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 II in the reply filed on 2/4/26 is acknowledged.
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.
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.
Claims 11-12, 14-15, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2019/0216616) in light of Huang et al. (“Synthesis and characterization of mesoporous hydroxyapatite powder by microemulsion technique,” 2019, J. Mater. Res. Technol. 8(3), pp. 3158-66) and Sun et al. (US 2017/0360534).
Claims 11 and 14: Yang teaches a process of producing an article by 3D Printing with a DLP system (i.e. an additive manufacturing process where an object is formed layer by layer), comprising the steps of: forming a slurry layer comprising calcium phosphate powder (¶ 0039-0041; 0058); curing the slurry layer in a predetermined pattern (¶ 0059); repeating the slurry layer formation and curing steps (Yang teaches that the body is formed by 3D printing of a DLP system which involves the formation of layers in the slurry which are cured and then repeating the process for form additional layers) (¶¶ 0059-0060; 0087); and debinding cured and uncured resin from the body (¶¶ 0062-0063).
Yang teaches that the body formed is a bone graft (Abst., e.g.) and that the calcium phosphate powder is hydroxyapatite (¶ 0011), but fails to describe the characteristics of the powder. Huang teaches hydroxyapatite powder (Abst.) used to form bone grafts (p. 3158, Col. 1) and explains that a suitable powder has a particle size of 1.5 µm (§ 3.7) and a pore volume of about 0.0025-0.0025 cc/g depending on the pore diameter (which ranges from about 2-50 nm) (Fig. 9). Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A). The simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is prima facie obvious. MPEP § 2143. Thus, because Yang does not discuss the details of the hydroxyapatite used to form the bone graft and because Huang teaches a suitable hydroxyapatite powder, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to have selected a powder having a particle size of 1.5 µm, a pore size of 2-50nm and a pore volume of mesopores of 0.01-0.025 depending on the desired characteristics of the powder with the predictable expectation of success.
Yang fails to disclose whether a laser is used for curing. Sun teaches a DLP 3D printing method and explains that a laser is used to cure the successive layers (¶ 0028). Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is prima facie obvious. MPEP § 2143. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to have selected a laser as the light source in Yang with the predictable expectation of success.
Claim 12: Yang teaches that the body formed is a bone graft (Abst., e.g.) (i.e. claimed implant).
Claim 15: Huang teaches a specific surface area of 13.62 m2/g (Abst.).
Claims 17-18: Huang teaches that about 10% (i.e. D 10% (i.e. D10) of the particles have a size of less than 1.0µm (Fig. 11).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, Huang and Sun in light of Wuthrich (EP2796110).
Claim 16: Huang fails to discuss the mesopore volume. Like Huang, Wuthrich teaches hydroxyapatite used in artificial teeth and explains that particles having a macroporous volume (pore size of 78-144) between 0.0033-0.2296 cc/g is suitable (see, e.g., Table 2). The simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is prima facie obvious. MPEP § 2143. Thus, because Huang is silent regarding macroporous pore volume and because Wuthrich teaches a suitable particle for the same purpose, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to have selected particles having a macroporous pore volume of 0.02-0.1 cc/g with the predictable expectation of success.
Prior Art
Lee et al. (US 2014/0239527) is also cited for disclosing how a DLP 3D Printing process works.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert A Vetere whose telephone number is (571)270-1864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00 EST.
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 Cleveland can be reached at (571) 270-1034. 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.
/ROBERT A VETERE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights