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 .
In the amendment filed on 11/18/25, applicants have amended claim 37 and cancelled claim 38. Amended claims 37 and 39-57 have been found rejectable over the references to Sung et al in view of Siebold (US 2018/0177221 A1), and/or further in view of others.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 37 and 39-57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claim 37, lines 6-9, in the phrase “each one of the two or more sets is configured to receive and dispense a different edible component such that the plurality of discrete applicators of a set dispense the same edible component, each one of the discrete applicators being configured to be separately controlled by the processor according to the pattern address signals”. Applicants’ specification does not support dispensing the same edible component using the plurality of discrete applicators of a set. Applicants’ original specification teaches “each one of the two or more sets is configured to receive and dispense a different edible component” (see original claim 1).
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.
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) 37-42, 46-53 and 55-57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RU 2417620C2 in view of Belzowski et al (US 2013/0011525).
As to claim 37, RU’620 teaches (see Figs 1A, 2-4, 18) a system for fabrication of a three-dimensional edible product having two or more edible components (see English Translation on page 6-7 for organoleptic components), the system comprising: a processor configured to receive an edible product design having pattern coordinates (see English Translation on page 30), and to provide pattern address signals based on the pattern coordinates (see English Translation on page 26 for a controller 71 transmitting signal); a printing mechanism comprising a printing head having two or more sets of a plurality of discrete applicators (see English Translation on page 16, printing device 32 comprising ink jet head 34), each one of the two or more sets is configured to receive and dispense a different edible component (different colors of edible ink composition, see English Translation on page 16) such that the plurality of discrete applicators of a set dispense the same edible component (nozzles in communication with one feed container, see English Translation on page 16); a driving mechanism (transport device or conveyor) configurable to receive said pattern address signals and to control the position of said printing head with respect to a printing support bed (see Fig 18 for the arrow AA); and a feeder mechanism configured to receive two or more edible components from different sources (four containers 36 containing different edible inks) and to separately manipulate each edible component towards a respective set (supplying ink to separate nozzles, see English Translation on page 16). RU’620 lacks specifically teaching applicators configured to selectively dispense each discrete applicator and each applicator receives its corresponding edible component in an independent manner from the other discrete applicators, although the inkjet printing systems shown in Figs 1-4 and 12-13) are capable of operating as claimed. In any event, Belzowski et al teaches (see Figs 3-4, para [0037], [0043], [0064-0065]) one of the discrete applicators (nozzles) being configured to be separately controlled by the processor (controller 45) according to the pattern address signals each discrete applicator of the plurality of discrete applicators is configured to selectively dispense, in a continuous or intermittent manner (controlled droplets [0033] [0036] for continuous droplets in selected pattern), a corresponding edible component thereof onto a printing support bed in accordance with the pattern address signals received from the processor, wherein each discrete applicator is configured to receive its corresponding edible component in an independent manner from the other discrete applicators, in accordance with the pattern address signals received from the processor (see Fig 3 and para [0036-0037] independently controlling nozzles). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to selectively dispensing each discrete applicator and receiving its corresponding edible component in an independent manner from the other discrete applicators in RU’620 to form droplets by mechanical or fluid forces which are less likely to alter dispensed enhancing agents or prevent buildup of microbial contamination as taught by Belzowski et al (see para [0038-0039]).
As to claim 39, in RU’620 teaches the feeder mechanism is capable of separately manipulating each edible component towards a different set of the two or more sets of discrete applicators (see English Translation on page 16, for each ink jet head 34 including nozzles in fluid communication with one or more of the feeding containers 36).
Regarding claim 40, RU’620 teaches at least one of the different sources comprises a readily available edible component contained within a container (36), wherein the feeder mechanism is configured to induce pressure within the container to manipulate the edible component contained therein outwards therefrom and towards its respective printing head (see English Translation on page 15, for pressure pulses to the printing ink).
As to claim 41, in RU’620 the two or more sources of a different edible component (containers 36) are capable of being constituted by at least one pre-fabrication module associated with the feeder mechanism and configured to receive ingredients and process the ingredients into the two or more edible components (ink compositions).
Regarding claim 42, in RU’620 the feeder mechanism comprises at least one pressurizing device (see English Translation on page 15, for pressure pulses to the printing ink).
As to claim 46, in RU’620 each of the two or more sets of discrete applicators (nozzles) capable of being maneuvered independently from the other sets.
Regarding claim 47, RU’620 each of the sets of discrete applicators are arranged next to each other along the print axis (see English Translation on pages 16-17, for the heads with nozzles arranged in a series lines).
As to claim 48, in RU’620 the printing head comprises two or more printing heads (print heads 34) corresponding to the number of the sets of the discrete applicators, wherein each set is positioned on a different printing head (see English Translation on page 16, for the head including different numbers of nozzles).
As to claim 49, RU’620 the printing head comprises two or more printing heads (print heads 34) corresponding to the number of the sets of the discrete applicators (nozzles), wherein each set is capable of being positioned on a different printing head (see English Translation on page 16, for the head 34 may be arranged in any desired manner).
Regarding claim 50, RU’620 teaches the printing head (34) further comprises at least one printing plate, each printing plate is configured with an inlet surface and an outlet surface and a plurality of apertures (see Figs 13A, 14A and 14C) transversing the plate from the inlet surface to the outlet surface, wherein each one of the apertures (outlets of nozzles) is in flow communication, via the inlet surface, to one of the plurality of the discrete applicators (nozzles), so as to enable manipulation of edible component therefrom.
As to claim 51, in RU’620 (see Fig 13A) each one of the discrete applicators comprises a hollow elongated applicator body having an edible component inlet, an applicator outlet (see Fig 4 for printing device 32 having hollow body) and a propelling mechanism (dosing device 202 ejecting the dye) disposed therein configured to propel edible component through the applicator outlet.
Regarding claim 52, RU’620 teaches (see Fig 13A) the propelling mechanism comprising a propelling element formed as any one of: an auger snuggly fitted within the applicator body or a progressive cavity pump (218) fitted within the applicator body.
As to claim 53, RU’620 teaches each one of the discrete applicators (nozzles) propelling mechanism (pump 218) is configured to be separately controlled by the processor (controller 224) in accordance with the pattern address signals.
As to claim 55, in RU’620 (see English Translation on page 9 and Fig 4) the driving mechanism (transport device or conveyor) is configured to maneuver the printing support bed (transport device with detection device) accordance with the pattern address signals received from the processor (controller 71 transmitting signal), so as to control the position thereof with respect to the printing head.
As to claim 56, RU’620 teaches at least one subsystem for operating a post-fabrication operation on the three-dimensional edible product (layers formed/applied on the 3D formed object, see English translated doc).
Regarding claim 57, RU’620 lacks specifically teaching post-fabrication process either during the fabrication process or after the fabrication process. However, in manufacturing food product at least one subsystem configured to operate
the post-fabrication operation either during the fabrication process or after the fabrication process is known in the art; such as shown by Belzowski et al (see Fig 6
post-fabrication operation including cutting portions for packaging). It would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to include post-fabrication process in RU’620 to make the food items ready
for consumers.
Claim(s) 43- 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
RU 2417620C2 in view of Belzowski et al (US 2013/0011525) as applied to claim 37 and further in view of Garrison et al (US 8,007,848).
RU’620 et al lacks teaching at least one splitter module. Garrison et al teaches
(see Figs 2-3) at least one splitter module (24, 26) having a splitter inlet configured to receive edible component, and a plurality of splitter outlets configured to provide edible component to each one of the discrete applicators (36-42) of one of the two or more sets of a plurality of discrete applicators (36-42), wherein the splitter module (24, 26) is configured to provide a substantially equal flow or pressure from each one of its splitter outlets, and wherein the splitter module (24, 26) comprises a plurality of edible material flow paths extending between the splitter inlet and each one of the splitter outlets, wherein the diameter of each flow path increases along the flow path (see Fig 7 for the nozzle spool 72 increasing in the diameter along the path 96). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include at least one splitter module in RU’620 to promote an even distribution of flow to each of the nozzles as taught by Garrison et al (see column 6, lines 48-53).
Claim(s) 54 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RU 2417620C2 in view of Belzowski et al (US 2013/0011525) as applied to claim 37 and further in view of Makover et al (US 2018/0050499A1) and Albert et al (US 2018/0338519)
RU’620 teaches moving the metering device for moving the head (see English Translation on page 35), but lacks teaching a plurality of elevating motors. Albert et al teaches (see Figs 1-2, 3A and para [0014-0016]) printing head body provided with a plurality of cartridge motors and lifting motors each of which is associated with one of the pluralities of discrete applicators (cartridges 306) and configured to elevate or lower the position of each one of the discrete applicators with respect to the printing support bed independently of one another (see Figs 1 and 4). Makover et al also teaches (see Figs 1 and 4) a lifting mechanism 41 with a motor 43 positioning a discrete applicator with respect to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a plurality of elevating motors in Sung et al to print even complex structures of foods (in particular foods with a relatively large spread in their height) in a precise manner as taught by Albert et al (see para [0015]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 37-55 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 YEWEBDAR T TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-1238. The examiner can normally be reached 7.00-3:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
YEWEBDAR T. TADESSE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717
/YEWEBDAR T TADESSE/