatus as taught by the Chen such that control unit comprises or is connected to an artificial intelligence unit as discussed above as taught by Christiansen to analyze a database comprising a plurality of feedbacks indicative of various components of the 3D printing system ([0288]). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious that the combination of the known elements provides a predictable result, namely, another known way to operates and controls the control unit. See MPEP 2143.
Claim(s) 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2016/0145566 (“Chen et al” hereinafter Chen) as applied to claims 1 or 6 above, and further in view of US2017/0282462 (“Abe et al” hereinafter Abe).
Regarding Claim 22, Chen teaches the device according to claim 6, and wherein said lateral damping device ([0085], vibration damper), comprises a tube surrounding either the holder connection means, or the generator connection means, or an intermediate connector, or the edge of the holder ([0085], the metric tilt platform was fixed to a vibration damper to prevent external perturbation). Chen fails to teach wherein the edge of the holder is prolonged downwards to form a skirt fitting with the lateral damping device.
However, Abe teaches wherein the edge of the holder is prolonged downwards to form a skirt fitting with the lateral damping device (Figure 4, forming table 20 prolonged downwards to form a skirt fitting with the part 70 for absorbing the vibration [0063]).
Chen and Abe are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of using vibration to pattern the materials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the device of Chen such that the edge of the holder is prolonged downwards to form a skirt fitting with the lateral damping device as taught by Abe to absorb the vibration provided between the forming table and the wall in order not to vibrate peripheral devices ([0063]).
Regarding Claim 23, Chen teaches the device according to claim 1, but fails to teach further comprising a frame, wherein the holder connection means and the generator connection means are connected by means of said intermediate connector and wherein this intermediate connector is connected to the frame of the patterning device by means of one or more flexible arms.
However, Abe teaches a frame (Figure 4, walls 27 formed a frame), wherein the holder connection means (Figure 4, forming table 20 comprises of a holder connection means that is used to connect with the vibrator 60) and the generator connection means (Figure 4, vibrator 60 must also has a connection means to connect with the forming table) are connected by means of said intermediate connector (Figure 4, part 70) and wherein this intermediate connector is connected to the frame of the patterning device (Figure 4, part 70 is connected to the wall 27) by means of one or more flexible arms (Figure 4, part 70 includes a spring and a rubber part and the spring part formed as flexible arms [0063]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the device of Chen such that it teaches all of the cumulative limitations taught by Abe to absorb the vibration provided between the forming table and the wall in order not to vibrate peripheral devices ([0063]). Furthermore, the combination of the known elements provides a predictable result, namely, another known design for placement of vibration generator with respect to the holder for the purpose of providing vibration to the build materials. See MPEP 2143.
Regarding Claim 24, the modified Chen teaches the device according to claim 23, wherein the flexible arms comprises several rigid portions and several flexible parts to form a leaf spring specifically adapted to the holder (Abe, Figure 4 and [0063], part 70 includes a spring and a rubber part and the spring part formed as flexible arms and specifically adapted to the forming table 20).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XINWEN (Cindy) YE whose telephone number is (571)272-3010. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30 - 17:00.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
XINWEN (CINDY) YE
Examiner
Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754