Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/038,846

METHOD FOR GENERATING AUXILIARY SUPPORT FOR 3D PRINTING OUTPUT STABILITY

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
May 25, 2023
Examiner
THROWER, LARRY W
Art Unit
1754
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Korea Electronics Technology Institute
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
622 granted / 947 resolved
+0.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
69 currently pending
Career history
1016
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
42.0%
+2.0% vs TC avg
§102
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§112
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 947 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 of Group I, claims 1-9, in the reply filed on May 7, 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 10-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Drawings Figures 1-2 are required to be designated by a legend identifying the drawings as “Prior Art” because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Interpretation Claims 3-4, 6 and 9 are directed to a method that recites conditional language such as “when a digital light processing (DLP) method is performed,” “when a stereolithography apparatus (SLA) method is used,” “when the distribution of the widths,” “when it is determined,” and “when the separation force,” “when bottom-up additive manufacturing is performed.” The conditional nature of this claim language allows for an interpretation where prior art meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim without the conditional language occurring. 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claim 4 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. Regarding claim 4, the parentheses render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation “planar density” within the parentheses are part of the claimed invention. 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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kobayashi et al. (US 2016/0368223). Claim 1: Kobayashi et al. discloses a method for generating an assistant support (abstract). The method includes slicing a 3D model into a plurality of 2D layers (¶¶ 90, 132; fig. 10; planar polygons 76a are determined); calculating a position of an assistant support based on widths of the sliced 2D layers (¶¶ 90, 132; fig. 10; the most distant triangular polygon from the center of gravity 74 of the target object model 72 is the polygon 76a, which calculates a width of the polygon, and a position of an assistant support is calculated based on the widths); and generating an assistant support based on a result of calculating (¶¶ 90-93, 132). Claim 2: Kobayashi et al. discloses dividing an output area of the sliced 2D layers and calculating widths of each area; and calculating a distribution of the widths of each area and calculating the position of the assistant support based on the calculated distribution (¶¶ 90-93, 132). Claims 3-4: The cited embodiments of Kobayashi et al. do not rely on DLP or SLA methods. Claim 5: Kobayashi et al. discloses calculating the position of the assistant support according to when the calculated distribution of the widths of each area are uniform (¶¶ 90, 132; fig. 10). Claims 6-8: Kobayashi et al. discloses the widths being uniform (¶¶ 90, 132; fig. 10). Claim 9: Kobayashi et al. discloses the assistant support being used to make a separation force uniform when the separation force between a cured area and a liquid material is not uniform in a process of lifting a cured 2D layer when bottom-up additive manufacturing is performed (¶¶ 90-93, 132; figs. 10, 16-19). 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 25, 2023
Application Filed
May 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Aug 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 15, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 10, 2025
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600082
DISPENSING HEAD FOR CONTINUOUS FIBER REINFORCED FUSED FILAMENT TYPE ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12539670
Method and Device for Producing a Three-Dimensional Object in an Optically Reactive Starting Material
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12484588
Partially Transparent Disposable Piping Bag
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Patent 12478129
THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING ALONG A CURVED SURFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12427701
VEHICLE TRIM COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 30, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
66%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+12.4%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 947 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month