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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/16/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received on 12/16/2025:
claims 1-2, 4, 8-9, 12-13, 19-21, 23-24, 26, 28-41 are currently pending;
claims 13, 19-21, 23-24, 26, 28 and 33-39 are withdrawn;
the objections to the specification are withdrawn in light of the amendments to the same;
the objections to the claims 1-2, 4, 8-9, 12 and 29-32 are withdrawn in light of the amendments to the same;
the 112(b) rejections to claims 9 and 32 are withdrawn in light of the amendment to the claims; and
all prior art grounds of rejection are maintained for at least the reasons as set forth herein. Additionally, new grounds of rejection for all claims including the newly added claims 40-41 is outlined below.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 8-9, 12, 29, 31-32 and 40-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (CN 109438999 A, with reference to the machine translation) (“Huang” hereinafter); evidenced by JECFA (Microcrystalline wax, 1995) (“Jecfa” hereinafter) with respect to claims 1 and 29 and Netzsch (Viscosity Converting Chart) (“Netzsch” hereinafter) with respect to claims 1 and 29.
Regarding claim 1, Huang teaches a mold material formulation (see Huang at [0021] teaching dental 3D-printed wax material). The wax material is taken to meet the claimed mold material formulation based on the structure below,
usable as forming a mold material in a cast-mold process in combination with a cast material formulation (the limitations directed towards the intended use of the claimed mold material formulation (see MPEP § 2111.02 II)),
the mold material formulation comprising:
Microcrystalline paraffin wax featuring a viscosity lower than 1000 cps at 90 oC and a melting temperature lower than 70 oC, in an amount of from about 40 to about 70 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Huang at [0022] teaching according to the mass fractions… mix 20-50 parts of microcrystalline wax), wherein the mass fractions is taken to meet the claimed “weight percent of the total weight of the formulation”, because in this instance, the mass fractions can be treated as weight percent (see MPEP 2144.05(I)). Microcrystalline wax is taken to meet the claimed “viscosity lower than 1000 cps at 90 oC and a melting temperature lower than 70 oC” as evidenced by Jecfa and Netzsch (see Jecfa at row 2 evidencing definition… microcrystalline wax is a refined mixture of solid, saturated hydrocarbons, mainly branched paraffin, obtained from petroleum, see Jecfa at row 8 evidencing melting range… 62-102oC (see MPEP 2144.05(I)), see Jecfa at row 12 evidencing Viscosity, 100o… not less than 11 cSt, see Netzsch at row 6 evidencing 10 cSt… 10 cps). Less than 11 cSt (or not 10 cps) overlaps with the claimed lower than 1000 cps (see MPEP 2144.05(I));
Vegetable-based (natural) wax featuring thermal conductivity higher than 0.4 W/m oC, and featuring an acid number higher than 2; in an amount of from about 30 to about 50 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Huang at [0022] teaching according to the mass fractions… 10-30 parts of plant wax, see Huang at [0014] teaching in one embodiment, the plant wax is selected from at least one of… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed “vegetable-based (natural) wax featuring thermal conductivity higher than 0.4 W/m oC, and featuring an acid number higher than 2” based on the specification at pages 54-55 disclosing B2… vegetable wax… candelilla wax); and
Fischer-Tropsch wax, in an amount of from about 1 to about 20 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Huang at [0022] teaching according to the mass fractions… 5-15 parts of Fischer-Tropsch wax) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 4, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Huang further teaches wherein said vegetable-based wax features… an acid number higher than 10 (see Huang at [0014] teaching in one embodiment, the plant wax is selected from at least one of… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed “vegetable-based (natural) wax features… an acid number higher than 10” based on the specification at pages 54-55 disclosing B2… vegetable wax… candelilla wax).
Regarding claim 8, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Huang further teaches wherein an amount of said Fischer-Tropsch wax ranges from 2 to 10, weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Huang at [0022] teaching according to the mass fractions… 5-15 parts of Fischer-Tropsch wax) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 9, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Huang further teaches wherein the mold material formulation is characterized by a viscosity in a range of from about 6 to about 15 centipoises, at a temperature in a range of from 70 to 90 oC; and as providing a mold material that is characterized by at least one… of the following characteristics… melting point lower than 80 oC (since the wax material as taught by Huang and the claimed mold material formulation of claims 1 and 9 employ substantially similar materials and process, it is reasonable to believe that the claimed properties (i.e., wherein the mold material formulation is characterized by a viscosity in a range of from about 6 to about 15 centipoises, at a temperature in a range of from 70 to 90 oC)) would have naturally flowed following the teaching of Huang (see MPEP 2112.01).
Regarding claim 12, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Huang further teaches usable in forming a mold in a configured pattern in an additive manufacturing process such as 3D inkjet printing (the wax material as taught by Huang is expected to be capable of being usable in forming a mold in a configured pattern in an additive manufacturing process such as 3D inkjet printing).
Regarding claim 40, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Huang further teaches wherein said vegetable- based (natural) wax consists of a vegetable-based (natural) wax featuring said thermal conductivity and said acid number (see Huang at [0014] teaching in one embodiment, the plant wax is selected from at least one of… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed “vegetable-based (natural) wax featuring thermal conductivity higher than 0.4 W/m oC, and featuring an acid number higher than 2” based on the specification at pages 54-55 disclosing B2… vegetable wax… candelilla wax).
Regarding claim 29, Huang teaches a mold material formulation (see Huang at [0021] teaching dental 3D-printed wax material). The wax material is taken to meet the claimed mold material formulation based on the structure below,
usable as forming a mold material in a cast-mold process in combination with a cast material formulation (the limitations directed towards the intended use of the claimed mold material formulation (see MPEP § 2111.02 II)),
the mold material formulation comprising:
Microcrystalline paraffin wax featuring a viscosity lower than 1000 cps at 90 oC and a melting temperature lower than 70 oC, in an amount of from about 40 to about 70 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Huang at [0022] teaching according to the mass fractions… mix 20-50 parts of microcrystalline wax), wherein the mass fractions is taken to meet the claimed “weight percent of the total weight of the formulation”, because in this instance, the mass fractions can be treated as weight percent) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)). Microcrystalline wax is taken to meet the claimed “viscosity lower than 1000 cps at 90 oC and a melting temperature lower than 70 oC” as evidenced by Jecfa and Netzsch (see Jecfa at row 2 evidencing definition… microcrystalline wax is a refined mixture of solid, saturated hydrocarbons, mainly branched paraffin, obtained from petroleum, see Jecfa at row 8 evidencing melting range… 62-102oC (see MPEP 2144.05(I)), see Jecfa at row 12 evidencing Viscosity, 100o… not less than 11 cSt, see Netzsch at row 6 evidencing 10 cSt… 10 cps). Less than 11 cSt (or not 10 cps) overlaps with the claimed lower than 1000 cps (see MPEP 2144.05(I));
Vegetable-based (natural) wax featuring thermal conductivity higher than 0.25 W/m oC, and featuring an acid number higher than 7; in an amount of from about 30 to about 50 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Huang at [0022] teaching according to the mass fractions… 10-30 parts of plant wax, see Huang at [0014] teaching in one embodiment, the plant wax is selected from at least one of… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed “vegetable-based (natural) wax featuring thermal conductivity higher than 0.25 W/m oC, and featuring an acid number higher than 7” based on the specification at pages 54-55 disclosing B2… vegetable wax… candelilla wax); and
Fischer-Tropsch wax, in an amount of from about 1 to about 20 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Huang at [0022] teaching according to the mass fractions… 5-15 parts of Fischer-Tropsch wax) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 31, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 29 above, and Huang further teaches wherein said vegetable-based wax features an acid number higher than 10 (see Huang at [0014] teaching in one embodiment, the plant wax is selected from at least one of… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed “vegetable-based wax features an acid number higher than 10” based on the specification at pages 54-55 disclosing B2… vegetable wax… candelilla wax).
Regarding claim 32, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 29 above, and Huang further teaches wherein the mold material formulation is characterized by a viscosity in a range of from about 6 to about 15 centipoises, at a temperature in a range of from 70 to 90 oC; and as providing a mold material that is characterized by at least one… of the following characteristics… melting point lower than 80 oC (since the wax material as taught by Huang and the claimed mold material formulation of claims 29 and 32 employ substantially similar materials and process, it is reasonable to believe that the claimed properties (i.e., wherein the mold material formulation is characterized by a viscosity in a range of from about 6 to about 15 centipoises, at a temperature in a range of from 70 to 90 oC)) would have naturally flowed following the teaching of Huang (see MPEP 2112.01).
Regarding claim 41, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 29 above, and Huang further teaches wherein said vegetable- based (natural) wax consists of a vegetable-based (natural) wax featuring said thermal conductivity and said acid number (see Huang at [0014] teaching in one embodiment, the plant wax is selected from at least one of… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed “vegetable-based (natural) wax featuring thermal conductivity higher than 0.25 W/m oC, and featuring an acid number higher than 7” based on the specification at pages 54-55 disclosing B2… vegetable wax… candelilla wax).
Claims 2 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang as applied to claims 1 and 29, respectively above, and further in view of Craig et al. (Properties of Natural Waxes Used in Dentistry. Journal of Dental Research, 1965) (“Craig” hereinafter).
Regarding claims 2 and 30, Huang teaches the limitations as applied to claims 1 and 29, respectively above, and as mentioned, Huang teaches a dental 3D-printed wax material comprising microcrystalline wax (see Huang at [0021]-[0022]).
However, Huang does not explicitly teach wherein said microcrystalline paraffin wax features a melting point range lower than 10 oC and/or an acid number lower than 2 (claims 2 and 30).
Like Huang, Craig teaches microcrystalline paraffin wax used in dentistry (see Craig at Title teaching properties of natural waxes used in dentistry, see Craig at page 1308, left column, section Materials and Methods teaching selection of waxes… the waxes investigated, together with the general categories and sources, are listed in Table 1… paraffin waxes are of mineral origin from high boiling fractions of petroleum and are mixtures of chiefly straight-chain-saturated hydrocarbons which crystallize in plates or needles, see Craig at page 1309, right column, section Results teaching setting and melting ranges… the setting ranges of the mineral and insect waxes are listed in Table 2, see Craig at page 1310, Table 2 teaching paraffin wax… temperature range oC… 7.0). 7 oC melting temperature range for paraffin wax is taken to meet the claimed wherein said microcrystalline paraffin wax features… a melting point range lower than 10 oC (claims 2 and 30).
Craig further teaches the melting and setting ranges of waxes are valuable in identifying and classifying wax as well as indicating purity (see Craig at page 1313, right column, section Discussion).
Additionally, MPEP states that “the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination” (see MPEP § 2144.07). In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that microcrystalline paraffin wax with a 7 oC melting temperature range is suitable for its intended use.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a microcrystalline paraffin wax with a 7 oC melting temperature range as taught by Craig in the wax material as taught by Huang because the microcrystalline paraffin wax is suitable for its intended use, and the melting ranges of waxes are valuable in identifying and classifying wax as well as indicating purity.
Claims 1-2, 4, 8-9, 12 and 29-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN 104759587 A, with reference to the machine translation) (“Li” hereinafter) in view of Koenig (US 4144075 A) (“Koenig” hereinafter); as evidenced by Jecfa with respect to claims 1 and 29, Netzsch with respect to claims 1 and 29, Craig with respect to claims 1 and 29, Dossetti-Romero et al. (Thermal diffusivity, thermal conductivity and resistivity of candelilla wax, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 2002) (“Dossetti-Romero” hereinafter) with respect to claims 1, 4 and 29, and Kuznesof (Candelilla Wax. Chemical and Technical Assessment 65th JECFA) (“Kuznesof” hereinafter) with respect to claims 1, 4, 29 and 31.
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches mold material formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching a precision casting wax mold material), which is taken to meet the claimed mold material formulation based on the structure as outlined below,
usable as forming a mold material in a cast-mold process in combination with a cast material formulation (the wax mold material as taught by Li is expected to be capable of being usable as forming a mold material in a cast-mold process in combination with a cast material formulation), the mold material formulation comprising:
Microcrystalline paraffin wax (see Li at [0009] teaching microcrystalline wax). Microcrystalline wax is also taken to meet the claimed paraffin, as evidenced by Jecfa (see Jecfa at page 1, row 2 column 2 evidencing microcrystalline wax is a refined mixture of solid, saturated hydrocarbons, mainly branched paraffin, obtained from petroleum),
featuring a viscosity lower than 1000 cps at 90 oC (microcrystalline wax as taught by Li is taken to meet the claimed recitation as evidenced by Jecfa and Netzsch, see Jecfa at row 12 evidencing Viscosity, 100o… not less than 11 cSt, see Netzsch at row 6 evidencing 10 cSt… 10 cps). Less than 11 cSt (or not 10 cps) overlaps with the claimed lower than 1000 cps (see MPEP 2144.05(I)), and
a melting temperature lower than 70 oC (see 112 rejection for Examiner interpretation, see Li at [0016] teaching the melting point of the microcrystalline wax is 65-75 oC) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)),
in an amount of from about 40 to about 70 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching the basic components are composed of the following raw materials in percentage by mass… 40-60% of microcrystalline wax) (see MPEP 2144.05(I));
Vegetable-based (natural) wax (see Li at [0009] teaching carnauba wax, and… candelilla wax). Carnauba and candelilla waxes are taken to meet the claimed vegetable-based (natural) wax as evidenced by Craig (see Craig at page 1308, right column, Table 1 evidencing wax carnauba… category plant… source palm tree… wax candelilla… category plant… source wild succulent plant),
featuring thermal conductivity higher than 0.4 W/m oC (see Li at [0009] teaching carnauba wax, and… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax as taught by Li is taken to meet the claimed high thermal conductivity as evidenced by Dossetti-Romero (see Dossetti-Romero at Abstract evidencing the values of thermal and electrical properties of candelilla wax… the thermal conductivity (k = 2.132 +/- 0.16 W mK-1 or 2.132 +/- 0.16 W/m oC), which overlaps with the claimed range (see MPEP 2144.05(I))), and
featuring an acid number higher than 2 (see Li at [0009] teaching carnauba wax, and… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed acid number higher than 2 as evidenced by Kuznesof (see Kuznesof at page 1, section 2 Description, paragraph 3 evidencing acid value… 12-22, which overlaps with the claimed range (see MPEP 2144.05(I)));
in an amount of from about 30 to about 50 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching the basic components are composed of the following raw materials in percentage by mass… 0-30% of carnauba wax, and 0-10% of candelilla wax). The combined amount of carnauba wax and candelilla was is 0-40 mass% (see MPEP 2144.05(I)); and
wax, in an amount of from about 1 to about 20 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching the basic components are composed of the following raw materials in percentage by mass… 5-30% of PE wax) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Li does not explicitly teach that the wax is Fischer-Tropsch, but Li teaches that the wax is PE wax (see Lee at [0009]).
Like Li, Koenig teaches a wax mold composition comprising microcrystalline wax, vegetable-based wax and PE wax (se Koenig at C1 L12-13 teaching this disclosure relates to wax compositions, see Koenig at C4 L61-67 teaching a suitable base wax consists essentially of… vegetable wax… microcrystalline wax… 1 to 12% synthetic waxes such as Fischer-Tropsch waxes, polyethylene, ethylene vinyl acetate, or amides). 1 to 12 % synthetic waxes such as polyethylene as taught by Koenig overlaps with the 5-30 % PE wax as taught by Li (see Lee at [0009]).
Additionally, MPEP states that “the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination” (see MPEP § 2144.07). In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that both PE wax and Fischer-Tropsch wax are a suitable materials for a wax mold composition.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to replace PE wax with Fischer-Tropsch wax as taught by Koenig in the wax mold material composition as taught by Li because both PE wax and Fischer-Tropsch wax are suitable materials for a wax mold composition.
Regarding claim 2, Li in view of Koenig teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Li further teaches wherein said microcrystalline paraffin wax features… a melting point range lower than 10 (see Li at [0016] teaching the melting point of the microcrystalline wax is 65-75 oC). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the melting point range is 10 (or 75 – 65), which overlaps with the claimed range (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 4, Li in view of Koenig teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Li further teaches wherein said vegetable-based wax features… an acid number higher than 10 (see Li at [0009] teaching carnauba wax, and… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed acid number higher than 10 as evidenced by Kuznesof (see Kuznesof at page 1, section 2 Description, paragraph 3 evidencing acid value… 12-22, which overlaps with the claimed range (see MPEP 2144.05(I))).
Regarding claim 8, Li in view of Koenig teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Li in view of Koenig further teaches wherein the amount of Fisher-Tropsh wax ranges from 2 to about 10 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching the basic components are composed of the following raw materials in percentage by mass… 5-30% of PE wax, and see claim 1 rejection based on Li in view Koenig with respect to replacing PE wax with Fisher-Tropsh wax).
Regarding claim 9, Li in view of Koenig teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Li in view of Koenig further teaches wherein the mold material formulation is characterized by a viscosity in a range of from about 6 to about 15 centipoises, at a temperature in a range of from 70 to 90 oC; and as providing a mold material that is characterized by at least one… of the following characteristics… melting point lower than 80 oC (see 112 rejection for Examiner’s claim interpretation, since the wax mold material composition as taught by Li in view of Koenig and the claimed mold material formulation of claims 1 and 9 employ substantially similar materials and process, it is reasonable to believe that the claimed properties (i.e., wherein the mold material formulation is characterized by a viscosity in a range of from about 6 to about 15 centipoises, at a temperature in a range of from 70 to 90 oC)) would have naturally flowed following the teaching of Li in view of Koenig (see MPEP 2112.01).
Regarding claim 12, Li in view of Koenig teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Li in view of Koenig further teaches usable in forming a mold in a configured pattern in an additive manufacturing process such as 3D inkjet printing (the wax mold material composition as taught by Li in view of Koenig is expected to be capable of being usable in forming a mold in a configured pattern in an additive manufacturing process such as 3D inkjet printing).
Regarding claim 29, Li teaches mold material formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching a precision casting wax mold material), which is taken to meet the claimed mold material formulation based on the structure as outlined below,
usable as forming a mold material in a cast-mold process in combination with a cast material formulation (the wax mold material as taught by Li is expected to be capable of being usable as forming a mold material in a cast-mold process in combination with a cast material formulation), the mold material formulation comprising:
Microcrystalline paraffin wax (see Li at [0009] teaching microcrystalline wax). Microcrystalline wax is also taken to meet the claimed paraffin, as evidenced by Jecfa (see Jecfa at page 1, row 2 column 2 evidencing microcrystalline wax is a refined mixture of solid, saturated hydrocarbons, mainly branched paraffin, obtained from petroleum),
featuring a viscosity lower than 1000 cps at 90 oC (microcrystalline wax as taught by Li is taken to meet the claimed recitation as evidenced by Jecfa and Netzsch, see Jecfa at row 12 evidencing Viscosity, 100o… not less than 11 cSt, see Netzsch at row 6 evidencing 10 cSt… 10 cps). Less than 11 cSt (or not 10 cps) overlaps with the claimed lower than 1000 cps (see MPEP 2144.05(I)), and
a melting temperature lower than 70 oC (see 112 rejection for Examiner interpretation, see Li at [0016] teaching the melting point of the microcrystalline wax is 65-75 oC) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)),
in an amount of from about 40 to about 70 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching the basic components are composed of the following raw materials in percentage by mass… 40-60% of microcrystalline wax) (see MPEP 2144.05(I));
Vegetable-based (natural) wax (see Li at [0009] teaching carnauba wax, and… candelilla wax). Carnauba and candelilla waxes are taken to meet the claimed vegetable-based (natural) wax as evidenced by Craig (see Craig at page 1308, right column, Table 1 evidencing wax carnauba… category plant… source palm tree… wax candelilla… category plant… source wild succulent plant),
featuring thermal conductivity higher than 0.25 W/m oC (see Li at [0009] teaching carnauba wax, and… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax as taught by Li is taken to meet the claimed high thermal conductivity as evidenced by Dossetti-Romero (see Dossetti-Romero at Abstract evidencing the values of thermal and electrical properties of candelilla wax… the thermal conductivity (k = 2.132 +/- 0.16 W mK-1 or 2.132 +/- 0.16 W/m oC), which overlaps with the claimed range (see MPEP 2144.05(I))), and
featuring an acid number higher than 7 (see Li at [0009] teaching carnauba wax, and… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed acid number higher than 7 as evidenced by Kuznesof (see Kuznesof at page 1, section 2 Description, paragraph 3 evidencing acid value… 12-22, which overlaps with the claimed range (see MPEP 2144.05(I)));
in an amount of from about 30 to about 50 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching the basic components are composed of the following raw materials in percentage by mass… 0-30% of carnauba wax, and 0-10% of candelilla wax). The combined amount of carnauba wax and candelilla was is 0-40 mass% (see MPEP 2144.05(I)); and
wax, in an amount of from about 1 to about 20 weight percent of the total weight of the formulation (see Li at [0009] teaching the basic components are composed of the following raw materials in percentage by mass… 5-30% of PE wax) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Li does not explicitly teach that the wax is Fischer-Tropsch, but Li teaches that the wax is PE wax (see Lee at [0009]).
Like Li, Koenig teaches a wax mold composition comprising microcrystalline wax, vegetable-based wax and PE wax (se Koenig at C1 L12-13 teaching this disclosure relates to wax compositions, see Koenig at C4 L61-67 teaching a suitable base wax consists essentially of… vegetable wax… microcrystalline wax… 1 to 12% synthetic waxes such as Fischer-Tropsch waxes, polyethylene, ethylene vinyl acetate, or amides). 1 to 12 % synthetic waxes such as polyethylene as taught by Koenig overlaps with the 5-30 % PE wax as taught by Li (see Lee at [0009]).
Additionally, MPEP states that “the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination” (see MPEP § 2144.07). In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that both PE wax and Fischer-Tropsch wax are a suitable materials for a wax mold composition.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to replace PE wax with Fischer-Tropsch wax as taught by Koenig in the wax mold material composition as taught by Li because both PE wax and Fischer-Tropsch wax are suitable materials for a wax mold composition.
Regarding claim 30, Li in view of Koenig teaches the limitations as applied to claim 29 above, and Li further teaches wherein said microcrystalline paraffin wax features… a melting point range lower than 10 (see Li at [0016] teaching the melting point of the microcrystalline wax is 65-75 oC). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the melting point range is 10 (or 75 – 65), which overlaps with the claimed range (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 31, Li in view of Koenig teaches the limitations as applied to claim 29 above, and Li further teaches wherein said vegetable-based wax features… an acid number higher than 10 (see Li at [0009] teaching carnauba wax, and… candelilla wax). Candelilla wax is taken to meet the claimed acid number higher than 10 as evidenced by Kuznesof (see Kuznesof at page 1, section 2 Description, paragraph 3 evidencing acid value… 12-22, which overlaps with the claimed range (see MPEP 2144.05(I))).
Regarding claim 32, Li in view of Koenig teaches the limitations as applied to claim 29 above, and Li in view of Koenig further teaches wherein the mold material formulation is characterized by a viscosity in a range of from about 6 to about 15 centipoises, at a temperature in a range of from 70 to 90 oC; and as providing a mold material that is characterized by at least one… of the following characteristics… melting point lower than 80 oC (see 112 rejection for Examiner’s claim interpretation, since the wax mold material composition as taught by Li in view of Koenig and the claimed mold material formulation of claims 1 and 29 employ substantially similar materials and process, it is reasonable to believe that the claimed properties (i.e., wherein the mold material formulation is characterized by a viscosity in a range of from about 6 to about 15 centipoises, at a temperature in a range of from 70 to 90 oC)) would have naturally flowed following the teaching of Li in view of Koenig (see MPEP 2112.01).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Responses to Applicant’s arguments are outlined in the Advisory Action dated 12/04/2025.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARITES A GUINO-O UZZLE whose telephone number is (571)272-1039. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm 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, Amber R Orlando can be reached at (571)270-3149. 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.
/MARITES A GUINO-O UZZLE/Examiner, Art Unit 1731