Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/790,022

LASER ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR PRODUCING POROUS LAYERS

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jun 29, 2022
Examiner
COLLISTER, ELIZABETH A
Art Unit
1784
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
The Regents of the University of California
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
283 granted / 348 resolved
+16.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
385
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.1%
+10.1% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 348 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Interpretation The amendments to the claims 24, 29 and 30 are supported by the Spec. in at least [0016, 0023] which teach the alkaline earth metal salt, alkali metal salt, NaCl and KCl. It is noted that the support for a remainer portion of the salt in the porous metal part is supported by the original method claims and in the Spec with the limitation of at least partially removing the salt/sacrificial material thus leaving some present. It is noted that no teaching is found that supports the range of the “at least partially removing” and thus none for at “at least some of sacrificial material remains”. Thus, no criticality of the range is taught nor are any ranges given in the examples or the Spec. for the sacrificial material remaining. The Spec does teach the initial Vol% [0014, 0021] of the sacrificial material in the starting material but not the remaining material. 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. Claims 24-25 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka et al. (US 20150004041 A1), herein Tanaka. In regards to claims 24 and 29, claim 24 defines the product by how the product was made. Thus, claim 24 is a product-by-process claims. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited steps imply a structure having a porous consolidated metal part with an alkali or alkaline earth metal salt present. The reference suggests such a product. Tanka teaches a porous aluminum part of sintered particles (i.e., consolidated) with a residual amount of NaCl present (0.2 mass % i.e., at least some) [Abstract, Table 1 example 18, 0053]. In regards to claim 25, Tanka further teaches the porous metal part is a catalyst support [0001]. 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 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (US 20150004041 A1), herein Tanaka, as applied to claim 24 above. In regards to claim 30, Tanka further teaches the sacrificial/support material comprises KCl [claim 8]. Tanaka differs from claim 30 by teaching KCl in a list of possible materials, such that it cannot be said that the KCl species is anticipated. However, it would have been obvious of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have employed any of the materials taught by Tanka, including KCl. The motivation for doing so is that the “selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use [supports] a prima facie obviousness determination.” See MPEP 2144.07. Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (US 20150004041 A1), herein Tanaka, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Cho et al (US 20140004441 A1), herein Cho. In regards to claim 26, Tanka does not expressly teach the porous part is a transport layer of a hydrogen generator. Cho teaches a porous metal transport layer of a hydrogen generator [Abstract, 0003-0004, 0013-0014, Figs. 1A-1B]. Cho teaches the porous metal layer comprises aluminum [0018]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used the porous aluminum part of Tanaka as the porous aluminum transport layer of Cho. One would have been motivated to do so as it would have been the simple substitution of one porous aluminum part of another to obtain predictable results. Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (US 20150004041 A1), herein Tanaka, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20200246873 A1), herein Kim. In regards to claim 27, Tanka does not expressly teach the porous part is the porous medium of a heat pipe. Kim teaches a porous aluminum metal layer for a heat pipe [0008-0010, 0014, 0051, 0054]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used the porous aluminum part of Tanaka as the porous aluminum medium of the heat pipe of Kim. One would have been motivated to do so as it would have been the simple substitution of one porous aluminum part of another to obtain predictable results. Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (US 20150004041 A1), herein Tanaka, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Lye et al.( WO 2006/020742 A2), herein Lye. In regards to claim 28, Tanaka does not expressly teach the porous part is an implantable device. Lye teaches an implantable medical device with an outer porous layer of aluminum [Abstract, 0097]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used the porous aluminum part of Tanaka as the porous aluminum outer layer of an implant device as taught by Lye. One would have been motivated to do so as it would have been the simple substitution of one porous aluminum part of another to obtain predictable results. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ELIZABETH A COLLISTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1019. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 9 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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. /ELIZABETH COLLISTER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 29, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 20, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603201
EXPANDABLE SINTERED NEODYMIUM-IRON-BORON MAGNET, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590036
ZIRCONIA PRE-SINTERED BODY SUITABLE FOR DENTAL USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583794
ZIRCONIA PRE-SINTERED BODY SUITABLE FOR DENTAL USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583800
CERAMIC ARTICLES MADE FROM CERAMIC BEADS WITH OPEN POROSITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583201
SOUND-ATTENUATING COMPOSITE COMPONENT WITH HONEYCOMB CORE AND PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+13.5%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 348 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month