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
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 2 January 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 29-34 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 2 January 2026.
Status of Claims
Responsive to the amendment filed 2 January 2026, claim 8 is amended and claim 39 is added. Claims 1-28 and 35-39 are currently under examination. Claims 29-34 are withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 2 “according to any claim 1” should read “according to claim 1”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-19, 23-27, 35, 36, and 38 are 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 2 requires in step a) that “the porous structure” is formed. This is not recited in step a) of claim 1. As claim 2 is recited, the porous structure would need to be both formed in step d) and also in step a) . The metes and bounds of claim 2 cannot be determined. Claim 3 depends from claim 2 and is also indefinite. Claims 8 and 9 each depends from claim 2 and is also indefinite.
Claim 4 requires in step c) that “the porous structure” is formed. This is not recited in step c) of claim 1. As claim 4 is recited, the porous structure would need to be both formed in step d) and also in step c) . The metes and bounds of claim 4 cannot be determined. Claim 5 depends from claim 4 and is also indefinite.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "densifying and bonding the powder to at least one of the starting object and the composite to form the intermediate object.” However claim 1 requires densifying and bonding the powder to the composite. It is not clear how claim 6 now makes required limitations of claim 1 optional. The metes and bounds of claim 6 cannot be determined and the claim is indefinite.
Claim 7 depends from claim 6 and is also indefinite.
Claim 10 recites that step c) further includes shaping a portion of the dense part. Claim 10 further recites that after the removal, the former member shapes or defines the surface of the object. It is not clear how the material is removed and then the member made from it shapes the object after removal. If the former member be removed, then it cannot define a surface. The metes and bounds of claim 6 cannot be determined and the claim is indefinite.
Each of claims 11-16, 27, 36, and 38 depends from claim 10 and is also indefinite. A similar limitation is found in claim 24, which is also indefinite.
Claim 13 requires that the former member is bonded to the composite to form the object. However claim 10 requires that the former member is removed so that they are separated. The metes and bounds of claim 13 cannot be determined and the claim is indefinite.
Claims 14 and 15 each depends from claim 13 and is also indefinite.
Claim 17 requires in step a) that “the porous structure” is formed. This is not recited in step a) of claim 1. As claim 17 is recited, the porous structure would need to be both formed in step d) and also in step a) . The metes and bounds of claim 17 cannot be determined. Claims 18 and 19 each depends from claim 17 and is also indefinite.
Claim 23 recites removing the second materials. Claim1 only recites a singular second material. It is not clear if claim 23 was intended to require multiple different second materials or if they are the same if the plurality of said composites.
Claims 24 and 25 each depends from claim 23 and is also indefinite.
Claim 25 requires “providing the starting object.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. No such starting object is recited in the claim or its parent claim prior to this. It is not clear whether applicant intended claim 25 to depend from claim 23, or from claim 6, which does invoke such a starting object. The metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined.
Claim 26 requires “at least one of the second material and third material” is soluble. There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. No such third material is recited in the claim or its parent claim prior to this. It is not clear whether applicant intended claim 26 to depend from claim 1, or from claim 10, which does invoke such a third material. The metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined.
Claim 35 requires “said applied heat and/or pressure.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. No such heat and/or pressure is recited in the claim or its parent claim prior to this. It is not clear whether applicant intended claim 35 to depend from claim 1. The metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined.
Claim 36 requires “said applied heat and/or pressure.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. No such heat and/or pressure is recited in the claim or its parent claim prior to this. It is not clear whether applicant intended claim 36 to depend from claim 10. The metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined.
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) 1-21, 23-28, and 35-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20100094420 A1 (hereinafter “Grohowski”).
Regarding claim 1, Grohowski teaches a porous bone fixation device (title). Grohowski teaches that the porous material is made by creating a matrix with extractable particulate therein (See SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION and [0056]-[0059]). Grohowski teaches that the method includes preparing multiple layers of different materials (See [0093]-[0097]). Grohowski teaches that the material includes a pore forming material is consolidated with a solid forming material (See [0097]-[0102] and Figs 4 and 5). Grohowski teaches that a homogenizing agent is also added to “wet” the material (See [0070], [0098]-[0102]). The pore former meets the limitation of a sacrificial material surrounding the first material. The solid layer over the pore forming layer meets the limitation of surrounding the composite with a powder. Grohowski teaches that such material is cold isostatic pressed ([0101]-[0102]), thus forming an intermediate object as claimed. Grohowski teaches removal of the pore former (See [01041]).
Regarding claim 2, Grohowski teaches that the material is tapped into a pressing die (See [0101]-[0102]), meeting the limitation of a body.
Regarding claim 3-5, Grohowski teaches pressing the powders (See [0101]-[0102]).
Regarding claim 6, Grohowski teaches that a starting object is used, where it is surrounded with the powder (see [0120]-[0130] and Figs 8-16).
Regarding claim 7, Grohowski teaches bonding (see [0120]-[0130] and Figs 8-16).
Regarding claim 8-9, Grohowski teaches formations on the surface (see [0120]-[0130] and Figs 8-16).
Regarding claim 10-12, Grotowski teaches that a third material is used (see [0120]-[0130] and Figs 8-16). Grohowski teaches that a homogenizing agent is also added to “wet” the material, added to the mixture and then removed (See [0070], [0098]-[0102]), which also meets the limitation of the “third material” and the “former member.”
Regarding claim 13-14, Grohowski teaches formations exist on the surface (see [0120]-[0130] and Figs 8-16).
Regarding claim 15, Grohowski teaches a pressing (see [0120]-[0130] and Figs 8-16).
Regarding claim 16, Grohowski teaches powders are used (see [0120]-[0130] and Figs 8-16).
Regarding claims 17-18, Grohowski teaches that the method includes preparing multiple layers of different materials (See [0093]-[0097]). Grohowski teaches that the material includes a pore forming material is consolidated with a solid forming material (See [0097]-[0102] and Figs 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 19, Grohowski teaches that the pore former is dissolved (See [0101]).
Regarding claim 20, Grohowski teaches to apply heat (See [0101]).
Regarding claim 21, Grohowski teaches to apply HIP if desired (see [0083]).
Regarding claims 23-24, Grohowski teaches that the method may include making multiple layers of porous and non-porous materials as desired (See [0093]-[0101]).
Regarding claim 25, Grohowski teaches that a starting object is used, where it is surrounded with the powder (see [0120]-[0130] and Figs 8-16).
Regarding claims 26-27, Grohowski teaches that the pore former is dissolved (See [0101]).
Regarding claim 28, Grohowski teaches that the material formed by the process is suitable for bonding onto an existing substrate, for example, a thermal management device (See [0095]). Thereby the skilled artisan would have clearly envisioned a sheet or plate of the material as bonded onto such devices. The limitation of being a bipolar or unipolar plate is distinguished only by the intended use, and the structure generated is not considered to be different from what is claimed. Applicant is directed to MPEP 2111.02.
Regarding claim 35-36, Grohowski teaches that the pore former is dissolved after the pressing (See [0101]).
Regarding claims 37-38, Grohowski teaches potassium chloride (See [0101]).
Regarding claim 39, Grohowski teaches that the material formed by the process is suitable for bonding onto an existing substrate, for example, a thermal management device (See [0095]). Thereby the skilled artisan would have clearly envisioned a sheet or plate of the material as bonded onto such devices. The limitation of being a bipolar or unipolar plate is distinguished only by the intended use, and the structure generated is not considered to be different from what is claimed. Applicant is directed to MPEP 2111.02.
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.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grohowski as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20180304362 A1 (hereinafter “Paulus”).
Regarding claim 22, Grohowski is applied to the claim as stated in the rejection of claims under 35 USC 102. Grohowski teaches that the material may be sintered by known means, and the method of sintering is selected by the skilled artisan (see [0083]). Grohowski does not teach field assisted sintering.
Paulus teaches field assisted sintering (see [0003] and BRIEF DESCRIPTION). Paulus teaches that the field assisted sintering can sinter a wide variety of powders more quickly and effectively than other processes (See [0037]-[0039]).
It would have been an obvious matter to the skilled artisan to have practiced the method of Grohowski and to have used FAST as taught by Paulus ([0003], [0037]-[0039]), because Paulus teaches that the field assisted sintering can sinter a wide variety of powders more quickly and effectively than other processes (See [0037]-[0039]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 10794642 B2 teaches to make a bipolar plate with a porous and dense component thru powder metallurgy. US 12036612 B2 teaches a bipolar plate construction with layered porous structure. US 6706239 B2 teaches conforming foam articles to make composites.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER S KESSLER whose telephone number is (571)272-6510. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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 S. KESSLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1734
/CHRISTOPHER S KESSLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights