Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 30, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 15-17 and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as anticipated by Lamprecht (US 2012/0225252).
Claim 15: Lamprecht discloses a field control system for controllably delivering magnetic fields to a ferrofluid (abstract). The system includes a magnetic field chamber (¶ 43; fig. 1), an array of micromagnets positioned in connection with a plurality of the chamber walls (figs. 8A-B), a reversibly hardenable ferrofluid (¶ 44) located within the magnetic field chamber in a liquid state (figs. 8A-8B); a processor (logic circuit 50) and memory communicably coupled to the processor and storing instructions that when executed by the processor cause the processor to: receive an input from a user for the reversibly hardenable ferrofluid, the input being for a novel object (¶¶ 57-58);cause the array of micromagnets to provide a magnetic field to the reversibly hardenable ferrofluid in the magnetic field chamber to cause the reversibly hardenable ferrofluid to take a shaped form corresponding to the novel object (¶ 85); and harden the reversibly hardenable ferrofluid in the shaped form corresponding to the novel object and in a solid state, the shaped form being removable from and usable outside of the magnetic field chamber (¶ 89).
Claim 16: Lamprecht discloses a plurality of actuators positioned in connection with the micromagnets (the CMOS drive circuits and current control circuitry individually actuate each OCC/micromagnet), a reservoir configured to receive and dispense a reversibly hardenable magnetic substance (the enclosure of the device, which holds the ferrofluid and from which the cured shape is released, functions as a reservoir).
Claim 17: Lamprecht discloses a ferrofluid and a reversible hardening agent dispersed in the ferrofluid, the reversible hardening agent being capable of repeatedly transitioning the ferrofluid between a liquid state and a solid state (¶ 64; UV or thermal curing polymer).
Claim 20: Lamprecht discloses computer-controlled delivery of the reversibly hardenable ferrofluid to the magnetic field chamber from a reservoir (¶ 83).
Claim 21: Lamprecht discloses the object is a mold tool for surface replication (¶ 89).
Claim 22: Lamprecht discloses the micromagnets being independently movable (figs. 1-3; ¶¶ 43-48).
Claim 23: Lamprecht discloses a membrane formed over the plurality of the chamber walls, whereby the micromagnets can deliver the magnetic field without contacting the reversibly hardenable ferrofluid (¶ 51; CMOS-passivation layer).
Claim 24: Lamprecht discloses the chamber walls include a floor, one or more side walls, and a ceiling (figs. 8A-8B).
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 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamprecht, as applied to claim 15 above, in view of Zlokamik (US 6,594,630).
Claim 19: Lamprecht is silent as to receiving voice commands. However, Zlokamik discloses a voice-activated control apparatus for receiving user voice commands (abstract.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to have included the well-established voice-recognition front end, yielding predictable benefits (hands-free operation, safety, convenience) in controlling the underlying user input.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “However, while Lamprecht appears to describe application of a magnetic field to a ferrofluid film, Lamprecht does not appear to disclose causing the reversibly hardenable ferrofluid to take a shaped form corresponding to the novel object.” This argument has been considered but is not persuasive. Paragraph 89 describes causing the reversibly hardenable ferrofluid to take a shaped form of a mold.
Applicant argues that because “Lamprecht has magnetic field generators on only the bottom surface of the supposed chamber,” “Lamprecht fails to disclose ‘an array of micromagnets positioned in connection with a plurality of the chamber walls.’” The bottom surface of Lamprecht’s chamber is a chamber wall.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY THROWER whose telephone number is (571)270-5517. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm MT M-F.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at 571-270-1487. 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.
/LARRY W THROWER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights