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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on June 15, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Patent 12,447,673 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being
drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely
traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on March 7, 2025.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the
inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named
inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct
inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance
with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee
required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 17 recites wherein a peak absorption of the UV radiation absorber is to be substantially matched to a peak emission of ultraviolet energy from an ultraviolet energy source with a narrow band wavelength of less than about 30 nm, which does not further limit claim 1, upon which claim 17 is dependent. The UV radiation absorber of claim 1 inherently includes a peak absorption. Such peak absorption is not further limited by being substantially matched to a peak emission of ultraviolet energy from an ultraviolet energy source with a narrow band wavelength of less than about 30 nm. For comparison, in instant claim 5, peak absorption of the UV radiation absorber is further limited to be at from 355nm to 400nm.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
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) 1-8 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Emamjomeh
et al. (US 2018/0022923) in view of WO 2018/022093 and Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690).
Emamjomeh et al. (US 2018/0022923) disclose a three-dimensional printing kit (Claim 15),
comprising:
a polymeric build material including polymer particles having an average particle size ranging
from about 10 µm to about 150 µm ([0011], [0019]-[0021], average particle size ranges from 5 µm to
about 100 µm); and
a fusing agent including an aqueous liquid vehicle and a radiation absorber, the radiation
absorber including a dye or pigment of any color ([0030]-[0031], the fusing agent includes water based
dispersions (aqueous liquid vehicle is water based) including a radiation absorbing binding agent (i.e.,
active material) which is a dye or pigment of any color).
However, Emamjomeh et al. (US 2018/0022923) does not disclose the polymeric build material
including from about 80 wt% to 100 wt% of polymer particles, the fusing agent including an ultraviolet
(UV) energy radiation absorber including a charged yellow water-soluble dye, the fusing agent including
from about 2 wt% to about 20 wt% of the radiation absorber, OR the dye being from about 1 wt% to
about 40 wt% soluble in water.
WO 2018/022093 discloses a fusing agent including an aqueous liquid vehicle (water or other
primary solvent) and a radiation absorber that absorbs electromagnetic radiation, the fusing agent
including an ultraviolet (UV) energy radiation absorber [0040], [0042]; a build material is used with the fusing agent (FA) for 3D printing as shown in fig. 1B).
Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690) discloses a polymeric build material including from about 80 wt%
to 100 wt% of polymer particles ([0010], 80 wt% to 99.9%), a fusing agent including an energy absorber
capable of absorbing electromagnetic (which includes ultraviolet) radiation (abstract, [0008], [0030],
[0052]-[0053]) including a charged yellow water-soluble dye ([0040], [0042], the fusing agent can
include a dye colorant, the dye may be cationic (charged) dyes and/or anionic (charged) dyes, Acid
Yellow, anionic, water-soluble dyes including, but not limited to Direct Yellow 132), the fusing agent
including from about 2 wt% to about 20 wt% of the radiation absorber ([0036], 0.1 wt% to 20 wt%), and
the dye being from about 1 wt% to about 40 wt% soluble in water ([0068], "soluble" refers to a solubility
percentage of more than 0.1 wt%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to modify the kit of Emamjomeh et al. (US 2018/0022923) wherein the polymeric build material
includes from about 80 wt% to 100 wt% of polymer particles, as disclosed by Feng et al. (US
2019/0054690), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative
configuration for the build material known to be operable in the art; to further modify the fusing agent
to include an ultraviolet (UV) energy radiation absorber, as disclosed by WO 2018/022093 and Feng et
al. (US 2019/0054690), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an
alternative configuration for the fusing agent material known to be operable in the art; to further
modify the radiation absorber to include a charged yellow water-soluble dye, the fusing agent including
from about 2 wt% to about 20 wt% of the radiation absorber, and the dye being from about 1 wt% to
about 40 wt% soluble in water, as disclosed by Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the fusing agent
material known to be operable in the art.
As to claim 2, Emamjomeh et al. (US 2018/0022923) further discloses the printing kit wherein
the polymer particles include polyamide, polyethylene, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polystyrene,
polyacrylate, polyacetal, polypropylene, polycarbonate, polyester, acrylonitrile butadiene styrene,
thermoplastic polyamide, thermoplastic polyurethane, engineering plastic, polyether ketone,
polyetheretherketone (PEEK), polyethylene terephthalate, polybutylene terephthalate, polymer blends
thereof, amorphous polymers thereof, core-shell polymers thereof, or a copolymer thereof [0019].
As to claim 3, Emamjomeh et al. (US 2018/0022923) further discloses that the fusing agent can
include a co-solvent [0032]. Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690) further discloses that the liquid vehicle of
the fusing agent can include from about 5 wt% to 50 wt% of an organic co-solvent, wherein the organic
co-solvent is selected from the group consisting of ethanol, methanol, propanol, acetone,
tetrahydrofuran, hexane, 1-butanol, 2-butanol, tert- butanol, isopropanol, propylene glycol, methyl
ethyl ketone, dimethylformamide, 1,4- dioxone, acetonitrile, 1,2-butanediol, 1-methyl-2,3-propanediol
2-pyrrolidone, and a combination thereof ([0044]-[0048], one or more co-solvents from 1 wt% to 50
wt%, organic co-solvents include aliphatic alcohols (ethanol, methanol, propanol, 1-butanol, 2-butanol,
tert-butanol, isopropanol), diols (propylene glycol), formamides, propanediols, 2-pyrrolidinone). It
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to
further modify the co-solvent of the fusing agent to include from about 5 wt% to 50 wt% of an organic
co-solvent, as disclosed by Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690), because such a modification is known in the
art and would provide an alternative configuration for the fusing agent material known to be operable in
the art.
As to claim 4, Emamjomeh et al. (US 2018/0022923) further discloses the fusing agent including
a surfactant [0032]. Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690) further discloses that the liquid vehicle of the fusing agent can include from about 0.01 wt% to 2 wt% of a surfactant ([0044], surfactant ranging from 1.01
wt% to 20 wt%). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention
was made, to further modify the surfactant of the fusing agent to be from about 0.01 wt% to 2 wt% of
the surfactant, as disclosed by Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690), because such a modification is known in
the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the fusing agent material known to be
operable in the art.
As to claims 5 and 17-18, WO 2018/022093 further discloses that the UV radiation absorber can absorb wavelengths from about 10 nm to about 390 nm [0040]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the radiation absorber to exhibit peak absorption of from about 355 to 400 nanometers, because such peak absorptions would have been found in finding operable UV radiation absorbers in view of the teachings of WO 2018/022093 to use UV radiation absorbers that can absorb wavelengths from about 10 nm to about 390 nm. Furthermore, note that UV radiation inherently includes wavelengths from about 10 to about 400 nm. Thus, peak absorption up to about 400 would also be further obvious. Furthermore, Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690) further discloses that the charged yellow water-soluble dye can be Acid Yellow 17, Acid Yellow 29, Acid Yellow 23, Acid Yellow 42 or Orasol Yellow dyes [0042]. Note that yellow dyes are ultraviolet radiation absorbers. See Applicant’s remarks filed on June 10, 2026 relative to Exhibit 1 “Yellow colorants absorb in the UV wavelength (e.g., about 400 nm and under)”. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the radiation absorber to exhibit peak absorption of from about 355 to 400 nanometers, because such peak absorptions would have been found when using charged yellow water-soluble dyes, as disclosed by Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690), which yellow dyes are ultraviolet absorbing dyes. Further, as to claim 17, the peak absorption of the UV radiation absorber is capable of being substantially matched to a peak emission of ultraviolet energy from an ultraviolet energy source with a narrow band wavelength of less than about 30 nm.
As to claim 6, Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690) further discloses that the dye can further include
Acid Yellow 17 (CI Acid Yellow 17) and Acid Yellow 23 (CI Acid Yellow 23), both of which are sulfonated
azo yellow dyes.
As to claim 7, Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690) further discloses the radiation absorber can be
present in the fusing agent in an amount ranging from about 5 wt% to about 15 wt% ([0041], from 0.1
wt% to 10 wt%, from 0.5 wt% to 5 wt%, from 2 wt% to 10 wt%).
As to claim 8, Emamjomeh et al. (US 2018/0022923) further discloses a detailing agent, wherein
the detailing agent includes a detailing compound to reduce a temperature of the polymeric build
material onto which the detailing agent is applied [0014].
As to claim 16, Feng et al. (US 2019/0054690) further discloses the charged yellow water-soluble
dye can be selected from the group consisting of CI acid yellow 23, CI acid yellow 17, CI acid yellow 4, CI
acid yellow 5, CI acid yellow 21, CI acid yellow 49, CI acid yellow 42, CI acid yellow 117, and a
combination thereof ([0042], Acid Yellow 17 (CI Acid Yellow 17), Acid Yellow 23 (CI Acid Yellow 23) and
Acid Yellow 42 (CI Acid Yellow 42).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that it is submitted that the skilled artisan would not have been led to combine Emamjomeh with Hartman. Emamjomeh is drawn to a three-dimensional (3D) printing method using multi jet fusion (MJF) (paragraph [0011]) and a novel detailing agent to reduce the degree of coalescence, or prevent coalescence of a portion of the build material on which the detailing agent has been delivered or has penetrated by providing an evaporative cooling effect. The cooling effect of the detailing agent reduces the temperature of the build material containing the detailing agent during radiation exposure. Since the build material, with detailing agent applied thereto, has a
reduced temperature, the coalescence bleed may be reduced or prevented. As such, the detailing agent disclosed herein contributes to the generation of dimensionally accurate 3D objects in real-time without
the need for post-object mechanical refining processes (e.g., tumbling,
stone polishing, etc.). (paragraph [0014])
In contrast, Hartman is drawn to a system for build material layer quality level
determination. The system may include an image capture device, a controller, and a computer readable storage medium. The computer readable storage medium may include instructions that may cause the controller to receive, from the image capture device, an image of a testing agent deposited in a testing pattern onto a layer of build materials, in which the layer of build materials is to form a section of a three-dimensional printed part. The instructions may also cause the controller to determine a condition of the deposited testing pattern in the received image, wherein the determined condition is to be used to determine a quality level of the layer of build materials based upon the determined condition. (Abstract)
Hartman's disclosure is further drawn to 3D printers including a testing agent delivery device that may be implemented to deposit a testing agent in a testing pattern onto a layer of a 3D part. Hartman states that "if there is an issue with the fusing process, i.e., the build materials are not properly fused together, there may be defects on the surface of the layer of build materials. These defects may cause other defects in the deposited testing pattern. For instance, gaps, line distortions of various shapes, blurred lines, or other defects may occur in the deposited testing pattern as a result of the defects in the surface of the layer of build materials." (Paragraph [0012]) "An image of the deposited testing pattern may be analyzed to determine a condition of the deposited testing pattern. The condition may be based upon the image quality and/or the readability of the deposited testing pattern in the captured image." (Paragraph [0013])
Hartman is drawn to a testing apparatus using a testing agent and an image capture device to determine a condition of a deposited testing pattern. Hartman's testing system can determine the condition of many various 3D printed layers, and thus discloses UV, IR or near-IR curing lamp, IR or near-IR light emitting diodes (LED), halogen lamps emitting in the visible and near-IR range, microwaves, or lasers with desirable electromagnetic wavelengths, as well as fusing agent active materials for
use therewith. (Paragraph [0031])
Given that Hartman is specifically drawn to a testing apparatus, it is submitted that the skilled artisan would have had no teaching or suggestion to look to Hartman to satisfy any perceived deficiencies in Emamjomeh.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant appears to argue that Emamjomeh and Hartman are not related in art, which is incorrect. Both references are to 3D printing using build materials and fusing agents, as mentioned in the prior art rejections above. Emamjomeh discloses 3D printing using build material 16 and fusing agents 28 (figs. 2C-2F). Hartman discloses 3D printing using build material 106 and fusing agents (FA) from FA delivery device 130 (fig. 1B).
Applicant further does not acquiesce to the Office's interpretation of Feng. The
Office states that Feng discloses
a fusing agent including an energy absorber capable of absorbing electromagnetic (which includes ultraviolet) radiation (abstract, [0008], [0030], [0052]-[0053]) including a charged yellow water-soluble dye ([0040], [0042], the fusing agent can include a dye colorant, the dye may be cationic (charged) dyes and/or anionic (charged) dyes, Acid Yellow, anionic, water-soluble dyes including, but not limited to Direct Yellow 132), the fusing agent including from about 2 wt% to about 20 wt% of the
radiation absorber ([0036], 0.1 wt% to 20 wt%). (Office Action, page 4)
Even though the Office states in its rejection that Feng discloses UV radiation,
the actual disclosure of Feng does not appear to disclose the use of UV radiation. The
skilled artisan would realize that Feng is teaching an infrared 3D printing system. See,
e.g., paragraph [0007]:
In formulating a powder bed material for use in the 3-dimensional printing system described herein, several parameters can be considered. Such parameters can include infrared (IR) energy density absorption, melting point, and/or process window temperatures.
At paragraph [0009], Feng states:
The fusing agent comprises an energy absorber capable of absorbing electromagnetic radiation to produce heat, and wherein the energy absorber comprises a carbon black, a near-infrared absorbing dye, a near-infrared absorbing pigment, a tungsten bronze, a molybdenum bronze, a metal nanoparticle, a conjugated polymer, or a combination thereof. The fusing electromagnetic radiation source can be set to expose the powder bed to infrared radiation having a peak from about 1050 nm to 1150 nm. [This is within the Near-Infrared (NIR) spectrum]
At paragraph [0010], Feng states:
In another example, a method of preparing polymer build material can include admixing from 80 wt% to 99.9 wt% of a polymer powder with from 0.1 wt% to 20 wt% of an antioxidant, flow aid, or
mixture thereof. The polymer powder can have a particle size distribution having the following profile: D 10 of 30 µm or more, D50 from 50 µm to 65 µm, and D90 of 100 µm or less, an infrared energy
density absorption of 20% or less....
Given at least the above quotes and the Feng disclosure as a whole, it is submitted that the skilled artisan would not assume that Feng discloses UV energy absorbers.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. While Feng discloses examples of fusing agents capable of absorbing infrared and near-infrared radiation as mentioned by Applicant above, Feng explicitly recites “The fusing agent can include an energy absorber capable of absorbing electromagnetic radiation to produce heat”. (abstract and [0008]), but also see [0030], [0052]-[0053] which disclose using electromagnetic radiation). It is known that electromagnetic radiation includes a range of radiation including ultraviolet radiation. See for example Hartman [0040] who discloses “The fusing agent may include a heat- or radiation-absorbing agent (i.e., an active material). The active material may be any suitable material that absorbs heat and/or electromagnetic radiation. The active material may be selected to absorb heat and/or any wavelength in the electromagnetic spectrum. As examples, the electromagnetic radiation absorber may absorb IR radiation …, which includes near-IR …, ultraviolet radiation …, visible radiation …, radio radiation…”. Thus, Feng does NOT disclose that ONLY infrared and near-infrared can be used. Feng discloses that fusing agents can include an energy absorber capable of absorbing electromagnetic radiation (which includes infrared, near-infrared ultraviolet radiation).
Further, it is submitted that the skilled artisan would not view Feng's disclosure of a yellow colorant in paragraphs [0042] et seq. as a radiation absorber. Yellow colorants absorb in the UV wavelength (e.g., about 400 nm and under). See, e.g., Merlain, T.G., Nanganoa, L.T., Desire, B.B.P., Nsami, N.J. and Mbadcam, K.J. (2016) "Fenton-Like Oxidation of Acid Yellow 23 in the Presence of Iron Rich Soil," Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science, 6, 553-569,
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/aces.2016.65048, attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Figure 11 of the Merlain paper is a graph entitled "UV-Vis spectral changes of acid yellow." As can be seen in the figure, the acid yellow shows strongest absorbance below about 440 nm, but exhibits negligible absorbance at about 540 nm and beyond. See also, e.g., "Absorption [Acid Yellow 17]", AAT Bioquest, https://www.aatbio.com/absorbance-uv-visible-spectrum-graph-viewer/acid yellow 17, attached hereto as Exhibit 2, which shows that the peak absorption of Acid Yellow 17 is at 199 nm, it absorbs strongly
around 400 nm, but exhibits negligible absorbance at about 500 nm and beyond.
As shown above, Feng's disclosure teaches near-infrared (not UV) systems (e.g., the near-IR spectrum is about 780 nm - 2,500 nm). As such, if a yellow colorant is used in Feng's near-infrared (not UV) system, it would not be a radiation absorber, e.g., as shown in Exhibits 1 and 2 referenced above. Feng does disclose an example of a colorant that may be the same as the fusing agent - carbon black (paragraph [0040]). However, carbon black is a strong absorber in the near-IR region, and is
listed (see quote from paragraph [0009] above) as one of Feng's example energy absorbers.
As such, contrary to the statements by the Office, it is submitted that the skilled artisan would recognize, from the totality of the Feng disclosure, that Feng does not teach a fusing agent including an ultraviolet (UV) energy radiation absorber, the UV radiation absorber including a charged yellow water-soluble dye as recited in Applicant's claim 1 (as shown above, the yellow colorant examples of Feng are not taught or disclosed as energy absorbers in Feng's near-IR system).
As such, since Feng does not teach what the Office proffered (i.e., a UV 3D printing system with a charged yellow water-soluble dye radiation absorber), it is respectfully submitted that the § 103 rejection fails for this reason alone.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, Feng discloses that the fusing agent can include an energy absorber capable of absorbing electromagnetic radiation (which includes a range of radiation including infrared, near-infrared and ultraviolet, among others) to produce heat. Feng discloses [0040] that “the fusing agent itself can include a pigment or dye colorant that imparts a visible color to the fusing agent” and that “the colorant may also be the same as the energy absorber itself”, and discloses that the colorant can include a charged yellow water-soluble dye ([0042], the colorant can be a dye, the dye may be cationic (charged) dyes and/or anionic (charged) dyes, Acid Yellow, anionic, water-soluble dyes including, but not limited to Direct Yellow 132). As evidenced by the Exhibits above provided by Applicant, it is known that “Yellow colorants absorb in the UV wavelength”. Thus, if a charged yellow water-soluble dye is selected as the energy absorber of the fusing agent as disclosed by Feng as mentioned above, it would be obvious, if not inherent, that the electromagnetic radiation (disclosed by Feng) used for energy absorption would be ultraviolet radiation. As referenced by Applicant above, Feng [0009] discloses that when near-infrared absorbing dye or pigment is used, then “The fusing electromagnetic radiation source can be set to expose the powder bed to infrared radiation”. Thus, it would be obvious, if not inherent, that when an ultraviolet absorbing dye or pigment is used, such as a charged yellow water-soluble dye as disclosed by Feng, then the fusing electromagnetic radiation source would be set to ultraviolet radiation.
Further, the Office states as reasoning for its proposed modification of Emamjomeh with Hartman and Feng that such modifications are known in the art and would provide alternative configurations known to be operable in the art. However, it is submitted that this reasoning is not sufficient to support a prima facie case of obviousness, for at least the following reasons.
According to MPEP 2143.01, "If the proposed modification or combination of the
prior art would change the principle of operation of the prior art invention being modified, then the teachings of the references are not sufficient to render the claims prima facie obvious."
In the present case, the Office proposes modification of the Emamjomeh disclosure to incorporate UV light sources and a UV energy radiation absorber, the UV radiation absorber including a charged yellow water-soluble dye. It is submitted that the Office's proposed modification of Emamjomeh would require substantial reconstruction and redesign of the Emamjomeh's 3D printing apparatus, as well as a change in a basic principle under which the Emamjomeh apparatus was designed to operate. Emamjomeh states throughout the disclosure shows that the light sources in
its 3D printing apparatus are near-infrared (not UV). See, e.g., paragraph [0036]:
The colorant in the detailing agent 29 may be a dye of any color having substantially no absorbance in a range of 650 nm to 2500 nm. By "substantially no absorbance" it is meant that the dye absorbs no radiation having wavelengths in a range of 650 nm to 2500 nm, or that the dye absorbs less than 10% of radiation having wavelengths in a range of 650 nm to 2500 nm. The dye is also capable of absorbing radiation with wavelengths of 650 nm or less. As such, the dye in the detailing agent 29 absorbs at least some wavelengths within the visible spectrum, but absorbs little or no wavelengths within the near-infrared spectra. This is in contrast to the active material in the fusing agent 28, which absorbs wavelengths within the near- infrared spectra. As such, the colorant in the detailing agent 29 will not substantially absorb the fusing radiation, and thus will not initiate melting and fusing of the build material 16 in contact therewith when the layer 10 is exposed to the fusing radiation.
As such, if Emamjomeh included UV light sources in its 3D print system, the colorants in its inventive detailing agent would absorb UV radiation and would defeat the purpose of its detailing agent.
As shown above, it cannot be assumed that Emamjomeh's apparatus was designed to operate with a UV light source and UV light absorbers. It is submitted that modifying Emamjomeh as proffered by the Office would require substantial reconstruction and redesign of the elements in Emamjomeh. Thus, if one of ordinary skill in the art would have substantially altered Emamjomeh's 3D printing apparatus to include UV light sources and a UV radiation absorber including a charged yellow water-soluble dye as proposed by the Office, the principles of operation of Emamjomeh's 3D printing apparatus and inventive detailing agent would have been transformed in a non-obvious way according to MPEP 2143.01.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. While embodiments in Emamjomeh disclose that fusing agents can absorb near-infrared radiation, Emamjomeh does not disclose that only near-infrared radiation is used. Emamjomeh discloses [0057] “The radiation R is emitted from a radiation source 30, such as an IR or near-IR curing lamp, or IR or near-IR light emitting diodes (LED), or lasers with specific IR or near-IR wavelengths. The radiation source 30 used will depend, at least in part, on the type of fusing agent 28 that is used”. Thus, the radiation used will depend upon the type of fusing agent used (e.g., upon infrared absorbing, near-infrared absorbing, ultra-violet absorbing, or other radiation absorbing). Feng discloses that it is known in the art to use ultra-violet absorbing fusing agents as mentioned above. Thus, the combination of Emamjomeh and Feng would NOT change the principle of operation of Emamjomeh because Emamjomeh discloses that “The radiation source 30 used will depend, at least in part, on the type of fusing agent 28 that is used” [0057]. Thus, if an ultra-violet absorbing fusing agent is used (which are known in the art as disclosed by Feng above), the radiation source used would be ultra-violet. As mentioned above, it is known in the art as disclosed by Feng that radiation absorbing fusing agents can be electromagnetic radiation absorbing, which includes infrared fusing agents, near-infrared absorbing fusing agents and ultraviolet fusing agents. Changing between different known fusing agents does NOT change the principle of operation of Emamjomeh, as radiation and radiation absorbing fusing agents are still used. As to the detailing agent arguments, Emamjomeh discloses that 3D printing can include build material and fusing agents, without using detailing agents. “In some instances”, coalescence bleed may result which can then be prevented with using detailing agents. See Emamjomeh [0011]-[0013]. Thus, it is known in the art to 3D print using build material and fusing agents, without using detailing agents, especially when coalescence bleed does not result from the 3D printing. While Emamjomeh discloses embodiments of the detailing agents in [0036], Emamjomeh does not disclose that only such detailing agents can be used. Emamjomeh [0013] discloses “The detailing agent includes a colorant that does not absorb the radiation used for fusing”. Thus, if detailing agents and ultraviolet absorbing fusing agents are used, it would be obvious to use a colorant for the detailing agent which does not absorb ultraviolet radiation in view of such teachings.
Further, Applicant respectfully submits that Emamjomeh, either alone or in combination with Hartman and/or Feng does not render independent claim 1 obvious because the proposed modifications render Emamjomeh as unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. MPEP § 2143.01.' V states that "[i]f a proposed modification would render the prior art invention being modified unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, there may be no suggestion or motivation to make the proposed modification." In
particular, modifying Emamjomeh by replacing its fusing agent having absorbance in the infrared or near infrared wavelength range (see, e.g., Emamjomeh at paragraph [0031]), with a charged yellow UV energy radiation absorber, would render Emamjomeh inoperable because Emamjomeh teaches using infrared (IR) or near infrared (near IR) radiation sources, not UV energy sources, (id. at paragraph [0057]), and also would render Emamjomeh's detailing agent as inoperative (as shown above).
Emamjomeh at paragraph [0031] states:
Examples of suitable fusing agents 28 are water-based dispersions including a radiation absorbing binding agent (i.e., an active material). The active material may be near infrared light absorber. As examples, the active material may be any near IR dye or pigment. The dye or pigment in the fusing agent 28 may be any color. As one example, the fusing agent 28 may be an ink-type formulation including carbon black as the active material. An example of this ink-type formulation is commercially known as CM997A available from Hewlett-Packard Company. Examples of other pigment based inks include the commercially available inks CM993Aand CE042A, available
from Hewlett-Packard Company.
It is respectfully submitted that the Office, in quoting that Emamjomeh states that "a
radiation absorbing binding agent (i.e., active material) … is a dye of any color …" is taking a single sentence in the middle of the paragraph out of context. The paragraph first states that the active material includes a near IR light absorber. Then the paragraph states that examples of the active material may be any near IR dye or pigment. Then the paragraph states that the (the "the" in the sentence refers back to the immediately preceding sentence that states "any near IR dye or
pigment") dye or pigment may be any color. Further, the examples in the paragraph
start with carbon black as the active material. Later examples in the paragraph are
primarily black and cyan ink formulations.
It is respectfully submitted that the skilled artisan would glean no teaching or suggestion to replace Emamjomeh's near IR dyes or pigments with a UV radiation absorber including a charged yellow water-soluble dye as recited in Applicant's revised claim 1, with any reasonable expectation of success. In fact, the skilled artisan would be led away from such a substitution due to the undesirable effect such a modification would have on its inventive detailing agent. The skilled artisan would recognize that
Emamjomeh, e.g., at paragraphs [0057]-[0058] teaches using an IR or near IR radiation source, and that Emamjomeh's radiation absorbing binding agent would need to exhibit adequate absorbance within IR or near IR wavelengths.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. 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). As mentioned above, while embodiments in Emamjomeh disclose that fusing agents can absorb near-infrared radiation, Emamjomeh does not disclose that only near-infrared radiation is used. Emamjomeh discloses [0057] “The radiation R is emitted from a radiation source 30, such as an IR or near-IR curing lamp, or IR or near-IR light emitting diodes (LED), or lasers with specific IR or near-IR wavelengths. The radiation source 30 used will depend, at least in part, on the type of fusing agent 28 that is used”. Thus, the radiation used will depend upon the type of fusing agent used (e.g., upon infrared absorbing, near-infrared absorbing, ultra-violet absorbing, or other radiation absorbing). Feng discloses that it is known in the art to use ultra-violet absorbing fusing agents as mentioned above. Thus, the combination of Emamjomeh and Feng would NOT render Emamjomeh unsatisfactory for its intended purpose because Emamjomeh discloses that “The radiation source 30 used will depend, at least in part, on the type of fusing agent 28 that is used” [0057]. Thus, if an ultra-violet absorbing fusing agent is used (which are known in the art as disclosed by Feng above), the radiation source used would be ultra-violet. As mentioned above, it is known in the art as disclosed by Feng that radiation absorbing fusing agents can be electromagnetic radiation absorbing, which includes infrared fusing agents, near-infrared absorbing fusing agents and ultraviolet fusing agents. Changing between different known fusing agents does NOT render Emamjomeh unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, as radiation and radiation absorbing fusing agents are still used for 3D printing. Emamjomeh [0031] discloses “Examples of suitable fusing agents 28 are water-based dispersions including a radiation absorbing binding agent (i.e., an active material).” Note that “radiation” in that sentence is NOT limited to near infrared radiation. The next sentence in [0031] is the active material “may be” near infrared light absorber. Thus, “radiation” in that sentence is NOT limited to near infrared radiation. Applicant argues that “any color” in [0031] means that the near IR dye or pigment is any color. This is contradictory to Applicant’s exhibits and arguments above that “Yellow colorants absorb in the UV wavelength”. Any color includes yellow. And thus, Applicant’s argument that “any color” in [0031] means that the near IR dye or pigment is any color (such as yellow) appears to be incorrect, as yellow cannot be a near IR dye or pigment. Thus in [0031], “any color” would be understood to mean that the “radiation absorbing binding agent” is any color. Even if Applicant doesn’t agree that Emamjomeh discloses any color radiation absorbing binding agent, it is known in the art that radiation absorbing fusing agents can be charged yellow water-soluble dyes, as disclosed by Feng. Arguments relative to detailing agents are addressed above. Applicant argues that Emamjomeh [0057]-[0058] disclose using IR or near IR. However, such disclosure are embodiments of the invention of Emamjomeh. Emamjomeh does not disclose that only IR and near IR can be used. As mentioned above, Emamjomeh discloses [0057] “The radiation R is emitted from a radiation source 30, such as an IR or near-IR curing lamp, or IR or near-IR light emitting diodes (LED), or lasers with specific IR or near-IR wavelengths. The radiation source 30 used will depend, at least in part, on the type of fusing agent 28 that is used”. Thus, the radiation used will depend upon the type of fusing agent used (e.g., upon infrared absorbing, near-infrared absorbing, ultra-violet absorbing, or other radiation absorbing). And as mentioned above, it is known in the art that radiation absorbing fusing agents can be charged yellow water-soluble dyes, as disclosed by Feng. Thus, there is motivation to combine the references with a reasonable expectation of success, as alternative radiation absorbing fusing agents (other than those disclosed in Emamjomeh) are known in the art, such as ultraviolet absorbing fusing agents (as disclosed by Hartman above) and fusing agents which include a charged yellow water-soluble dye (as disclosed by Feng above) which yellow fusing agents are also ultraviolet absorbing fusing agents as mentioned above and as even argued by Applicant that “Yellow colorants absorb in the UV wavelength” as evidenced by the provided Exhibits.
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 JOSEPH S LEYSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5061. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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, Sam Xiao Zhao can be reached at 5712705343. 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.
/J.S.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/John J DeRusso/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights