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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/20/26 has been entered.
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.
Claims 9 is 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.
Claim 9 recites “in which an extrusion based manufacturing process.” The limitation does not properly refer back to the extrusion based manufacturing process previously recited.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 9-11, 13-15, 23 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by over Kemperle et al. (US 2014/0117575)
As to claims 1 and 23, Kemperle discloses An apparatus for the extrusion-based manufacture of at least one three- dimensional object, comprising at least one extrusion unit which comprises an extrusion unit 106/220/302 defining an outlet region and is configured for melting an extrusion material and/or for applying a molten extrusion material to a substrate (para 16-18, figs 1-3), comprising a detection device (any one of the sensors para 21-46, for example, the temperature sensor para 21, 37 or the camera 222/220, para 28, 36-38) which is configured to acquire parameter information (para 21, 27-46) relating to (a) a process parameter (para 21, 29-33, 37, for example shape/image/temperature/viscosity) of an extrusion-based manufacturing process which can be carried out or is carried out by means of the apparatus, (b) an object parameter (para 21-23, 33 shape/image/temperature) of a three-dimensional object which is to be manufactured or is manufactured by means of the apparatus, and to generate position information, and/or (c) time information describing a detection position or a detection time of corresponding parameter information, wherein the detection device is mounted to the extrusion unit (figs 2-3), and wherein the detection device extends about the extrusion unit (detection device 302 is clearly extends “about” the extrusion chamber) and comprises a housing (figs 2) and an array (plurality of sensors 40) of optical (cameras) or acoustic (para 39) or thermal detection elements (para 22, 37 (thermal detection)) having a detection region directed toward a region (working volume, para 18, 19, 28-49) below the outlet region of the extrusion unit (figs 1-3, para 18, 19, 28-49) , the array being configured to acquire, prior to solidification of the molten extrusion material, information describing the molten extrusion material and/or substrates prior to solidification, such information including at least one of a temperature of the molten extrusion material, a geometric parameter of a bead of the molten extrusion material (para 28-29)), a deposition-path characteristic of the molten extrusion material (figs 1-3, para 13-50). Note, the camera and temperature sensor examples given above exemplary only, and the examiner notes that any of the sensor of Kemperle can read on the claimed detection device.
As to claim 9, Kemperle discloses the process parameter describes a chemical and/or a physical parameter (para 28, temp of working volume) of a process space in which an extrusion-based manufacturing process carried out by means of the apparatus takes place.
As to claimn 10, Kemperle discloses the parameter information relating to the object parameter describes at least one chemical, geometric (para 28) and/or at least physical (temperature, para 21, 37) parameter of the three-dimensional object
As to claim 11 Kemperle discloses an output device is configured to generate image information describing a one- or multi-dimensional image of corresponding parameter information (fig2, discussion of fig 2, para 37-40)
As to claim 13, Kemperle discloses a comparison apparatus configured to compare the parameter information with at least one corresponding reference parameter and to generate comparison information describing a respective comparison result (para 39, 62-64, claim 18)
As to claim14, Kemperle discloses a control apparatus which is configured to control the operation of the apparatus, wherein the control device is configured to control the operation of the apparatus on the basis of the parameter information and/or on the basis of corresponding comparison information (para 39, 62-64, claim 18)
As to claim 15, Kemperle discloses a temperature control device which is assigned to the device and is configured for temperature control (para 23, 28)
As to clam 24, Kemperle discloses an assignment device, which is configured to assign to a corresponding parameter information position information and/or time information (para 20, 50, device for communication)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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) ---4, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kemperle et al. (US 2014/0117575, newly cited), and further in view Yoshida (previously cited, 2018/029387).
As to claim 4, Yoshida discloses a detection device is mounted movably in at least one degree of freedom of movement with respect to an extrusion unit (para 38, fig 1. Yoshida). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kemperle such that the detection device is mounted movably in at least one degree of freedom of movement with respect to the extrusion unit as taught by Yoshida above as such equipment the detection device to more accurately acquire the parameter information (para 38)
As to claim 21, Yoshida discloses the at least one degree of freedom comprises a translational and/or rotational degree of freedom (para 38-39, figs 6-7)
As to claim 22, Yoshino discloses a guide device 63 comprising one or more guide elements (rails 63), wherein each of the one or more guide elements define at least one movement path or at least one degree of freedom of movement along which the device or a corresponding detection device can be moved (para 27, fig 1).
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over, Kemperle and Yoshida as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zamorano et al. (US 2019/0001559).
As to claims 16, Kemperle and Yoshida do not disclose the temperature controller comprising a heater exchanger.
Zamorano discloses a device for forming a 3D object, comprising a temperature controller 328, the controller comprising a heat exchanger 314a/b (para 23-37, figs 3-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kemperle and Yoshida such that the temperature controller comprises a heater exchanger as taught by Zamorano above as such provides excellent control of the temperature regardless of ambient conditions (para 29-31).
As to claim 17, Zamorano discloses the heat exchanger device comprises at least two flow channel structures, wherein a first flow channel structure 320 through which a first temperature control fluid can flow extends through a first spatial volume in which the device, is arranged or formed, and a second flow channel structure (channel within 314a through which refrigerant flows, para 24-28) through which a second temperature control fluid can flow extends through a second spatial volume separated from the first spatial volume by a heat transfer structure (fig 3, para 23-32).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/20/26 have been fully considered but they are either not persuasive or moot in light of the new grounds of rejection presented above.
Applicant’s arguments directed at Conrow and Yoshida are moot as Yoshida is used only as a secondary reference. Applicant’s argumesnt directed at Kemperle as a secondary reference are moot. However, applicant’s arguments as they might apply to Kemperle as a primary reference used above will be addressed.
Applicant’s asserts Kemperle is primarily directed toward detection of mechanical force types. The argument is not accurate as Kemperle never discloses mechanical detection is its primary purpose. Furthermore, the arguments are not germane as they ignore the fact the Kemperle clearly discloses other detection of other parameters throughout the reference. Applicant asserts the camera 222 is capable of providing only binary yes/no evaluations. This statement is plainly incorrection as para 37, 40 literally say the camera can covert object capture data “into a digital model of the object”. Additionally, the camera 222 is not the only sensor disclosed by Kemperle. Other sensors can read on the claimed detection device. At least para 37 discloses direct temperature measurements. Applicant assert’s Kemperle does not disclose the detection elements directed toward a region below the outlet region of the extruder unit. Figs 1-2 directly contradict this assertion. The measurements acquired from the working volume necessarily require the detection devices to be directed toward a region below the outlet region of the extrusion unit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6038. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9-6.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at 571-270-5038. 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 T SCHATZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights