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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, claims 1-5, 7-15, 17-28, and 35 in the reply filed on 14 November 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 31-32 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 14 November 2025.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 27 October 2022. These drawings are accepted.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-8, 17-18, and 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0134713 A1 (hereinafter “Abbott”).
Regarding claim 1, Abbott teaches a method of additive manufacturing using binder jetting (see abstract or figs 1-3 or claim 1). Abbott teaches a powder build material is deposited to a surface of the powder bed (See fig 8). Abbott teaches that the functional binder is jetted onto the powder bed, and then a metal oxide is jetted separately (see Fig 8). Abbott teaches that the particle in the ink binder infiltrates between the powder particles (see Fig 2-3). Abbott teaches that the metal oxide is reduced, which causes sintering to the build material (see [0094]). Abbott teaches that alternatively this may be done between layers, as by applying heat to sinter an individual layer by the reacted nanoparticle ([0094]-[0095]).
Abbott does not teach that the metal oxide is present in the powder bed when the reducing agent is applied. Abbott teaches that the reducing agent is applied before the oxide (Fig 8). However, the mere alteration of the sequence of processing steps would not have resulted in a material difference in the process. For example applying the copper nanoparticles in the powder bed and then applying the reducing agent after would have met the limitations of the claim and achieved the same results. It would have been an obvious matter to the skilled artisan at time of filing to have altered the sequence of steps 802 and 803 in Fig 8 when the same reactions and effects would have taken place between the materials. Applicant is directed to MPEP 2144.04 IV.
Further alternatively, Abbott teaches that the material used in the build powder may be an oxide (see [0038] or claim 4). It would have been an obvious matter to the skilled artisan to have selected the oxide as Abbott teaches that this is a suitable material. The effect of the reducing agent that reduces the copper oxide reducing the other metal oxide to create free metal would have naturally flowed from the teachings of Abbott.
Regarding claim 2, Abbott teaches that Nitride may be present in the build (see [0038] or claim 4).
Regarding claim 3, Abbott teaches titanium compounds ([0038] and claim 4).
Regarding claim 5 Abbott teaches that combinations may be used (see [0038]).
Regarding claim 7, Abbott teaches that the metal oxide is reduced, which causes sintering to the build material (see [0094]). Abbott teaches that alternatively this may be done between layers, as by applying heat to sinter an individual layer by the reacted nanoparticle ([0094]-[0095]).
Regarding claim 8, Abbott teaches copper (Fig 8 and claim 1).
Regarding claim 17, Abbott teaches that the metal oxide is reduced, which causes sintering to the build material (see [0094]). Abbott teaches that alternatively this may be done between layers, as by applying heat to sinter an individual layer by the reacted nanoparticle ([0094]-[0095]).
Regarding claim 18, Abbott teaches copper (Fig 8 and claim 1).
Regarding claim 26-27, Abbott teaches a size of 100 nm or less (see [0055]), overlapping the range as claimed and establishing prima facie obviousness for that range.
Regarding claim 28, Abbott teaches that the materials may be room temperature susceptors ([0046]).
Claim(s) 4, 13-15, 23-25, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0134713 A1 (hereinafter “Abbott”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20220250149 A1 (hereinafter “Gibson”).
Regarding claim 4, Abbott does not teach a hydride material be used.
Gibson teaches a technique for controlling build material flow (See title). Gibson teaches that the method of fabricating a metal or ceramic part includes adding a packing modifier which allows for control of powder packing and powder flow (See [0024]-[0027]). Gibson teaches that the materials may include hydrides such as titanium hydride (see [0038]-[0039]).
It would have been an obvious matter to the skilled artisan at a time of filing to have altered the method of Abbott as by adding titanium hydride, as taught by Gibson (see [0038]-[0039]), in order to have better control of powder packing and powder flow as taught by Gibson (See [0024]-[0027]).
Regarding claim 13, Gibson teaches that the powder bed may include titanium and titanium hydride (See [0039]).
Regarding claim 14, Gibson teaches that alloys may be formed (See [0035]).
Regarding claim 15, Gibson envisions that titanium is alloyed with aluminum (See Table 1).
Regarding claim 23, Gibson teaches that the powders may include aluminum (See [0044]).
Regarding claim 24-25, Gibson envisions alloys of aluminum (Table 1).
Regarding claim 35, Gibson teaches that the powder bed may include titanium and titanium hydride (See [0039]).
Claims 9-12 and 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0134713 A1 (hereinafter “Abbott”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2019025801 A1 (hereinafter “Black”).
Regarding claim 9, Abbott does not teach wherein the precursor includes titanium precursor.
Black teaches a method of 3D printing which uses a functional binder (See pp 4-5). Black teaches that the binder may include a titanium metal precursor (see pp 11-12). Black teaches that the binders used have advantages over traditional binders such as the metal remaining in the finished part (See p 6).
It would have been an obvious matter to the skilled artisan at a time of filing to have altered the method of Abbott as by adding titanium precursor in a binder, as taught by Black (seep 11-12), in order to have advantages over traditional binders (See p 6).
Regarding claim 10, Black teaches organometallics (see p. 12).
Regarding claim 11, Black teaches an amine ligand (See p 12).
Regarding claim 12, Black teaches (Ti(NR2)4 (see p. 12).
Regarding claim 19-22, Black envisions aluminum (see p 11-12).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 9908819 B1 teaches to produce ceramic green bodies using binder with iron citrate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER S KESSLER whose telephone number is (571)272-6510. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
CHRISTOPHER S. KESSLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1734
/CHRISTOPHER S KESSLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1759