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 .
Response to Amendments
Applicant filed a response, amended claim 1 and 22, and cancelled claim 7 on 01/06/2026.
Response to Arguments
Arguments are primarily drawn to the amended claim 1 and 22. The revised rejection addresses the amended claim 1 and its dependent claims.
Regarding claim 1 and 22, Erickson teaches a fused filament fabrication composite filament comprising a metal organic framework (MOP), in an amount greater than 10% by mass, dispersed in a matrix polymer (Claim 1 and [0010]). Erikson teaches preferred embodiments using greater than 10% MOF by mass in a matrix polymer [0030] and [0048], as high MOF filler ratio are thought to suppress swelling behavior and contribute to more favorable extrusion behavior [0056].
Erickson does not explicitly teach the step of wet mixing comprises combining the CNFs and the thermoplastic at a ratio of 5% to 10% by weight of the CNFs relative to the mass of the thermoplastic in the liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution.
However, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). The Court found that the overlapping endpoint of the prior art and claimed range was sufficient to support an obviousness rejection, particularly when there was no showing of criticality of the claimed range. The prior art teachings are not limited to preferred embodiments.
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 1-6 and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeol (US 11,654,615) in view of Erickson (PG-PUB 2019/0217517) and Zhu (US 12,319,826).
Regarding claim 1, Jeol teaches a process of manufacturing a filament or part material using a melt-mixing process of thermoplastic polymers (Col 39, ln 20-56 and Col 40, ln 36-65).
Jeol teaches the part material comprises a polymeric component of 5 to 95 wt% of at least polymer P1 and 5 to 95 wt% of at least polymer P2 and from 0.1 wt% to 60 wt% of fillers, such as carbon nanofibers (Col 4, ln 51 -Col 5, ln 25).
Jeol teaches suitable fillers including carbon black, carbon fibers, and combinations thereof (Col 4, ln 54-59).
Jeol does not explicitly teach:
wet mixing conductive carbon nanofibers (CNFs) and a thermoplastic in a liquid
solvent to form an evenly mixed suspension of the CNFs in a liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution, wherein the step of wet mixing comprises combining the
CNFs and the thermoplastic at a ratio of 5% to 10% by weight of CNFs relative to the
mass of the thermoplastic in the liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution; and
evaporating the solvent out of the evenly mixed suspension to form the
electrically-conductive fused deposition modeling material containing the CNFs
homogeneously mixed within a solid matrix of the thermoplastic at a ratio of 5% to 10% by weight of CNFs relative to the mass of the thermoplastic.
Zhu teaches preparing composite filaments suitable for additive manufacturing comprising a continuous polymer phase of a first thermoplastic polymer and a second thermoplastic polymer that are immiscible with one another and electrically conductive particles distributed in the continuous polymer phase (Col 4, ln 9-35). Zhu teaches the electrically conductive particles suitable for use may comprise a metal, a carbonaceous conductor, or any combinations thereof (Col 10, ln 8-25). Zhu teaches illustrative forms of electrically conductive particles comprising metals may include nanoparticles, nanoflakes, nanowires (Col 10, ln 8-25). Zhu teaches carbonaceous conductors that may be used alone in combination with one or more electrically conductive particles comprising a metal may include carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes, or any combinations thereof (Col 10, ln 8-25).
Zhu teaches a wide range of thermoplastic polymers may be used, such as polylactic acid (Col 10, ln 26- Col 11, ln 64). Zhu teaches the electrically conductive particles are present in the continuous polymer phase at a particle: polymer weight ratio ranging from 10:90 to about 95:5, based on total composite mass (Col 8, ln-4-64 and Claim 5).
Erikson teaches a process of manufacturing an electrical-conductive fused deposition material, the method comprising:
wet mixing metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) and a thermoplastic in a liquid solvent to form an evenly mixed suspension of the (MOFs) in a liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution (Figure 1A, [0031]-[0033], [0041], [0051]);
evaporating the solvent out of the evenly mixed suspension to form the electrically-conductive fused deposition modeling mater containing the homogenously mixed with a solid matrix of the thermoplastic (Figure 1A, [0031]-[0033], [0042], [0052]);
wherein the MOFs can include carbon nanotubes, porous carbons, covalent organic frameworks, silica, and other porous materials [0003]-[0004],
wherein the CNF can be present in an amount greater than 10% by mass, dispersed in a matrix polymer (Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Jeol, in particular the melt-mixing process, with the process of Erikson, a known suitable process of mixing and preparing a mixture of thermoplastic polymer and conductive filler for preparing a part material suitable for fused deposition material as taught by Zhu.
Regarding claim 2, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 1,
forming the liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution as a homogeneous liquid
thermoplastic/solvent solution comprising the thermoplastic and a first volume of the liquid solvent (Erikson, Figure 1A and [0032]-[0033], [0041]-[0042]);
mixing the CNFs in the liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to form the evenly
mixed suspension (Erikson, Figure 1A and [0032]-[0033], [0041]-[0042]).
Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu does not teach adding the CNF/solvent suspension to the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution.
However, selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C)). Selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to rearranging the step of adding the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to the CNF/solvent suspension of Jeol in view of Erikson with adding the CNF/solvent suspension to the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution, as modifying which solution is added to the other solution presents the predictable result of providing a mixture of both solution and does not present any new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 3, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 2, wherein the step of forming the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution comprises:
mixing pellets of the thermoplastic in the liquid solvent (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042]);
dissolving the mixed pellets in the liquid solvent to form the liquid
thermoplastic/solvent solution (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042]); and
mixing the resulting liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to form the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0032]-[0033], [0041]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 4, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 1,
forming a CNF/solvent suspension by suspending the CNFs within a second
volume of the liquid solvent (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]) and
adding the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to the CNF/solvent suspension (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0042]).
Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu does not teach adding the CNF/solvent suspension to the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution.
However, selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C)). Selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to rearranging the step of adding the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to the CNF/solvent suspension of Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu with adding the CNF/solvent suspension to the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution, as modifying which solution is added to the other solution presents the predictable result of providing a mixture of both solution and does not present any new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 5, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 4, wherein the step of forming the evenly mixed suspension includes sonicating the suspension (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042], [0051]).
Regarding claim 6, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 1, wherein the step of forming the evenly mixed suspension includes sonicating the suspension (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042], [0051]).
Regarding claim 8, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 1, wherein the liquid solvent comprises dimethylformamide (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0033], [0051]-[0052]).
Regarding claim 9, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches a method comprising forming the electrically-conductive filament from the electrically-conductive fused deposition modeling material of claim 1 (Erickson, Claim 23 and [0013], [0015]-[0016], [0034]).
Regarding claim 10, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches the method as applied to claim 9, wherein the step of forming the electrically-conductive filament includes forming the electrically-conductive filament from the pellets (Jeol, Col 3, ln 11-47 and Col 42, ln 58- Col 43, ln 2)
Regarding claim 11, Jeol in view of Erikson and Zhu teaches the method as applied to claim 9, wherein the step of forming the electrically-conductive filament includes extruding the electrically-conductive fused deposition modeling material (Erickson, Claim 23 and [0013], [0015]-[0016], [0034]).
Claims 1-6, 8-11, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (PG-PUB 2019/0217517) in view of Zhu (US 12,319,826).
Regarding claim 1, Erickson teaches a process of manufacturing an electrical-conductive fused deposition material, the method comprising:
wet mixing metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) and a thermoplastic in a liquid solvent to form an evenly mixed suspension of the (MOFs) in a liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution (Figure 1A, [0031]-[0033], [0041], [0051]);
evaporating the solvent out of the evenly mixed suspension to form the electrically-conductive fused deposition modeling mater containing the homogenously mixed with a solid matrix of the thermoplastic (Figure 1A, [0031]-[0033], [0042], [0052]);
wherein the MOFs can include carbon nanotubes, porous carbons, covalent organic frameworks, silica, and other porous materials [0003]-[0004],
wherein the CNF can be present in an amount greater than 10% by mass, dispersed in a matrix polymer (Claim 1).
Erickson does not teach wet mixing conductive carbon nanofibers (CNFs) and a thermoplastic in a liquid solvent to form an evenly mixed suspension of the CNFs in a liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution.
Zhu teaches preparing composite filaments suitable for additive manufacturing comprising a continuous polymer phase of a first thermoplastic polymer and a second thermoplastic polymer that are immiscible with one another and electrically conductive particles distributed in the continuous polymer phase (Col 4, ln 9-35). Zhu teaches the electrically conductive particles suitable for use may comprise a metal, a carbonaceous conductor, or any combinations thereof (Col 10, ln 8-25). Zhu teaches illustrative forms of electrically conductive particles comprising metals may include nanoparticles, nanoflakes, nanowires (Col 10, ln 8-25). Zhu teaches carbonaceous conductors that may be used alone in combination with one or more electrically conductive particles comprising a metal may include carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes, or any combinations thereof (Col 10, ln 8-25).
Both Erickson and Zhu are drawn to the same field of endeavor pertaining to manufacturing composite filaments comprising functionalized material, such as electrically conductive materials. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Erickson, in particularly the MOF such as carbon nanotubes utilized, with the carbon nanofibers, a known suitable carbonaceous conductors that may be used alone in combination with one or more electrically conductive particles as taught by Zhu, to yield the predictable result for providing composite filaments with conductive material.
Erickson teaches CNF can be present in an amount greater than 10% by mass, dispersed in a matrix polymer (Claim 1).
Erickson does not explicitly teach the step of wet mixing comprises combining the CNFs and the thermoplastic at a ratio of 5% to 10% by weight of the CNFs relative to the mass of the thermoplastic in the liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution.
However, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). The court found that the overlapping endpoint of the prior art and claimed range was sufficient to support an obviousness rejection, particularly when there was no showing of criticality of the claimed range.
Regarding claim 2, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 1,
forming the liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution as a homogeneous liquid
thermoplastic/solvent solution comprising the thermoplastic and a first volume of the liquid solvent (Figure 1A and [0032]-[0033], [0041]-[0042]);
mixing the CNFs in the liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to form the evenly
mixed suspension (Figure 1A and [0032]-[0033], [0041]-[0042]).
Erickson in view of Zhu does not teach adding the CNF/solvent suspension to the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution.
However, selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C)). Selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to rearranging the step of adding the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to the CNF/solvent suspension of Erickson with adding the CNF/solvent suspension to the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution, as modifying which solution is added to the other solution presents the predictable result of providing a mixture of both solution and does not present any new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 3, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 2, wherein the step of forming the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution comprises:
mixing pellets of the thermoplastic in the liquid solvent (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042]);
dissolving the mixed pellets in the liquid solvent to form the liquid
thermoplastic/solvent solution (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042]); and
mixing the resulting liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to form the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0032]-[0033], [0041]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 4, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 1,
forming a CNF/solvent suspension by suspending the CNFs within a second
volume of the liquid solvent (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]) and
adding the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to the CNF/solvent suspension (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0042]).
Erickson in view of Zhu does not teach adding the CNF/solvent suspension to the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution.
However, selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C)). Selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to rearranging the step of adding the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution to the CNF/solvent suspension of Erickson with adding the CNF/solvent suspension to the homogeneous liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution, as modifying which solution is added to the other solution presents the predictable result of providing a mixture of both solution and does not present any new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 5, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 4, wherein the step of forming the evenly mixed suspension includes sonicating the suspension (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042], [0051]).
Regarding claim 6, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 1, wherein the step of forming the evenly mixed suspension includes sonicating the suspension (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042], [0051]).
Regarding claim 8, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches the process as applied to claim 1, wherein the liquid solvent comprises dimethylformamide (Erickson, Figure 1A and [0033], [0051]-[0052]).
Regarding claim 9, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches a method comprising forming the electrically-conductive filament from the electrically-conductive fused deposition modeling material of claim 1 (Erickson, Claim 23 and [0013], [0015]-[0016], [0034]).
Regarding claim 10, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches the method as applied to claim 9.
Erickson in view of Zhu does not teach forming the electrically-conductive fused deposition modeling material into pellets, wherein the step of forming the electrically-conductive filament includes forming the electrically-conductive filament from the pellets.
Zhu teaches electrically-conductive filament suitable for fused filament fabrication. Zhu teaches the filaments may be used as a filament of the larger form or may be cut and pulverized to form composite pellets likewise containing electrically conductive particles distributed in a continuous polymer phase (Col6, ln 25-44 and Col 12, ln 4-13). Zhu teaches like composite filaments, composite pellets or similar non-filamentous composite materials may be subsequently processed into printed parts having piezoresistive properties under suitable additive manufacturing conditions.
Both Erickson and Zhu teaches the formation of fused filament fabrication using electrically-conductive material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Erickson with converting the extruded filaments into pellets, a known suitable alternative state for providing composite materials to be subsequently processed into printed parts having piezoresistive properties under additive manufacturing as taught by Zhu.
Regarding claim 11, Erickson in view of Zhu teaches the method as applied to claim 9, wherein the step of forming the electrically-conductive filament includes extruding the electrically-conductive fused deposition modeling material (Erickson, Claim 23 and [0013], [0015]-[0016], [0034]).
Regarding claim 22, Erickson teaches a wet-mixing process that disperses conductive carbon material or MOF throughout thermoplastic [0003]-[0004], the process comprising the steps:
dissolving thermoplastic with a solvent, thereby creating a thermoplastic-based
solution [0041]-[0042];
suspending conductive carbon material or MOF in the thermoplastic-based solution (Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042], [0051]-[0052]); and
mixing the thermoplastic-based solution to distribute the conductive carbon material or MOF throughout the solution (Figure 1A and [0041]-[0042], [0051]-[0052]).
Erickson teaches CNF can be present in an amount greater than 10% by mass, dispersed in a matrix polymer (Claim 1).
Erickson does not teach wet mixing conductive carbon nanofibers (CNFs), suspending CNFs in the thermoplastic-based solution, and mixing the thermoplastic-based solution to distribute the CNFs throughout the solution.
Zhu teaches preparing composite filaments suitable for additive manufacturing comprising a continuous polymer phase of a first thermoplastic polymer and a second thermoplastic polymer that are immiscible with one another and electrically conductive particles distributed in the continuous polymer phase (Col 4, ln 9-35). Zhu teaches the electrically conductive particles suitable for use may comprise a metal, a carbonaceous conductor, or any combinations thereof (Col 10, ln 8-25). Zhu teaches illustrative forms of electrically conductive particles comprising metals may include nanoparticles, nanoflakes, nanowires (Col 10, ln 8-25). Zhu teaches carbonaceous conductors that may be used alone in combination with one or more electrically conductive particles comprising a metal may include carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes, or any combinations thereof (Col 10, ln 8-25).
Erickson does not explicitly teach the step of wet mixing comprises combining the CNFs and the thermoplastic at a ratio of 5% to 10% by weight of the CNFs relative to the mass of the thermoplastic in the liquid thermoplastic/solvent solution.
However, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). The court found that the overlapping endpoint of the prior art and claimed range was sufficient to support an obviousness rejection, particularly when there was no showing of criticality of the claimed range.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANA C PAGE whose telephone number is (571)272-1578. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00-5:30.
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, Phillip Tucker can be reached at 5712721095. 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.
/HANA C PAGE/Examiner, Art Unit 1745
/MICHAEL A TOLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745
Prosecution Insights