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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant amendment filed 12/08/2025 has been entered and is currently under consideration. Claims 1-17 remain pending in the application.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (2019/0209482 of record) hereinafter Li in view of Sanzari (US2020/0290279 of record).
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches:
A print head for a 3D printer (Fig 2a-b: printing head 210; [0069]), with a feeder for a raw material of variable viscosity (Fig 2a: barrel 202; [0051, 0069]) and with a nozzle having a discharge opening (Fig 2a-b: nozzle 212, extrusion port 226), the nozzle tapering in a direction of flow of a liquid phase of the raw material for dispensing the liquid phase through the discharge opening (Fig 2a-b, 3c; [0070]), wherein a pressure generator is provided in order to elevate a pressure of at least some of the liquid phase to a basic pressure in a pressure generator chamber (Fig 2a: piston 204, barrel 202; [0069]), and wherein a pressure modulator (Fig 2a-b: sealing needle 218; [0071]), interposed between the pressure generator and the nozzle (Fig 2a), defining a modulator axis extending centrally therethrough (Fig 2a), and movable independently of the pressure generator along the modulator axis ([0070]), is configured to modulate the pressure of at least some of the liquid phase around the basic pressure ([0070, 0071]), wherein the pressure generator is laterally offset from the modulator axis (Fig 2a).
Li does not teach wherein the feeder is laterally offset from the pressure generator chamber, and wherein a passage extends laterally between the feeder and the pressure generator chamber.
In the same field of endeavor regarding additive manufacturing, Sanzari teaches a feeder is laterally offset from a pressure generator chamber, and wherein a passage extends laterally between the feeder and the pressure generator chamber for the motivation of staging the material for delivery to the deposition chamber (Fig 1: feed chamber 110, conduit 125, deposition chamber 120; [0015, 0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the feeder as taught by Li with the feeder as taught by Sanzari in order to stage the material for delivery to the deposition chamber.
Regarding claim 2, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Li further teaches wherein the pressure modulator acts on a partial volume of the liquid phase ([0071]).
Li in view of Sanzari does not teach wherein the pressure modulator acts on a partial volume of the liquid phase which has a volume of no more than 1 cm3 and/or which fills a distance of no more than 5 cm between the imparting of the pressure modulation and the discharge opening.
However, it has been held that changes in size/proportion are obvious. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have changed the size of the portion of the print head holding the volume of the liquid phase that is acted upon by the pressure modulator as taught by Li to have a volume of no more than 1 cm3 or a distance of no more than 5 cm between the imparting of the pressure modulation and the discharge opening in order to reduce the time delay between activation of the pressure modulator and completion of actuation of the pressure modulator.
Regarding claim 3, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Li further teaches wherein the pressure modulator comprises a cylindrical needle (Fig 3a: sealing needle 218) which is movably mounted in a modulator duct leading to the nozzle (Fig 2a-2b: [0066]) and has a tip tapering toward the nozzle (Fig 2a-b, 3a: tapered end 224; [0065, 0070]).
Regarding claim 4, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 3.
Li further teaches wherein the tip is dimensioned such that the tip can be introduced at least partially into the nozzle (Fig 2a-b, 3a-c; [0065-0066]).
Regarding claim 5, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 4.
Li further teaches wherein the tip is dimensioned such that the tip can at least partially pass through the discharge opening (Fig 2a-b, 3a-c; [0065-0066]).
Regarding claim 6, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Li further teaches wherein the pressure generator comprises a cylindrical piston which is movably mounted in a main duct which can be filled with the liquid phase (Fig 2a: piston 204; [0069]).
Sanzari further teaches a cylindrical piston (Fig 1; [0016]).
Regarding claim 7, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 6.
Li further teaches wherein the pressure modulator comprises a cylindrical needle (Fig 3a: sealing needle 218) which is movably mounted in a modulator duct leading to the nozzle (Fig 2a-2b: [0066]) and has a tip tapering toward the nozzle (Fig 2a-b, 3a: tapered end 224; [0065, 0070]).
Li in view of Sanzari does not explicitly recite wherein a ratio of a diameter of the needle outside a region of the tip to the diameter of the piston is 1:3 or smaller.
However, Fig 2a of Li shows this relationship.
Regarding claim 10, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Li further teaches wherein the pressure modulator is configured to lower the pressure of the liquid phase at the discharge opening to such an extent that discharge of the liquid phase from the discharge opening is prevented ([0070, 0071]).
Regarding claim 11, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 7.
Li further teaches wherein the tip is dimensioned such that the tip can be introduced at least partially into the nozzle (Fig 2a-b, 3a-c; [0065-0066]).
Regarding claim 12, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 11.
Li further teaches wherein the tip is dimensioned such that the tip can at least partially pass through the discharge opening (Fig 2a-b, 3a-c; [0065-0066]).
Regarding claim 13, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 6.
Li further teaches wherein the pressure modulator comprises a cylindrical needle (Fig 3a: sealing needle 218) which is movably mounted in a modulator duct leading to the nozzle (Fig 2a-2b: [0066]) and has a tip tapering toward the nozzle (Fig 2a-b, 3a: tapered end 224; [0065, 0070]).
Li further teaches wherein a ratio of a diameter of the needle outside a region of the tip to the diameter of the piston is 1:4 or smaller(Fig 2a).
Regarding claim 14, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 13.
Li further teaches wherein the tip is dimensioned such that the tip can be introduced at least partially into the nozzle (Fig 2a-b, 3a-c; [0065-0066]).
Regarding claim 15, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 14.
Li further teaches wherein the tip is dimensioned such that the tip can at least partially pass through the discharge opening (Fig 2a-b, 3a-c; [0065-0066]).
Regarding claim 16, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Sanzari wherein the feeder includes a funnel portion configured to receive the raw material (Fig 1).
Regarding claim 17, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Sanzari further teaches wherein the passage extends from the funnel portion to the pressure generator chamber (Fig 1).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Sanzari as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zawaski et al. (US 2020/0047412 of record) hereinafter Zawaski.
Regarding claim 8, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Li further teaches wherein the pressure generator and the pressure modulator act on the liquid phase inside of the 3D printer for an object to be produced and are mechanically coupled to at least one drive source (Fig 2a; [0069-0070, 0074]).
Li in view of Sanzari does not teach a heatable build chamber and at least one drive source arranged outside the build chamber
In the same field of endeavor regarding additive manufacturing, Zawaski teaches a 3d printer with a heatable build chamber wherein sensitive electric components, including motors, are kept removed from the heated chamber while only essential components such as the print head are located inside the build chamber for the motivation of using high performance material while isolating the components from the high ambient temperatures (Fig 2: [0005, 0047-0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus as taught by Li in view of Sanzari to use a build chamber with “removed” motor drives as taught by Zawaski in order to use high performance material while isolating the components from the high ambient temperatures.
Regarding claim 9, Li in view of Sanzari teaches the apparatus of claim 8.
Li further teaches wherein at least some of a region in which the pressure generator can increase a pressure of the raw material has a heater for generating a liquid phase of the raw material (Fig 5c: heater 502, barrel 504 [0074]) the at least one drive source for the pressure modulator is thermally insulated from this heater (Fig 5C; piston 506 is lifted out of barrel 504 and the motor/piston assembly is insulated from the heater 502 in this position).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/08/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Li and Sanzari do not teach a pressure modulator configured to modulate the pressure of at least some of the liquid phase around the basic pressure. Applicant argues that the sealing needle 218 of Li is not taught to be capable of modulating pressure. However, Li teaches that “the pressure controller can be operated to prevent excess pressure buildup in the device when the sealing needle 218 is in the closed position” ([0070]). The above passage implies that a pressure buildup is caused by closing of the sealing needle 218. Even without such a teaching, one of ordinary skill in the art would logically conclude that the sealing needle 218 would inherently cause a buildup of pressure when a flowing fluid is blocked from flowing in a closed vessel downstream of a pressure generator. Therefore the sealing needle 218 of Li is considered to be a pressure modulator configured to modulate the pressure of at least some of the liquid phase around the basic pressure.
Applicant argues that the pressure modulator acts on a smaller volume of material close to the nozzle to execute rapid, dynamic pressure changes around the basic or base pressure, which allows for precise control of the extrusion start/stop (e.g., for sharp corners and clean travel moves), which provides high precision. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Furthermore, even if amended to recite the above subject matter, the sealing needle 218 of Li teaches the above function. Li teaches “When the sealing needle 218 is positioned in a closed position, the tapered end 224 of the sealing needle 218 engages the tapered inner surface of the nozzle 212 to inhibit flow of melted material through the nozzle. To open the nozzle 212 and allow melted material to flow through the extrusion port, the actuator 220 operates the sealing needle 218 to position the sealing needle 218 in an open position by raising the sealing needle 218, thereby disengaging the tapered lower end 224 from the inner surface of the nozzle 212” ([0070]). Furthermore, “tapered end 224 of the sealing needle 218 allows the sealing needle 218 to pierce the melted material, allowing the melted material to flow up and around the closing sealing needle 218 instead of being pushed down” ([0071]) providing high precision of control over the flow of material out of the nozzle.
Applicant argues that Sanzari does not teach the pressure modulator. 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).
For at least the above reasons, the application is not in condition for allowance.
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 ALEXANDER A WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5361. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8 am-4 pm EST.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/ALEXANDER A WANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741