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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/08/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (pg. 8) that “it is impossible for Huang to disclose or suggest the newly added limitations because the Office Action expressly acknowledges that Huang ‘does not teach the first connecting channel via which build material is at least temporarily conductible/conducted to a receiving region which does not correspond to the exit opening of the printing nozzle.’ See Office Action at page 14” but this is not found persuasive. Huang meets the claimed first connecting channel with “F” in Fig. 2, which connects to the outlet 41. Although this does not meet the above limitation where “F” temporarily does not connect to the exit opening of the printing nozzle, it meets the new limitation where the first connecting channel connects with the feed section of the plasticizing means. Huang depicts backflow channel 34 to connect to channel F to connect to outlet 30 and reservoir 24 via gear pump 28a,28b, see [0041], Fig. 2. Examiner notes this directly corresponds to applicant’s parts further connecting channel 7 connecting channel 8 is connected with receiving region 10 and feed section 16 of plasticizing means 3.
Applicant argues (pg. 8) “John expressly discloses that bypass channel 9 conducts material to bypass die 5, not directly to a feed section of the plasticizing means” but this is not found persuasive. This newly claimed limitation is met by primary reference Huang, not secondary reference John. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant argues (pg. 9) that “the material path disclosed by John is: extrusion unit - borehole 8 - bypass channel 9 - bypass die 5 -- collection receptacle 4. John therefore discloses external discharge through bypass die 5 rather than a configuration in which an outlet of the further connecting channel is directly connected to a feed section of the plasticizing means” but this is not found persuasive. Firstly, John teaches a plasticizing unit (not shown) is connected to flange 1 and the top of Fig. 1 and 2, see [0018], [0033]. That is, the bypass channel 9 of John is connected to the plasticizing means via channel 10. Secondly, the configuration is John is relied upon only for a modification of Huang to include an additional outlet. The modification of Huang by John does not bodily incorporate all parts of John. The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 16, 17, and 19-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 2005/0015175 A1) in view of John et al. (US 2021/0347117 A1) hereinafter John.
Regarding claim 16, Huang meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus ( a layer-by-layer manner in accordance with a design created on a computer, see [0001] and [0016]) for extrusion-based production of a shaped article starting from a build material present in the form of a granulate and/or a powder, (variety of material compositions including ceramic powder [0063] Examiner notes the claimed granulate or powder is the intended use of the apparatus, see MPEP 2114. The device of Huang is capable of use with various materials that can be extruded using a screw extruder or gear pump, see [0041]) comprising:
a plasticizing means in which the powder and/or granulate-form build material is plasticizable/plasticized; (optional heating elements 25a,25b to help the fluid material in the reservoir 24 and chamber 32 maintain a desired constant temperature, see [0039], Fig. 1b. Examiner notes these elements of Huang are capable of plasticizing a material and meet the claimed plasticizing means)
a printing nozzle provided with an exit opening (inkjet printhead 38 [0041]) via which the plasticized build material is selectively depositable/deposited domain-dependently in a build plane to form the shaped article (precursor fluid material is dispensed onto a surface of the device substrate 43 to form a desired pattern of the deposited material 42, see [0040])
and a first connecting channel (F, Fig. 2) via which the build material is at least temporarily conductible/conducted from an outlet of the plasticizing means to the exit opening of the printing nozzle, (flow direction of the precursor fluid material from the chamber 32 to the dispensing head is referred to as forward flow, designated by the letter F in FIG. 2 and FIG. 3) and a further connecting channel (backflow channel 34A, Fig. 2)
wherein an outlet of the further connecting channel (F, Fig. 2) is directly connected to a feed section of the plasticizing means.(Huang depicts backflow channel 34 to connect to channel F to connect to outlet 30 and reservoir 24 via gear pump 28a,28b, see [0041], Fig. 2. Examiner notes this directly corresponds to applicant’s parts further connecting channel 7 connecting channel 8 is connected with receiving region 10 and feed section 16 of plasticizing means 3).
Huang does not teach the first connecting channel via which build material is at least temporarily conductible/conducted to a receiving region which does not correspond to the exit opening of the printing nozzle.
John teaches the first connecting channel via which build material is at least temporarily conductible/conducted to a receiving region which does not correspond to the exit opening of the printing nozzle. (John teaches the apparatus to be used for generative manufacturing or 3D printing, see [0003] and [0028]. John teaches bypass channel 9, Fig. 2 to send material to collection receptable 4, Fig. 2, see [0039]. John teaches to achieve that feeding of extruded plastically deformable material for manufacture is halted when flowing through the bypass channel, [0013]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the nozzle control for a 3D printing system of Huang with the 3D printing bypass nozzle of John because material flow cannot be started and stopped easily and 3D printing applications require non-continuous flow, thus it improves the process to flush unwanted material instead of pausing, see John [0001-[0006].
Regarding claim 17, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 16, further comprising: a closure means (the printhead 41 may contain a conventional office inkjet printhead with the valve means comprising either a piezo-electric actuator or a thermal actuation element, see [0051]) that is arranged or configured in the first connecting channel, (channel F, Fig. 2) wherein the closure means is configured to control a volume flow of the plasticized build material passed through the connecting channel. (Huang teaches a desired amount of fluid material is discharged out of the orifice 41 in the form of minute droplets, [0041]. Examiner notes that this indirectly teach the material flow through channel F, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 18, wherein the first connecting channel has a first closure means (printhead 41 contains valve means, [0051]) and the at least one further connecting channel at least one further closure means arranged or configured in it, (needle 46 being inserted into the channel 34A,34B to a shallow position the material back-flow rate from 34A to 34B, and re-entering the reservoir, is higher, [0043] John teaches bypass channel 9, Fig. 2 to send material to collection receptable 4, Fig. 2, see [0039], thus the arrangement of the two closure means is obvious in view of the combination) and an opening degree of the closure means is controllable. (cross-section area of channel 34A,34B through which the material can back flow is effectively adjusted by this position, which can be readily changed by using an actuator, e.g., a linear motion device 53 powered by a stepper motor 52, see [0042]).
Regarding claim 20, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 19, wherein at least the further closure means is a needle valve. (needle 46, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 21, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 20, wherein the opening degree of the first closure means and at least one further closure means (Huang teaches cross-section area of channel 34A,34B through which the material can back flow is effectively adjusted by this position, which can be readily changed by using an actuator, e.g., a linear motion device 53 powered by a stepper motor 52, see [0042]. Huang teaches a first valve means in a printhead, [0051] and a needle 46 in channel 34A and 34B. John teaches bypass channel 9, Fig. 2 to send material to collection receptable 4, Fig. 2, see [0039], thus the arrangement of the two closure means is obvious in view of the combination) is controllable by open-and/or closed-loop control, via a control unit. (Huang teaches operating a CAD computer for generating control signals, where the dispensing head 38 is also controlled to dispense the fluid material, continuously or intermittently, [0046]. Huang teaches cross-section area of channel 34A,34B through which the material can back flow is effectively adjusted by this position, which can be readily changed by using an actuator, e.g., a linear motion device 53 powered by a stepper motor 52, see [0042]. Examiner notes that this meets the claimed closed-loop control because the system of Huang responds to input signals with control signals. Furthermore, Huang as modified by John teaches the apparatus is controllable by open-loop and/or closed-loop control. This rotary drive can, in turn, be influenced by the electronic controller, which is used anyhow for the particular additive production of components, so as to influence, or completely halt, the volume flow of extruded plastically deformable material fed for manufacturing, see John [0017].)
Regarding claim 22, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 21, wherein an employed build material is at least partially composed of plastics material. (fluid material may be in a hot melt (e.g., thermoplastic), a liquid containing a liquid soluble second component, see [0063]).
Regarding claim 23, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 22, wherein the build material comprises short fibers. (Examiner notes the material consumed by the apparatus is considered the material worked upon, see MPEP 2115. Huang teaches wide variety of material compositions, including organic, polymeric, metallic, ceramic, carbonaceous, glass, organo-metallic, and combinations thereof, see [0063]).
Regarding claim 24, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 23, wherein the receiving region into which the further connecting channel opens, (John teaches bypass die 5, into a collection receptacle 4) comprises a build material collection reservoir (collection receptable 4) in which the build material conducted in the further connecting channel is receivable/received.
Regarding claim 25, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 24, wherein material collection reservoir is configured as a build material collection container (collection receptable 4, Fig. 1) which is detachably connectable to the additive manufacturing apparatus. (Examiner nots the part 4 of John is capable of being detached given the design shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 26, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 25, wherein the outlet region of the further connecting channel arranged downstream of the plasticizing means is connected to a feed section of the plasticizing means, so that the build material conducted by the connecting channel is suppliable/supplied to a plasticizing means-side plasticizing process for plasticizing the build material. (Huang teaches the material can be recycled where the flow through a channel 34A,34B and an outlet 36 back into the reservoir 24. [0042])
Regarding claim 27, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 26, further comprising: a robot unit (Examiner notes that “robot unit” is given the broadest reasonable interpretation and that no definition is found in the specification) that is configured to carry a printing means comprising at least the printing nozzle and moving this printing means over the build plane, (Huang teaches three-dimensional motion controller is electronically linked to the mechanical drive means and is operative to actuate the mechanical drive means (e.g., those comprising stepper motors) in response to "X", "Y", "Z" axis drive signals for each layer received from the CAD computer, see [0059] Examine notes that this meets the claim robot unit) such that build material is selectively deposited domain-dependently on the build plane to form the shaped article. (precursor fluid material is dispensed onto a surface of the device substrate 43 to form a desired pattern of the deposited material 42, see [0040])
Regarding claim 28, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 27, wherein the plasticizing means comprises at least one conveying and/or pressurizing means in the form of a screw (screw extruder [0041]).
Regarding claim 29, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 28, wherein the screw is a screw extruder. (screw extruder [0041]).
Regarding claim 30, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 29, wherein the plasticizing means and/or a printing means comprising at least one printing nozzle is provided with a heating means via which thermal energy is transferable to a build material conducted in the plasticizing means and/or in the printing means. (Huang teaches optional heating elements 25a,25b to help the fluid material in the reservoir 24 and chamber 32 maintain a desired constant temperature, see [0039], Fig. 1b)
Regarding claim 31, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 30, wherein a channel section downstream of the outlet of the plasticizing means has configured therein a branch at which the first and the at least one further connecting channel branch off. (Huang Fig. 2 depicts channel 32 and 34A branching off downstream of the plasticizing outlet 30).
Regarding claim 32, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 31, wherein at least one closure means is arranged in proximity to the printing nozzle (Huang teaches inkjet jet nozzle to include closure means such as a piezo-electric actuator or a thermal actuation element, see [0051]) and/or in proximity to the receiving region.
Regarding claim 33, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 32, wherein the first closure means is arranged in proximity to the printing nozzle (Huang teaches an inkjet nozzle to include closure means such as a piezo-electric actuator or a thermal actuation element, see [0051]) and the further closure means is arranged in proximity to the receiving region. (Huang teaches needle 46 being inserted into the channel 34A,34B).
Regarding claim 34, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 33, wherein the additive manufacturing apparatus is configured to extrude a powder- and/or granulate-form build material according to an extrusion additive manufacturing process (EAM), and/or fused deposition modelling process (FDM), and/or fused filament fabrication process (FFF), and/or fused layer modelling process (FLM). (Examiner notes the broadest reasonable interpretation of these terms includes the commonly understood meaning. Wikipedia defines FDM and FFF to include “Hot extrusion of pellets”, see provided copy pg. 3. Therefore the method of Huang meets the claimed EAM, FDM, FFF, and FLM).
Regarding claim 35, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed process for additive manufacturing of at least one shaped article using an additive manufacturing apparatus according to claim 34, wherein a first closure means controls the supplying of plasticized build material to the exit opening of the printing nozzle (printhead 41 contains valve means, [0051]) and a further closure means controls the supplying of plasticized build material to a receiving region, (needle 46 being inserted into the channel 34A,34B to a shallow position the material back-flow rate from 34A to 34B, and re-entering the reservoir, is higher) and wherein when in the state of a closed first closure means and an open further closure means the supplying of an entirety of the build material, to the receiving region is performed via the further connecting channel. (Huang teaches backflow channel 34A, Fig. 2. John teaches bypass die 5, into a collection receptacle 4. John teaches to achieve that feeding of extruded plastically deformable material for manufacture is halted when flowing through the bypass channel, [0013]).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 2005/0015175 A1) in view of John et al. (US 2021/0347117 A1) hereinafter John, and in further view of Saurwalt (US 2023/0139210 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Huang as modified by John meets the claimed wherein the closure means is a needle valve. (Huang teaches the printhead 41 may contain a conventional office inkjet printhead with the valve means comprising either a piezo-electric actuator or a thermal actuation element, see [0051]).
Saurwalt meets the claimed wherein the closure means is a needle valve. (Saurwalt teaches the plunger 72 comprises a valve device 73, arranged to close off the output channel 5, subsequently stopping the output flow of the liquefied material through the nozzle 6, see [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to select the needle valve nozzle of Saurwalt in place of the inkjet printhead of Huang because a larger aperture improves printing speed for fast assembly of printed objects, see [0038].
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Marino (US 2016/0039148 A1) teaches the 3-D printer includes a nozzle for extruding a material, apparatus for controllably positioning the nozzle in accordance with the specification; and apparatus for generating a feedback signal that is indicative of at least one characteristic of a most recently extruded portion of the material, [0005], where the nozzle 12 is controllably translated in the x-y plane in order to extrude a layer of material, see [0009].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL M. ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0467. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM.
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, Sam Zhao can be reached at (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.
/MICHAEL M. ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights