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, claims 13 – 15, and the species A (Figures 1 and 2), in the reply filed on December 11, 2025, is acknowledged. Claim s 1 – 7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on FILLIN "Enter mail date of the reply." \* MERGEFORMAT December 11, 2025 . Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i). Response to Amendment Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed on December 11, 2025, have been entered. Claims 13, 14 and 16 are currently amended. Claims 17 – 25 are new. Claims 8 – 12 are cancel. Claims 1 – 7 are withdrawn. Claims 13 – 25 are pending and under examination. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/04/2023, 04/21/2023, 02/22/2024, and 10/01/2024, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Objections Claim s 1 – 7 are objected to because of the following informalities: claim s 1 – 7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention (as indicated above). Therefore, the amendment to the claims filed on December 11, 2025, does not comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.121(c) because the status of the claims have been amended to “(Previously Presented)” in the marked up copy of the amended claims. However, since claims 1 – 7 are drawn to a nonelected invention, the claim status should be amended to - - (Withdrawn) - - . Amendments to the claims filed on or after July 30, 2003 , must comply with 37 CFR 1.121(c) which states: (c) Claims . Amendments to a claim must be made by rewriting the entire claim with all changes ( e.g. , additions and deletions) as indicated in this subsection, except when the claim is being canceled. Each amendment document that includes a change to an existing claim, cancellation of an existing claim or addition of a new claim, must include a complete listing of all claims ever presented, including the text of all pending and withdrawn claims, in the application. The claim listing, including the text of the claims, in the amendment document will serve to replace all prior versions of the claims, in the application. In the claim listing, the status of every claim must be indicated after its claim number by using one of the following identifiers in a parenthetical expression: (Original), (Currently amended), (Canceled), (Withdrawn), (Previously presented), (New), and (Not entered). (1) Claim listing. All of the claims presented in a claim listing shall be presented in ascending numerical order. Consecutive claims having the same status of “canceled” or “not entered” may be aggregated into one statement ( e.g. , Claims 1–5 (canceled)). The claim listing shall commence on a separate sheet of the amendment document and the sheet(s) that contain the text of any part of the claims shall not contain any other part of the amendment. (2) When claim text with markings is required. All claims being currently amended in an amendment paper shall be presented in the claim listing, indicate a status of “currently amended,” and be submitted with markings to indicate the changes that have been made relative to the immediate prior version of the claims. The text of any added subject matter must be shown by underlining the added text. The text of any deleted matter must be shown by strike-through except that double brackets placed before and after the deleted characters may be used to show deletion of five or fewer consecutive characters. The text of any deleted subject matter must be shown by being placed within double brackets if strike-through cannot be easily perceived. Only claims having the status of “currently amended,” or “withdrawn” if also being amended, shall include markings. If a withdrawn claim is currently amended, its status in the claim listing may be identified as “withdrawn—currently amended.” (3) When claim text in clean version is required. The text of all pending claims not being currently amended shall be presented in the claim listing in clean version, i.e. , without any markings in the presentation of text. The presentation of a clean version of any claim having the status of “original,” “withdrawn” or “previously presented” will constitute an assertion that it has not been changed relative to the immediate prior version, except to omit markings that may have been present in the immediate prior version of the claims of the status of “withdrawn” or “previously presented.” Any claim added by amendment must be indicated with the status of “new” and presented in clean version, i.e. , without any underlining. (4) When claim text shall not be presented; canceling a claim. (i) No claim text shall be presented for any claim in the claim listing with the status of “canceled” or “not entered.” (ii) Cancellation of a claim shall be effected by an instruction to cancel a particular claim number. Identifying the status of a claim in the claim listing as “canceled” will constitute an instruction to cancel the claim. (5) Reinstatement of previously canceled claim. A claim which was previously canceled may be reinstated only by adding the claim as a “new” claim with a new claim number. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 25 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 25 is missing a dot “.” a t the end. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed to a “control program” i.e., a computer program per se (often referred to as “software per se”) , which is being claimed as a product without any structural recitations , failing the eligibility analysis first step (Step 1: NO) and thus is non-statutory, warranting a rejection for failure to claim statutory subject matter . See MPEP 2106.03 (I). As the courts' definitions of machines, manufactures and compositions of matter indicate, a product must have a physical or tangible form in order to fall within one of these statutory categories. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348, 111 USPQ2d at 1719. Thus, the Federal Circuit has held that a product claim to an intangible collection of information, even if created by human effort, does not fall within any statutory c ategory. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1350, 111 USPQ2d at 1720 (claimed “device profile” comprising two sets of data did not meet any of the categories because it was neither a process nor a tangible product). Similarly, software expressed as code or a set of instructions detached from any medium is an idea without physical embodiment. See Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 449, 82 USPQ2d 1400, 1407 (2007); see also Benson, 409 U.S. 67, 175 USPQ2d 675 (An "idea" is not patent eligible). Thus, a product claim to a software program that does not also contain at least one structural limitation (such as a “means plus function” limitation) has no physical or tangible form, and thus does not fall within any statutory category . Another example of an intangible product that does not fall within a statutory category is a paradigm or business model for a marketing company. In re Ferguson, 558 F.3d 1359, 1364, 90 USPQ2d 1035, 1039-40 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The examiner suggests amending the claim to further contain at least one structural limitation (such as a “means plus function” limitation) providing physical or tangible form, and thus does complying with the eligibility analysis and falling withing at least one of the four statutory categor ies . For example, including structural relationships (e.g., storage device , storage device readable by a computer ) into the claim limitations (e.g., “A storage device readable by a computer containing a control program that when executed…”), as disclosed in Applicant’s specification in paragraph [0061] “ A control program for performing the shaping processing at the above-described step S2 may be stored in the storage device 114, or may be stored in another storage device readable by a computer as the control device 115. ” Note that t he language provided is only suggested; other language that conveys the same idea would be considered when formally presented, as would other amendments or arguments when formally presented to the Office. 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) 13 – 15, and 17 – 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2015/0259247 A1) , in view of Beam et al. (US 2003/0065400 A1). Regarding claim 13, Watanabe teaches a method for manufacturing a three-dimensional shaped object, based on shape data representing a three-dimensional shape of a three-dimensional shaped object [0007 -001 3 , 0135 ] , the method comprising: a layer forming step of forming a ceramic layer [0004, 0097-0112] , using a powder ceramic material [0004 , 0172 ] (see FIGs. 1-2) ; a curing liquid applying step of applying (see FIGs. 1-2 , “powder layer stack formation hardening liquid” [0113-0120, 0173] ) , to a target region in the layer (e.g., “predetermined region” [0016] , see FIGs. 1-2 [0117-0119] ) , a curing liquid including a chelating agent [00 26 -0037, 0120] , based on the shape data [0117-0119 , 0135 ] ; and repeating the layer forming step and the curing liquid applying step so as to form the three-dimensional shaped object by a reaction product of the ceramic material with the chelating agent in the target regions of the layers superimposed on each other (see [0015-0017 , 0135 ] , and FIGs. 1-2 and [0179] ) , wherein the target region includes a one-side region and an opposite-side region that become a one-side portion and an opposite-side portion respectively in the three-dimensional shaped object (e.g., see FIGs. 1-2 the target region being the darker area, having a left side [a one-side region], and a right side [an opposite-side region]) , and the curing liquid applying step includes applying the curing liquid [0024] to the target region, based on a position range of each of the one-side region and the opposite-side region expressed by the shape data [0135] , Watanabe does not explicitly disclose applying the curing liquid to the target region, such that an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the one-side region is larger than an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the opposite-side region, thereby forming a dense portion in the one-side portion, and forming a porous portion in the opposite-side portion . Watanabe, however, discloses at [0006] that it is known in the art that “ a porous texture object has a large surface area due to its texture, can be absorbed into bone tissues easily, and also can be phagocytosed by phagocytic cells easily. In contrast, a dense texture object is absorbed extremely slowly, and cannot be phagocytosed by phagocytic cells easily. It is expected that utilizing the characteristic differences due to the texture, and combining a porous texture portion and a dense texture portion would lead to expression of a desired biocompatibility. ” – Hence, forming an object having these porous texture side and dense texture side , is analogous to forming a dense portion in the one-side portion, and forming a porous portion in the opposite-side portion. Beam et al. , teaches forming a macrostructure in an engineered regenerative biostructure in materials which are sinterable (e.g., ceramics [0097-0098] ), by any 3DP process (three-dimensional printing process) ( [0084] , FIGs. 7A-7D), and discloses at [0089] , inter alia, a “ method involves double-printing, i.e., printing on a layer of powder, allowing the volatile part of the binder liquid to evaporate essentially completely, and printing more binder liquid onto the same place such that the binder substance which remains after the last printing is built up above the actual powder particles in the bed. The next layer of powder which is spread or deposited cannot occupy the region which is occupied by the built-up binder substance from the "puddle" formed by the repeat printing(s) at the same location. Eventually, when the binder material in the puddle decomposes and exits as gaseous decomposition products, the absence of particles in the region formerly occupied by the puddle yields a macrostructure of empty space. ” – analogous to the claimed “an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the one-side region is larger than an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the opposite-side region, thereby forming a dense portion in the one-side portion, and forming a porous portion in the opposite-side portion.” [0103] discloses “ It may be desired that some portions of the biostructure be made so as to contain mesostructures (porous, see Beam et al. [0045] ) and also to contain other regions which may have a more uniform packing density of powder particles, i.e., a more thorough joining of primitives so as not to exhibit mesostructures . ” – Hence a dense portion and a porous portion. Beam et al. discloses the purpose could be f or applications where the biostructure may require more strength than what is available from a biostructure containing only mesostructures everywhere. [0104] One method of producing and eliminating mesostructures is by adjusting the saturation parameter during printing in different regions. “ A sufficiently large saturation parameter may result in an essentially uniform distribution of powder particles in the final biostructure and primitives that are essentially fully bound to one another. A sufficiently small saturation parameter may result in the creation of mesostructures . ” [0105] Adjustment of the saturation parameter from one region of a biostructure to another, using a given dispenser, may be achieved by adjusting any of the variables which together make up the saturation parameter. This may be achieved by adjusting the amount of dispensed liquid per unit distance traveled along the principal direction of motion. – Hence, applying a larger amount of curing liquid to a one-side region of the target region). [0124] “ Further, the porosity of the biostructure may vary from region to region of the biostructure. For example, appropriate porosity might be used to imitate the structure of cortical bone (the dense hard outer portion of bone) or of cancellous bone (the softer inner portion of bone) or of both types of bone within a single biostructure. ” Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the curing liquid applying step to the target region (Watanabe [0024]) , based on a position range of each of the one-side region and the opposite-side region expressed by the shape data (Watanabe [0135] ) , in the method for manufacturing a 3D shaped object of Watanabe, such that an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the one-side region is larger than an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the opposite-side region , as suggested by the prior art of Beam et al. , thereby forming a dense portion in the one-side portion, and forming a porous portion in the opposite-side portion , as taught and suggested by the prior art of Beam et al., for the purpose of, as suggested by Beam et al. [0124], the porosity of the biostructure may vary from region to region of the biostructure, to imitate the structure of cortical bone (the dense hard outer portion of bone) or of cancellous bone (the softer inner portion of bone) or of both types of bone within a single biostructure, and/or to, as suggested by Watanabe [0006], combining a porous texture portion and a dense texture portion that would lead to expression of a desired biocompatibility. See MPEP 2143 (I)(G). Regarding claim 14, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 13, wherein the target region in each of the layers includes an intermediate region between the one-side region and the opposite-side region, and the curing liquid applying step includes applying the curing liquid to the target region, based on a position range of each of the one-side region, the opposite-side region, and the intermediate region expressed by the shape data, such that an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the intermediate region is smaller than the amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the one-side region, and is larger than the amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the opposite-side region, thereby forming an intermediate portion having a dense degree higher than a dense degree of the porous portion and lower than a dense degree of the dense portion. – e.g., Beam et al. at [0278] discloses, “One embodiment of the biostructure of the present invention comprises a matrix-material network such that the space not occupied by the matrix material forms a non-matrix-material network that interlocks with the matrix-material network. The matrix material, forming a first interconnected network, may have exposed internal surfaces of that network at least some of which may receive essentially a coating of the interpenetrating material. The matrix material together with its coating may form a second network, which may be designated the second interconnected network or the interpenetrant network. The interpenetrant network may be such that the spaces not occupied by it also form a network, which may be designated the third interconnected network. All of these networks may be three dimensionally interconnected, although they do not have to be. Additionally there may be other regions of the biostructure in which the interpenetrant network may be completely or almost completely filled with interpenetrating material. Gradual variation of the extent of filling by the interpenetrating material may be provided. The matrix-material or first network may be deterministically designed including features such as macrostructure (a porous portion with a lower dense degree) , mesostructured (an intermediate portion with a higher dense degree than the macrostructure) , microstructure (a dense portion having a dense degree higher than both the macrostructure and mesoestructure ) , channels (which may be curved), internal void spaces, and other features that may be complicated. ” Regarding claim 15, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing a three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 13, further comprising: a washing step of washing the three-dimensional shaped object after forming the three-dimensional shaped object (see Beam et al. [0088] ). Regarding c laim 17 , Watanabe/Beam teaches a control device for controlling a three-dimensional shaping apparatus (e.g., Watanabe [0118] “Preferable examples of the inkjet printer include SG7100 manufactured by Ricoh Company Limited.”; Beam et al. FIG. 13A , FIG. 14 , [0165 , 0172-0179 ] ) to implement the method according to claim 13, the control program causing the three-dimensional shaping apparatus to execute (Beam et al. [0154-0155] “The controls and programming of the switchover relative to the position of the dispenser over the build bed 1270 may take this into account”, [0158] “Such delays and adjustments can be programmed into software that controls the 3DP process.”): layer forming processing of causing the three-dimensional shaping apparatus to form a ceramic layer (e.g., Watanabe [0110] ; Beam et al. [0079] ) , using a powder ceramic material (as discussed in claim 13 above) ; curing liquid applying processing of causing, based on the shape data, the three-dimensional shaping apparatus to apply, to a target region in the layer, a curing liquid including a chelating agent (see the discussion of claim 13 above, and Watanabe [0016, 0070-0076] ) ; and processing of repeating the layer forming processing and the curing liquid applying processing so as to cause the three-dimensional shaping apparatus to form the three-dimensional shaped object by a reaction product of the ceramic material with the chelating agent in the target regions of the layers superimposed on each other (Watanabe [0016-0017, 0110] ) , wherein the target region in each of the layers includes a one-side region and an opposite-side region that constitute a one-side portion and an opposite- side portion respectively in the three-dimensional shaped object, and the control program causes the three-dimensional shaping apparatus computer to execute the curing liquid applying processing such that an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the one-side region is larger than an amount of the curing liquid applied to each unit area in the opposite-side region, thereby forming a dense portion in the one-side portion, and forming a porous portion in the opposite-side portion (see the discussion of claim 13 above and Beam et al. [0154-0158] ) . Regarding claim 18, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 13, except for explicitly disclosing, wherein the dense portion has a dense degree equal to or higher than 80%, and the porous portion has a dense degree lower than 60%. Beam et al., however, discloses at [0438] that, “Many studies have found the optimal scaffold pore size for new bone is between 200-400 um. In this study, pores less than 100 microns and macro-channels greater than 1000 microns generated high amounts of new bone. The results here showed that controlled scaffold macrogeometry , macrostructure and microarchitecture can influence levels of osteoconduction .” Beam et al. at [0103-0104] discloses it might be desirable to provide the 3D-shaped object with a region of higher density for application needed the scaffold provides load bearing capacity , and at [0124] “Further, the porosity of the biostructure may vary from region to region of the biostructure. For example, appropriate porosity might be used to imitate the structure of cortical bone (the dense hard outer portion of bone) or of cancellous bone (the softer inner portion of bone) or of both types of bone within a single biostructure.” Additionally, at [0307] discloses that a “remaining void space, especially if it forms an interconnected network, allows access of bodily fluids for resorbing the resorbable material and facilitates cell in-growth. Resorption of the resorbable material thus occurs faster.” Therefore, as the amounts of levels of osteoconduction and the load bearing capacity of the 3D-shaped object are variables that can be modified, among others, by adjusting said dense degree (e.g., macrogeometry , macrostructure and microarchitecture), with said osteoconduction and load bearing capacity both varying as the dense degree is increased /decreased in different regions of the 3D-shaped object , the precise dense degree would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention . As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed dense degree cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have optimized, by routine experimentation , the dense degree in the dense portion i n the method of Watanabe/Beam to obtain the desired balance between osteoconduction and the load bearing capacity of the 3D-shaped object ( In re Boesch , 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. ( In re Aller , 105 USPQ 223). Regarding claim 19, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 13, wherein the ceramic material is calcium phosphate (Watanabe Abstract, [0004, 0015, 0020 ] ; Beam et al. [0005, 0046, 0447] ). Regarding claim 20, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 13, wherein the calcium phosphate is any one of a-tricalcium phosphate (a-TCP), 8-tricalcium phosphate (8-TCP), octacalcium phosphate (OCP), and carbonate apatite. (Watanabe [0030, 0066-0069] ). Regarding claim 21, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 19, wherein the chelating agent is an organic compound having three or more phosphate groups or carboxyl groups per one molecule (Watanabe [0032-0037] ). Regarding claim 22, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 21, wherein the organic compound is any one of etidronic acid, phytic acid, and citric acid (Watanabe [0027] ). Regarding claim 23, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 13, wherein the three-dimensional shaped object is an artificial bone to be charged in a missing portion of a living bone so as to form a bone body together with the living bone, the artificial bone includes an outer surface serving as an outer surface of the bone body, and an inner surface to be located inside the bone body, and the outer surface is formed by the dense portion, and the porous portion forms the inner surface (e.g., Beam et al. [0003] discloses engineered regenerative biostructures, and more particularly to porous bone augmentation articles, and at [0124] discloses “Further, the porosity of the biostructure may vary from region to region of the biostructure. For example, appropriate porosity might be used to imitate the structure of cortical bone (the dense hard outer portion of bone) or of cancellous bone (the softer inner portion of bone) or of both types of bone within a single biostructure.” Regarding claim 24, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 23, wherein the inner surface formed by the porous portion is a surface to be adjacent to an inner surface included in the missing portion and formed by the living bone (e.g., the cancellous bone part (softer inner portion of bone) in the porous bone augmentation 3D-shaped regenerative biostructure of Beam et al. [0124] ). Regarding claim 25, Watanabe/Beam teaches the method for manufacturing the three-dimensional shaped object according to claim 13, wherein the curing liquid applying processing includes: causing the three-dimensional shaping apparatus to drop or eject a cell inclusion liquid or a growth factor inclusion liquid to entirety or a predetermined region of the target region in each of the layers, wherein the cell inclusion liquid includes one or both of cells and growth factors, and the growth factor inclusion liquid includes growth factors. (see Watanabe [0187] “cell culture liquid”, and Beam et al. [0192 , 0292, 0351, 0449 ] ). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. GIAGNON et al. ( US 2017/0304056 A1 ) : [0017] Indeed, being performed by 3D printing (stereolithography) from the scanner data from the patient (STL files), the block is perfectly fitted to the defect . [0036] It is interesting that: [0037] the core of the part has a structure as close as possible to the “porous” and soft trabecular bone; [0038] the outer periphery of the part (considered in its position placed within the bone defect) has a structure as close as possible to the characteristics of the cortical bone: dense and rigid; and [0039] the portion of the part intended to come into contact with the patient's bone is very “porous” for allowing the fastest possible revascularization. [0089] As indicated above, the part 11 a could have a network more dense or with larger channel sections in its region in contact with the patient's bone for an acceleration of the revascularization. [0092] a part 11 B intended to come into contact with the patient's bone, in which the three-dimensional network of vascularization channels is more dense or is composed of square-section channels with a section larger than the channels of the part 11 A, for example, with a 400-600 μm side+/−200 μm; and [0093] a surface part 11 C surrounding the bores 25 , which is not provided with a revascularization network, thus without channels (with only the microporosity) for a better resistance. Sherwood et al. (US Pat. No. 6,454,811 B1): Col. 7 lines 40 – 54: “The transition zone, which is adjacent to both the cartilage and the bone portions, forms a gradient in porosity from close to that of the bone or more dense portion to close to that of the cartilage or least dense portion. The transition zone may also form a gradient in polymer composition, from that of the bone portion to that of the cartilage portion, where the polymer is a copolymer and the ratio of monomers is different for the bone versus the cartilage portions, or the portions are formed of two different polymers and the transition zone is a blend or copolymer of the two polymers. The transition zone may also include a shape gradient or have a region which has an outer shape like the bone portion near the bone portion and a region with an outer shape that is substantially round or similar to the cartilage portion in the region nearest the cartilage portion.” Col. 10 lines 52 – 63 . Sherwood et al. (US 2003/0114936 A1): [0031] The transition zone, which is opposed to both the cartilage and the bone portions, forms a gradient in porosity from close to that of the bone or more dense portion to close to that of the cartilage or least dense portion and may include variation of ratio of the polyester polymers and other materials found in both of the other portions also in gradient fashion. Cima ( US Pat. No. 5,387,380 ) : Col. 6 lines 39 – 49: “An alternative approach is to accomplish densification or compaction by spraying a small amount of liquid on the surface which allows the particles to repack during drying. An example is to spread alumina particles in the 0.5-5 micron range and then to spray or mist water onto the spread layer. The water will cause the particles to rearrange and repack, resulting in a high density layer. If a small amount of water is used, there will be no need to dry the layer before printing. If a larger amount of water is used, the layer may have to be partially dried before printing.” Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT EDGAREDMANUEL TROCHE whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9766 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 7:30-5:30 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Sam Zhao can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-5343 . 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. /EDGAREDMANUEL TROCHE/ Examiner, Art Unit 1744 /JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742