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
The amendment filed 09/16/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 20 and 23 have been amended. Claims 2-3, 7, 10-19, 21 and 25-26 remain canceled. Claim 27 is a newly submitted claim. Accordingly, claims 1, 4-6, remain pending and are the claims addressed and examined below.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the claim objections previously set forth in the Office action mailed 05/16/2025. Applicant’s amendments to claims 20 and 23 have overcome the 35 USC 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Office action mailed 05/16/2025.
In view of the amendments to the claimed subject matter, the following new grounds of rejections are necessitated.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 09/16/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 20 under 35 USC 103 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 in view of a new prior art reference found in an updated search necessitated by the amendments to the claims (see Sano et al., US 2018/0038015, as applied in the rejections below).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “output the flowable extrudate from the print to form an object” in lines 5-6 should be corrected to recite “output the flowable extrudate from the print head to form an object” to ensure consistent language is used throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: there is a redundant “to” in line 20 of claim which should be removed in order for the claims to be grammatically coherent. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
[AltContent: rect]
Claims 20, 22-24 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 20: the recitation “a magnetic material added in sufficient quantity so as to impart magnetic qualities to the article” in lines 19-20 renders the claim indefinite as it not clear what the scope of “added in sufficient quantity” is intending to cover. For instance, technically one magnetic particle would impart magnetic qualities to an article, and it is unclear how many particles constitute “added in sufficient quantity” so as to adequately impart magnetic qualities to an article to arrive at the claim. Claims 22-24 and 27 are rejected due to their dependency on independent claim 20.
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.
[AltContent: rect]Claims 1 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shields et al. (US 2021/0331389; of record) in view of Bourgoyne (US 2016/0096320; of record) and further in view of Mantell et al. (US 2017/0320272; of record) and Sano et al. (US 2018/0038015).
As to claim 1: Shields discloses the claimed system for additive manufacturing (i.e., 3D printing system for preparing a three-dimensional object) (Shields at [0002], [0010], [0011], Fig. 1), comprising:
a print head (i.e., printing device 10) (Shields at [0010], [0011], [0013], [0072], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below) including:
a heated conduit (i.e., heated section) having a heating element to receive a raw material and produce a flowable extrudate therefrom (i.e., the heating section 20 is a tubular section comprising Peltier elements on the outer tube wall; during operation, a polymer is fed into the feed section 16 and then the polymer is melted in the heating section 20 so as to obtain a polymer melt) (Shields at [0072], [0075], [0080], [0082], [0084], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below);
a nozzle (i.e., terminal printing head section 30 including a die 32) to receive the flowable extrudate from the heated conduit and output the flowable extrudate from the print head to form an object (i.e., shaping, depositing and foaming the cooled homogenized expandable pressurized polymer mixture by extruding it through the die 32 of the terminal printing head section 30) (Shields at [0072], [0079], [0081], [0089], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below); and
an additive injection device (i.e., gas supply line 26 having a discharge end provided and connected with the upper part of the mixing section 24), operatively coupled to the print head, that is configured to add an additive to the flowable extrudate prior to exiting the nozzle (i.e., dosing at least one blowing agent through the gas supply line 26) (Shields at [0072], [0079], [0086], [0087], [0088], [0089], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below),
wherein the additive injection device is in direct physical contact with the print head (i.e., gas supply line 26 having a discharge end provided and connected with the upper part of the mixing section 24) (Shields at [0072], [0079], [0086], [0087], [0088], [0089], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below),
the additive injection device having a main additive injection passage to add the additive to the flowable extrudate in the print head (i.e., gas supply line 26 having a discharge end provided and connected with the upper part of the mixing section 24; dosing at least one blowing agent through the gas supply line 26) (Shields at [0072], [0079], [0086], [0087], [0088], [0089], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below),
wherein the main additive injection passage extends through the print head into the heated conduit (i.e., gas supply line 26 having a discharge end provided and connected with the upper part of the mixing section 24; dosing at least one blowing agent through the gas supply line 26) (Shields at [0072], [0079], [0086], [0087], [0088], [0089], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below);
PNG
media_image1.png
552
584
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Shields discloses dosing gas supply line 26 having a discharge end provided and connected with the upper part of the mixing section 24; and dosing at least one blowing agent through the gas supply line 26 (Shields at [0061], [0072], [0079], [0086], [0087], [0088], [0089], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided above).
Though, as apparent in annotated Fig. 1 from Shields disclosure above, it is evident the main additive injection passage is configured to supply the additive parallel to the flowable extrudate in the main extrudate flow passage; hence, Shields fails to disclose the claimed wherein the main additive injection passage is configured to supply the additive perpendicularly to the flowable extrudate in the heated conduit for mixing with flowable extrudate, and the claimed wherein the additive is a pressure sensitive adhesive. Moreover, Shields is silent regarding the claimed flow control valve disposed within the nozzle, the flow control valve being positionable in one or more intermediate states between an open position and a closed position to control across-sectional area of the flowable extrudate exiting the nozzle.
However, Bourgoyne teaches an apparatus for utilizing vesiculated extrusions in extrusion-based additive fabrication, wherein one or more vesicular forms are created within the extrusions by occupying a portion of the extrusion bead with a vesiculating fluid in order to optimize the fabrication of an object and to improve its ultimate physical characteristics; this vesiculation being produced by a means including but not limited to hollowing, aerating, or otherwise introducing gas or liquid bubbles into the extrusion bead before it solidifies (Bourgoyne at [0016]).
Bourgoyne further teaches a vesiculating fluid 608 being introduced into nozzle chamber 704 through a port 614 located in side 902 (i.e., wherein the main additive injection passage is configured to supply the additive perpendicularly to the flowable extrudate in the main extrudate flow passage for mixing with the flowable extrudate to the flowable extrudate) (Bourgoyne at [0061], [0062], FIG. 9B as well as teaching parallel Fig. 9A in the alternative presenting a reasonable expectation of success for either arrangement).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the additive being supplied via perpendicularly to flowable extrudate in a heated extruder assembly as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Bourgoyne above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way with the added benefit of introducing the additive perpendicularly enabling more of opportunity to modify the size and distribution of the vesicles formed (as recognized by Bourgoyne at [0062]).
Shields, modified by Bourgoyne, is silent regarding the claimed flow control valve disposed within the nozzle to control a flow rate or cross-sectional area of the extrudate existing in the nozzle, the flow control valve being positionable in one or more intermediate states between an open position and a closed position to control across-sectional area of the flowable extrudate existing the nozzle.
However, Mantell teaches an extruder assembly 108 for a three-dimensional object printing system 100 (Mantell at [0007], [0029], FIG. 1). Mantell further teaches that the extruder assembly 108 includes an extruder body 160 and a reservoir 164, which is configured to store a quantity of build material; an extrusion slot 168 defined at the bottom of the extruder body 160, where the extrusion slot 168 is operatively connected to the reservoir 164 and is configured to extrude build material received from the reservoir 164 to form a build object 180 (Mantell at [0029], [0031], FIG. 1).
Additionally, Mantell teaches the extruder body 160 including a shutter system for closing off the extrusion slot or a portion thereof; where shutter system 200 includes a flat shutter body 204 operatively connected to an actuator 208 which is configured to slide the flat shutter body 204 linearly across the slot 168 to close a portion of the slot; and the actuator 208 being operatively connected to a controller 116, such that the controller 116 is configured to operate the actuator 208 to set the position of the flat shutter body 204 based on the desired size of the extruded ribbon (Mantell at [0031], [0032], FIG. 1, FIG. 2).
The broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “valve” is “any of numerous mechanical devices by which the flow of liquid, gas, or loose material in bulk may be started, stopped, or regulated by a movable part that opens, shuts, or partially obstructs one or more ports or passageways” (“Valve.” Merriam-Webster.com, Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. May 2025); therefore, it can be concluded that the shutter used in the extruder assembly of Mantell above is equivalent to the claimed flow control valve disposed within the nozzle to control a flow rate or cross-sectional area of the extrudate existing in the nozzle, the flow control valve being positionable in one or more intermediate states between an open position and a closed position to control across-sectional area of the flowable extrudate existing the nozzle.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the actuator controlled shutter within an extruder assembly to extrude material based on the desired size of the extruded ribbon as such is known in the art of extrusion based additive manufacturing given the discussion of Mantell above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, with the advantage of the shutter body (i.e., flow control valve) enabling the extrusion area of an extrusion slot/outlet to be adjusted for better three-dimensional object printing accuracy and faster build times (as acknowledged by Mantell at [0007]).
Lastly – Shields, modified by Bourgoyne and Mantell, teach the additive being a physical blowing agent including carbon dioxide, nitrogen, water, cyclopentane, isobutane, pentane and arbitrary combinations of two or more of the aforementioned compounds (Shields at [0061]), or the additive constituting the vesiculating fluid 608 comprising a gas, or water or another liquid (Bourgoyne at [0056]). Though, Shields modified thus far fails to disclose the claimed wherein the additive is a pressure sensitive adhesive.
However, Sano teaches a filament for material extrusion 3D printer molding, which affords a molded body having soft texture and excellent heat resistance and among others, exhibits good moldability in molding by a material extrusion 3D printer (Sano at [0001]). Specifically, Sano teaches filament 1 being extruded in the extrusion direction 2, heated in a heating part 3 to make a molten resin 4, and then being extruded from a nozzle 5 (Sano at [0047], Fig. 1, Fig. 2). Sano further teaches additives being added to the filament, the additives including a pressure sensitive adhesive for increasing the frictional resistance between a filament and an engaging part during molding by a material extrusion 3D printer (Sano at [0117], [0119], [0138]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a pressure sensitive adhesive as an additive in a material as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Sano above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the advantage of doing so increasing the frictional resistance between a filament and an engaging part during molding by a material extrusion 3D printer (as recognized by Sano at [0119], [0138]).
As to claim 4: Shields, Bourgoyne, Mantell and Sano teach the system of claim 1 above. Shields further discloses the claimed wherein the raw material comprises a filament or granules (i.e., the polymer can enter the feed section 16 of the printing device 10 in the form of polymer granulates, polymer pellets, or a polymer filament) (Shields at [0060]).
As to claim 5: Shields, Bourgoyne, Mantell and Sano teach the system of claim 4 above. Shields further discloses the claimed wherein the heating element is configured to produce the flowable extrudate from the filament or the granules (i.e., the polymer can enter the feed section 16 of the printing device 10 in the form of polymer granulates, polymer pellets, or a polymer filament; and during operation, a polymer is fed into the feed section 16 and then the polymer is melted in the heating section 20 so as to obtain a polymer melt) (Shields at [0060], [0072], [0075], [0080], [0082], [0084]).
As to claim 6: Shields, Bourgoyne, Mantell and Sano teach the system of claim 1 above. Sano further teaches the claimed wherein the additive includes a pigment (i.e., the additive includes a coloring agent) (Sano at [0117], [0119]), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
[AltContent: rect]
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shields, Bourgoyne, Mantell and Sano as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Busbee (US 2021/0039306; of record).
As to claim 8: Shields, Bourgoyne, Mantell and Sano teach the system of claim 1 above. Shields, modified by Bourgoyne, Mantell and Sano, fail to disclose the claimed wherein the additive injection device includes a plurality of flow lines in communication with the main additive injection passage, each flow line being configured for connection to a respective additive supply; wherein each flow line includes a respective flow control valve.
However, Busbee teaches a print head 2202 comprising a printing nozzle 2204 having an orifice 2206 for extruding material, and a mixing chamber 2208 (Busbee at [0008], [0019], [0213], [0214], [0215], [0216], [0217], [0218], FIG. 17). Busbee further teaches fluids, solid particles, or a semi-solid paste may be introduced into the nozzle from one, two three, or more inputs, the fluids/solid particles/semi-solid pastes are kept separate prior to entrance into the nozzle (Busbee at [0119], [0176], [0177]); and additives being added and introduced directly into the nozzle such that the inlets for each additional input to enter the nozzle are independently at the same or different distances from an outlet of the nozzle, and using one or more valves present on the one or more inputs to control the flow of material through the inlets and into the nozzle (Busbee at [0119], [0176], [0177], [0189]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the utilize the plurality of flow lines, each line being connected to a respective additive supply, and each flow line having a respective control valve as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Busbee above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 9: Shields, Bourgoyne, Mantell, Sano and Busbee teach the system of claim 8 above. Busbee further teaches the claimed wherein the plurality of flow lines include at least a first flow line configured to receive a magenta pigment, a second flow line configured to receive a yellow pigment, and a third flow line configured to receive a cyan pigment (Busbee at [0086], [0119], [0176], [0189]).
It is respectfully noted that the limitation “first flow line configured to receive a magenta pigment, a second flow line configured to receive a yellow pigment, and a third flow line configured to receive a cyan pigment” is being interpreted as a recitation of the material worked upon, and is given patentable weight only to the extent that structure is added to the claimed apparatus (see MPEP § 2112.01 I and § 2114-2115 for further details).
Given Busbee discloses a plurality of additives being introduced through separate inputs (i.e., the plurality of flow lines includes a first flow line, a second flow line and a third flow line), and the additives being pigments (Busbee at [0119], [0176]), it can be reasonably deduced that the structure in Busbee is capable of receiving a magenta pigment, a yellow pigment, and a cyan pigment.
It is the Examiner's assessment, absent evidence to the contrary, that the prior art applied would be capable of meeting the recited material worked upon or, in the alternative, that such an apparatus would constitute an obvious extension over the prior art for a skilled practitioner in the art at the time of the invention. See MPEP § 2115 " A claim is only limited by positively recited elements. Thus, "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." (quotes and citation omitted). The burden, therefore, shifts to the Applicant to establish that the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied on (see MPEP § 2115) (citation omitted).
[AltContent: rect]
Claims 20, 22, 24 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shields et al. (US 2021/0331389; of record) in view of Moosberg et al. (US 2021/0069789; of record) and further in view of Molinari et al. (US 2015/0183161; of record) and Sano et al. (US 2018/0038015).
As to claim 20: Shields discloses the claimed system for additive manufacturing (i.e., 3D printing system for preparing a three-dimensional object) (Shields at [0002], [0010], [0011]), comprising:
a print head (i.e., printing device 10) (Shields at [0010], [0011], [0013], [0072], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below) including:
a heated conduit (i.e., heated section) having a heating element to receive a raw material and produce a flowable print material therefrom (i.e., the heating section 20 is a tubular section comprising Peltier elements on the outer tube wall; during operation, a polymer is fed into the feed section 16 and then the polymer is melted in the heating section 20 so as to obtain a polymer melt) (Shields at [0072], [0075], [0080], [0082], [0084], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below);
a nozzle to receive the flowable print material from the heated conduit and output the flowable print material from the print head to form an article (i.e., terminal printing head section 30 including a die 32; shaping, depositing and foaming the cooled homogenized expandable pressurized polymer mixture by extruding it through the die 32 of the terminal printing head section 30) (Shields at [0072], [0079], [0081], [0089], Fig. 1 – see annotated version provided below);
a control and positioning system configured to control movement of the print head according to a preprogrammed set of instructions (i.e., a three-dimensional movement device for adjusting the position of the printing device in a predefined three-dimensional matrix so as to allow to deposit the strand of expandable, expanding or expanded polymer at a predetermined time at a precise position within the three-dimensional matrix) (Shields at [0013], Claim 1); and
an additive injection device (i.e., gas supply line 26 having a discharge end provided and connected with the upper part of the mixing section 24), operatively coupled to the print head, that is configured to add an additive to the flowable print material prior to exiting the nozzle to alter a characteristic of the flowable print material (i.e., dosing at least one blowing agent through the gas supply line 26, enabling the production of articles comprising foamed sections and non-foamed sections) (Shields at [0022], [0072], [0079], [0086], [0087], [0088], [0089], FIG. 1 – see annotated version provided below).
PNG
media_image1.png
552
584
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Shields is silent regarding the claimed flow control valve disposed within the nozzle, the flow control valve being a mechanical iris and being positionable in one or more intermediate states between an open position and a closed position to control a cross-sectional area of the flowable print material exiting the nozzle; and also fails to explicitly disclose the claimed venturi within the print head, the venturi being configured to mix the additive with the flowable print material; and wherein the additive is one of a magnetic material added in sufficient quantity so as to impart magnetic qualities to the article, or a pressure sensitive adhesive.
However, Moosberg teaches a system with a dynamic variable size nozzle orifice for three-dimensional printing (Moosberg at Title). Moosberg further teaches a nozzle orifice whose diameter is varied by a mechanical function that is separately controlled independently of the pressure of the material being extruded through the nozzle, where such a variation in the nozzle orifice diameter is carried out by an iris type shutter orifice device which can provide a range of orifice diameters at the nozzle tip using external control means (i.e., flow control valve disposed within the nozzle, the flow control valve being a mechanical iris and being positionable in one or more intermediate states between an open position and a closed position to control a cross-sectional area of the flowable print material exiting the nozzle) (Moosberg at [0014], [0017], [0024], [0025], [0055], [0056], FIG. 1, FIG. 7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the iris type shutter orifice mechanical device within a discharge orifice of an extruder as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Moosberg above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way, with the added benefit of building strong inter-layer bonding by using a single, dynamic nozzle orifice leading to a reduction in printing time without a reduction in resolution or detailing abilities (as recognized by Moosberg at [0015], [0055]).
Shields, modified thus far, discloses the printing device 10 including a mixing section 24, the mixing section 24 including one or more static mixers to obtain a homogenized expandable pressurized polymer melt (Shields at [0034], [0080], [0087], Fig. 1); though, modified Shields fails to explicitly disclose the claimed venturi within the print head, the venturi being configured to mix the additive with the flowable print material.
However, Molinari teaches 3D printer including a print head 12 configured to controllably deposit/bind a stock material 14 onto a substrate 16, and motion controller 18 that is configured to controllably translate a print head 12 within a predefined workspace; the print head 12 being configured to receive the solid stock material 14 from a source such as a spool 20 or hopper, melt the stock material 14 (e.g., using a resistive heating element 22), and expel the molten stock material 14 onto the substrate 16 via a nozzle 24 – the nozzle 24 defining an orifice 26 at its distal tip 28 through which the molten material 14 may exit the print head 12 (Molinari at [0021], FIG. 1).
Molinari further teaches an embodiment in which a mixing cavity 140 is disposed within the nozzle 124 two mix two different materials input into the nozzle, where the entrance to the mixing cavity 140 defined a nozzled portion (i.e., venturi) that increases flow turbulence to further facilitate mixing of the two materials (Molinari at [0039], [0042], FIG. 7).
Paragraph [0022] of the specification as filed states “the mixing device may be a specific passage configuration that generates turbulence or eddies (e.g., a venturi) within the passage so as to facilitate mixing of the additive and flowable extrudate” – hence, it can be concluded that the nozzled portion at the entrance of the mixing cavity within the print head taught by Molinari corresponds to the claimed venturi within the print head, the venturi being configured to mix the additive with the flowable print material.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the nozzled portion (i.e., venturi) that increases flow turbulence to further facilitate mixing of the two materials at the entrance to the mixing cavity as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Molinari above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Lastly – Shields, modified thus far, discloses the additive being a physical blowing agent including carbon dioxide, nitrogen, water, cyclopentane, isobutane, pentane and arbitrary combinations of two or more of the aforementioned compounds (Shields at [0061]). Though, Shields modified thus far fails to disclose the claimed wherein the additive is one of a magnetic material added in sufficient quantity so as to impart magnetic qualities to the article, or a pressure sensitive adhesive.
However, Sano teaches a filament for material extrusion 3D printer molding, which affords a molded body having soft texture and excellent heat resistance and among others, exhibits good moldability in molding by a material extrusion 3D printer (Sano at [0001]). Specifically, Sano teaches filament 1 being extruded in the extrusion direction 2, heated in a heating part 3 to make a molten resin 4, and then being extruded from a nozzle 5 (Sano at [0047], Fig. 1, Fig. 2). Sano further teaches additives being added to the filament, the additives including a pressure sensitive adhesive for increasing the frictional resistance between a filament and an engaging part during molding by a material extrusion 3D printer (i.e., wherein the additive is a pressure sensitive adhesive) (Sano at [0117], [0119], [0138]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a pressure sensitive adhesive as an additive in a material as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Sano above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the advantage of doing so increasing the frictional resistance between a filament and an engaging part during molding by a material extrusion 3D printer (as recognized by Sano at [0119], [0138]).
As to claim 22: Shields, Moosberg, Molinari and Sano teach the system of claim 20 above. Moosberg further teaches the claimed wherein the control and positioning system is configured to control movement of the flow control valve disposed within the nozzle of the print head according to the preprogrammed set of instructions (i.e., the nozzle is translated under the control of a computer system in accordance with previously generated CAD data that has been sliced into constituent layers; the dynamic variable nozzle orifice can comprise an orifice that is controlled by an external device and is an iris-type shutter orifice) (Moosberg at [0002], [0017], [0055], [0056]), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 20.
As to claim 24: Shields, Moosberg, Molinari and Sano teach the system of claim 20 above. Shields further discloses the claimed wherein the control and positioning system is configured to control movement of the additive injection device, wherein the control and positioning system is configured to add the additive to the flowable print material at an outermost layer of the article (i.e., three-dimensional movement device for adjusting the position of the printing device in a predefined three-dimensional matrix so as to allow to deposit the strand of expandable, expanding or expanded polymer at a predetermined time at a precise position within the three-dimensional matrix) (Shields at [0013], [0022], Claim 1).
As to claim 27: Shields, Moosberg, Molinari and Sano teach the system of claim 20 above. Sano further teaches the claimed wherein the additive is the pressure sensitive adhesive (i.e., the additive includes a pressure-sensitive adhesive for increasing the frictional resistance between a filament and an engaging part during molding by a material extrusion 3D printer) (Sano at [0117], [0119], [0138]), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 20.
[AltContent: rect]
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shields, Moosberg, Molinari and Sano as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Bourgoyne (US 2016/0096320; of record).
As to claim 23: Shields, Moosberg, Molinari and Sano teach the system of claim 20 above. Shields further discloses the claimed control and positioning system being configured to add the additive as an inline part of a process for additively manufacturing the article without changing the print head (i.e., three-dimensional movement device for adjusting the position of the printing device in a predefined three-dimensional matrix so as to allow to deposit the strand of expandable, expanding or expanded polymer at a predetermined time at a precise position within the three-dimensional matrix) (Shields at [0013], Claim 1).
Shields, modified thus far, fails to disclose the claimed wherein the additive injection device includes a flow control valve, and therefore, also the claimed wherein the control and positioning system is configured to control movement of the flow control valve of the additive injection device according to the preprogrammed set of instructions.
However, Bourgoyne teaches an apparatus for utilizing vesiculated extrusions in extrusion-based additive fabrication, wherein one or more vesicular forms are created within the extrusions by occupying a portion of the extrusion bead with a vesiculating fluid in order to optimize the fabrication of an object and to improve its ultimate physical characteristics; this vesiculation being produced by a means including but not limited to hollowing, aerating, or otherwise introducing gas or liquid bubbles into the extrusion bead before it solidifies (Bourgoyne at [0016]).
Bourgoyne further teaches a vesiculating fluid 608 being introduced into nozzle chamber 704 through a port 614 located in side 902 (Bourgoyne at [0061], [0062], FIGs. 9A-9B); where, means to stop and start the flow of the vesiculating fluid 608, or reverse the flow with negative pressure, can be provided in the form of valve 712 that can intermittently open and close tube 610 (Bourgoyne at [0059], FIGs. 9A-9B). Additionally, Bourgoyne teaches apparatus 501 includes a computer-controlled positioning device 502 utilizing x-axis positioning mechanism 504, y-axis positioning mechanism 506, and z-axis positioning mechanism 508 which positions a heated extruder assembly 514, such that controller 503 sends commands to control the components of apparatus 501 (Bourgoyne at [0050], FIG. 5); and means to control at least valve 712 can comprise an electromechanical device such as but not limited to a solenoid controlled by controller 503 of apparatus 501 (Bourgoyne at [0050], [0056], [0059], FIG. 5, FIGs. 9A-9B).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the additive injection device includes a flow control valve, and therefore, also the claimed wherein the control and positioning system is configured to control movement of the flow control valve of the additive injection device according to the preprogrammed set of instructions as such is known in the art of additive manufacturing given the discussion of Bourgoyne above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way with the added benefit of providing very precise control of volumes of additives (as recognized by Bourgoyne at [0059]).
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 BAILEIGH K. DARNELL whose telephone number is (469)295-9287. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, MST.
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, Galen H. Hauth can be reached at (571)270-5516. 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.
/BAILEIGH KATE DARNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743