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 of Group II (i.e., claims 6-10) without traverse in the reply filed on 08/11/2025 is acknowledged. Claim(s) 1-5 is/are withdrawn as being drawn to nonelected Group I. Accordingly, claim(s) 6-10 is/are examined herein.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 6-10 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 6 recites “3D printing method using a support body composition comprising a curing agent, the 3D printing method comprising:” in the preamble which is indefinite because the body of claim 6 fails to recite steps of forming and curing layers of the support body composition in 3D printing fashion. See MPEP §§ 2103 C and 2112.02. Under the BRI, the claim can have multiple plausible interpretations including an interpretation in which the term “3D printing” recited in the preamble is not considered a limitation. Claim 6 has been examined below as if the prior art only needs to disclose the support body composition and steps set forth in the body of the claim to disclose claim 6.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “wherein the curing agent is diffused from the support body composition to the structure body and cure the structure body in a contact between the support body composition and the structure body” which is indefinite. The language makes it difficult to ascertain the subject matter for which protection is sought. The limitation can have multiple plausible interpretations including a first interpretation in which the body structure is cured only at the contact or a second interpretation in which the body structure is cured as a whole. The limitation has been examined below as if it read --wherein the curing agent is diffused from the support body composition to the structure body and cures a contact between the support body composition and the structure body--.
Claim(s) 7-10 is/are rejected as being dependent from claim 6 and therefor including all the limitation thereof
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tosoratti (WO 2021074439).
Regarding claim 6, Tosoratti discloses a 3D printing method (method comprising a 3D printing step: pg. 2, pg. 24; additionally, the term “3D printing” is only recited in the preamble, and it is not considered a limitation: See §§ MPEP 2103 C and 2111.02 II ) using a support body composition (mould material) comprising a curing agent (cross-linking agent: Abstract, pg. 2, pg. 24), the 3D printing method comprising:
discharging the support body composition to a platform such that the support body composition comprising the curing agent comprises an accommodation space (discharging mould material A3 onto model/platform A1 such that the mould material A3 comprising the cross-linking agent A4 comprises an accommodation/cavity space: pg. 22, pg. 26, Figs. 1 and 4) ; and
discharging a structure body into the accommodation space (discharging a biocompatible polymer into the accommodation/cavity space to yield a body structure/implant: Abstract, pg. 22, pg. 26, Figs. 1 and 4);
wherein the curing agent is diffused from the support body composition to the structure body and cures a contact/interface between the support body composition and the structure body (the cross-linking agent is diffused from the mould material to the biocompatible polymer and cures/crosslinks an interface/contact between the mould material to the biocompatible polymer: Abstract, pg. 22, pg. 26, Figs. 1 and 4). Thus, Tosoratti discloses the method substantially as claimed by applicant.
Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Peri (US 20220055312).
Regarding claims 6-9, Peri discloses a 3D printing method (P0041, Fig. 1) using a support body composition (selectively depositing support material also referred to as the “formulation” for creating a support region: Abstract, P0090-0093) comprising a curing agent (the “formulation” comprising a photoinitiator: P0162, 0273, Table 1; wherein the photo-initiator reads on the claimed curing agent), the 3D printing method comprising:
discharging the support body composition to a platform such that the support body composition comprising the curing agent comprises an accommodation space (selectively depositing the support material to a tray such that the deposited support material 330 comprising the photoinitiator comprises an internal space: P0046, 0062, 0067, 0273, Fig. 3); and
discharging a structure body into the accommodation space (depositing a modeling material which forms a body region 310 into the internal space defined by 330: Abstract, P0045, 0066, 0086-0088, and Fig. 3);
wherein the curing agent is diffused from the support body composition to the structure body (the mixing of the support material and modeling material at their mutual interface 320 is expected to comprise diffusing/moving of the photoinitiator from the support material to the modeling material: P0047, 0067, claim 1) and cures the interface/contact between the support body composition and the structure body (curing includes curing/cross-linking the interface/contact 320 between the support material and the body region: P0048, 0067, Fig. 3);
expanding the accommodation space by discharging the support body composition to an upper end of the support body composition that is discharged to the platform, which is performed after the discharging of the structure body to the support body composition (expanding the accommodation space by discharging another/upper layer of the support material to an upper end of the support body composition that is discharged to the platform, which is performed after the discharging the first/bottom layer of the body region 310 to the first/bottom layer of support material: P0041, 0084, Fig. 3; 330 and 310 are manufactured layer by layer during a single pass);
additionally discharging the structure body into the expanded accommodation space, which is performed after the expanding of the accommodation space (dispensing another/upper layer of the modeling material to form another layer of the body region into the expanded accommodation space, which is performed after the expanding of the accommodation space which includes discharging the another/upper layer of the support region: P0041, 0084, Fig. 3; 330 and 310 are manufactured layer by layer during a single pass);
covering the structure body (310) in the accommodation space by additionally discharging the support body composition (support material in the top region of 330) such that the structure body (310) is fully enclosed by the support body composition (support region 330 encloses body region 310: Fig. 3). Thus, Peri implicitly discloses the method substantially as claimed by applicant.
PNG
media_image1.png
502
440
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
305
384
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peri (US 20220055312) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Feinberg (US 20160167312).
Regarding claim 10, Peri further discloses a step of immersing the support body composition and the structure body that are discharged to the platform in an aqueous solution (P0049, Fig. 1, claim 1).
Peri fails to disclose that the aqueous solution comprises the curing agent.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing methods, Feinberg discloses the technique of immersing a body structure (208) in an aqueous solution (202) comprising a curing agent (cross-linking agent or CaCl2) for the benefit(s) yielding the predictable benefit(s) of achieving/facilitating crosslinking of the body structure (P0009-0010, 0053, 0060-0062, Fig. 2).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Peri in view of Feinberg by including the curing agent in the aqueous solution for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of enhancing crosslinking of the body structure while still dissolving the support region via the aqueous solution as suggested by Feinberg. See MPEP §§ 22143 I C, 2143 I G, and/or 2144 II.
Conclusion
Additional prior art made of record and not relied upon that is considered to be pertinent to
Applicant’s disclosure:
Endoh (US 20170217090) discloses a relevant method (Figs. 7-14 and accompanying text).
Twiddy (US 20220088850) discloses a relevant method (Figs. 1-4 & 6 and accompanying text).
Peri/Endoh/Twiddy can be combined with Tosoratti in a 103 rejection in a future rejection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERZI H MORENO HERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0625. The examiner can normally be reached 1:00-10:00 PM PT.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
JERZI H. MORENO HERNANDEZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1743
/JERZI H MORENO HERNANDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights