DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
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 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) 20-22, 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsunoya (US 20200384532 A1).
In reference to claim 20, Tsunoya discloses a process for printing a 3D object using a support material composition and a build material, the process comprising: (“method for manufacturing a three-dimensional shaped object … with a shaping material … a support shaping step” [abstract])
wherein said build material is selected from the group consisting of polyamide (PA), polyether-block polyamides (PEBA), polyether ketone ketone (PEKK), PVDF homopolymer, and PVDF copolymer compositions, wherein the PVDF copolymer includes a majority by weight of vinylidene fluoride (VDF) monomer units (“shaping material, for example, … PA (polyamide)” [P0099])
wherein said support material composition is an acrylic composition having a Tg of less than 105°C (“the support material, … ASA (acrylonitrile-styrene-acrylate),” [P0098]. ASA has a Tg less than 105C)
printing both the build material and support material composition, wherein said support material composition is compatible, miscible or semi-miscible with the build material, and (Printing is implied. The prior art discloses the same composition and thus meets the chemical property claim limitation)
removing the support material composition after formation of the 3D object, (“dissolving the support with a solvent” [Claim 8])
In reference to claim 21, see rejection of claim 20.
In reference to claim 22, ASA is soluble in acetone. It would be obvious to use a known solvent.
In reference to claim 26, see rejection of claim 20 and “the shaping material and the support material may further include the solvent” (P0100)
In reference to claim 27, see rejection of claim 20.
In reference to claim 28-29, the prior art discloses the same support composition and thus meets the chemical property claim limitation.
In reference to claim 35, the cited prior art discloses the invention as in claim 20. The build material is not required to be the fluoropolymer.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 24, 30-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsunoya (US 20200384532 A1) and further in view of Hopkins (US 20100096072 A1)
In reference to claim 24 30-33, Tsunoya states that “As a resin that can be used in the support material, for example, PMMA (acryl), ABS (acrylonitrile-butadiene-acrylate), ASA (acrylonitrile-styrene-acrylate), PLA (polylactic acid), PEI (polyetherimide), PC (polycarbonate), PP (polypropylene), PE (polyethylene), PA (polyamide), EP (epoxy), PPS (polyphenylene sulfide), PS (polystyrene), paraffin wax, and other thermoplastic resins can also be preferably used” (P0098) but does not disclose the particular composition of the methacrylic polymer as claimed.
In the same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the particular problem faced by the inventor, soluble support materials (“support material from supply source 22 is desirably soluble in an aqueous solution, such as an alkaline aqueous solution” [P0016]), Hopkins teaches a “support material feedstock comprising a first copolymer and a polymeric impact modifier” (Abstract) wherein
“suitable primary copolymers for use in the support material include copolymers of styrene, methacrylic acid, and buytl acrylate… from about 25% by weight to about 98% by weight” (P0023); and,
“suitable impact modifier copolymers for use in the support material include copolymers of ethylene, glycidyl methacrylate, and buytl acrylate… concentrations of the one or more impact modifiers in the support material range from about 1% by weight to about 25% by weight” (P0026-0027)
“suitable ester monomer units for the primary copolymer include polymerized monomers of alkyl acrylate monomers. Examples of suitable concentrations of the ester monomer units in the primary copolymer range from about 5% by weight to about 40% by weight” (P0020) See Formula 5-6 and descriptions thereof.
“support material may also include additional additives, such as additional plasticizers, rheology modifiers, inert fillers” (P0028)
The combination would be achievable by replacing or modifying the acrylic polymer of Tsunoya with the teachings of Hopkins.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the invention such that said acrylic composition comprises a copolymer comprising from 70 to 80 weight percent of methyl methacrylate monomer units, and from 20 to 30 weight percent of C1-4 acrylate units; and additional additives, such as additional plasticizers, rheology modifiers, and inert fillers.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been specifically motivated to modify the prior art as stated above in order to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; achieve the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; and/or choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success; use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and/or apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results and to provide the improvements disclosed by Hopkins.
Claim 36 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsunoya (US 20200384532 A1) and further in view of Huang (US 20030032214 A1)
In reference to claim 36 and 38, Tsunoya does not disclose the build material as PVDF, but indicates that it can be an “other thermoplastic resin” (P0099).
PVDF was a known thermoplastic resin suitable for 3D printing as evidenced by Huang, which discloses a similar process for printing a 3D object using a support material composition and a build material (“deposition of the non-polarizable polymer substrate 68 and a support structure 70 point by point and layer by layer onto a target surface 44” [P0040] ) the process comprising: printing both the build material and support material composition… removing the support material composition after formation of the 3D object, … (See Fig 2B and 2A, Huang deposits build material 68 and support material 70, and then removes support material 70).
wherein said build material is selected from the group consisting of PVDF copolymer compositions, wherein the PVDF copolymer includes a majority by weight of vinylidene fluoride (VDF) monomer units; and, said build material comprises said PVDF copolymer (“copolymers of vinylidene fluoride are also useful materials. … vinylidene fluoride content can vary in the range of from about 30% by weight to about 95% by weight.” [P0021]);
and explains that PVDF is useful for printing electronics (background section).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the invention such that the build material was PVDF as claimed in order to use the process to print electronics.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20120258250 A1 discloses a method for producing a three-dimensional part involves the generation of a printed assembly comprising both the functional part and a temporary support structure, with the latter specifically engineered to include at least two distinct polymers characterized by different glass transition temperatures. Following the printing process, the entire structure is subjected to a post-processing annealing treatment designed to enhance material properties, such as stability and strength, by allowing for the controlled thermal rearrangement of the polymer chains, ultimately resulting in a high-fidelity final three-dimensional object.
US 20150024309 A1 discloses a specialized support material has been engineered for integration with electrophotography-based additive manufacturing systems, utilizing a sophisticated composition that features a thermoplastic copolymer paired with a charge control agent. The chemical framework of this copolymer is distinctively structured with aromatic groups, (meth)acrylate-based ester groups, carboxylic acid groups, and anhydride groups exhibiting a high anhydride conversion rate to ensure functional performance. Provided in a powder form with a strictly controlled particle size, this material is specifically optimized for use within systems equipped with a layer transfusion assembly, facilitating the precise, layer-by-layer construction of support structures. Additionally, the material is designed for efficient post-processing, as its formulation ensures it is at least partially soluble in aqueous solutions, allowing for the streamlined removal of support scaffolds from the primary printed components.
US 20160009027 A1 discloses a method for manufacturing a three-dimensional part and a support structure via an electrophotography-based additive manufacturing system involves a multi-step process utilizing at least two engines, whereby a first electrophotography engine develops a support layer from a soluble support material, which is then transferred to a transfer medium, while a second electrophotography engine simultaneously or sequentially develops a part layer of the three-dimensional part from an ABS material, subsequently transferring that layer to the same transfer medium. The transfer medium collects these complementary layers, moving the combined support and part layer to a specialized layer transfusion assembly, which then transfuses the new layer onto the previously printed layers to create a 3D structure that allows for the removal of the support material after the printing process is completed.
US 20240092033 A1 discloses novel support material formulations for additive manufacturing designed to enhance the dissolution rate of the cured material while simultaneously maintaining robust mechanical strength. These specialized formulations consist of a mixture including a water-miscible, non-curable polymer, a first water-miscible material capable of being cured, and a second, water-miscible component engineered to interfere with the intermolecular interactions that occur between polymeric chains when the first material is exposed to curing energy. This unique composition allows for the rapid dissolving of the support structure after 3D printing, specifically by controlling the cross-linking structure through the introduction of the interfering agent. Furthermore, the invention covers methods for creating three-dimensional objects utilizing these formulations and the resulting 3D-fabricated objects that benefit from improved post-processing removal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS KRASNOW whose telephone number is (571)270-1154. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 8am-5pm.
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 Zhao can be reached at 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.
/NICHOLAS KRASNOW/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights