DETAILED ACTION
In Request for Continued Examination filed on 07/16/2026 for response filed on 07/01/2026 has been entered, claims 1-3 and 6-20 are pending. Claims 15-20 are withdrawn based on restriction requirement. Claims 1 and 10 are currently amended. Claims 1-3 and 6-14 are considered in the current Office 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 .
Status of Previous Objections/Rejections
Previous 35 USC 103 rejections are withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s amendment and argument. However, new rejections have been established.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/01/2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The Examiner wishes to point out the application claims are directed towards an apparatus and as such will be examined under such conditions. The material worked upon or the process of using the apparatus is viewed as recitation of intended use and is given patentable weight only to the extent that structure is added to the claimed apparatus (Please see MPEP 2112.01 and 2114-2115 for further details).
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 1 be found allowable, claim 7 (as being substantial identical to claim 6), claim 10 (as being substantial identical to claim 1), claims 11-12 and 14 (as being substantial identical to claims 6-9) will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2022/0184888 (Rudolph) and US2018/0207850 (“Stockett et al” hereinafter Stockett).
Regarding Claim 1, Rudolph teaches a system for three-dimensional (3D) printing using a 3D printer (abstract and Figure 10), the system (Figure 10) comprising:
a printing head (Figure 10, nozzle 525) of the 3D printer for 3D printing a material including a photosensitive resin ([0037]),
a first UV light source adapted to produce a first UV beam (Figure 5, UV radiation source 510 that partially cured the UV curable polymer at the perimeter 540 of the composite filament [0055]), wherein the first UV light source is positioned such that the first UV beam enters the nozzle (Figure 5) and irradiates the material while the material is inside the semitransparent nozzle to increase a viscosity of the material prior to exiting an opening of the semitransparent nozzle ([0055], as the first UV light source partial cure the polymer, the viscosity of the polymer increased.);
a second UV light source adapted to produce a second UV beam (Figure 5, a second UV source 511 [0055]), wherein the second UV light source is positioned such that the second UV beam is applied to the material after the material exits the opening of the semitransparent nozzle (Figure 5 and [0055], second UV source applied UV beam to materials that have already exit the nozzle) and as the material is laid on a substrate ([0055]); and
a controller ([0022], the controller directs a direction and intensity of the UV radiation from the at least one light source in response to instructions provided to the controller) of the 3D printer configured to
direct the printing head to print a layer of the material ([0042], The position of the light beam will be controlled by the programmable logic controller (PLC) of the printer. It will be synchronized with the motion of the print head which implied the print head is also controlled),
calculate an appropriate strength of UV radiation in the first UV beam based on at least one of the viscosity within the nozzle ([0042], the amount of cure and the extent of cure can be controlled by steering the UV beam to a portion of the fiber as it is dispensed. Adjusting the exposure intensity and/or exposure time will affect the speed at which the filament can be dispensed and the residence time of the composite filament to UV exposure is depend upon the viscosity of the filament upon dispense [0061]),
direct the first UV light source to project the first UV beam at the appropriate strength into the nozzle while the material is flowing ([0055]) therein to controllably increase the viscosity of the material without fully solidifying ([0042]),
calculate an appropriate strength of UV radiation in the second UV beam to fully solidify the layer of the material after the layer of the material was partially solidified by the first UV beam ([0072]), and
direct the second UV light source to project the second UV beam at the appropriate strength to the layer of the material after the layer of the material has moved through the nozzle and is laid on the substrate in order to fully solidify the layer of the material on the substrate (Figure 5 and [0021], [0055], [0072]).
Rudolph fails to teach wherein the printing head includes a semitransparent nozzle having at least one semitransparent wall configured to transmit ultraviolet (UV) radiation into an interior of the semitransparent nozzle; wherein the first UV light source is positioned such that the first UV beam enters the semitransparent nozzle through the at least one semitransparent wall; direct the first UV light source to project the first UV beam at the appropriate strength through the semitransparent wall.
However, Stockett teaches wherein the printing head includes a semitransparent nozzle (Figure 1 and [0021], a tip 44 of nozzle may be at least partially transparent) having at least one semitransparent wall (Figure 1, wall of the tip 44 is at least partially transparent [0021]) configured to transmit ultraviolet (UV) radiation into an interior of the semitransparent nozzle ([0021], allow for energy from cure enhancers 20 to penetrate tip 44 and prime the curing of the matrix, as the composite material passes therethrough, which implied an interior space of the nozzle); wherein the first UV light source is positioned such that the first UV beam enters the semitransparent nozzle through the at least one semitransparent wall (Figure 3 and [0021], energy from cure enhancers 20 to penetrate tip 44 and prime the curing of the matrix. The tip of the nozzle comprises semitransparent walls and the energy penetrated the tip to cure the material); direct the first UV light source to project the first UV beam through the semitransparent wall ([0021]).
Rudolph and Stockett are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of additive manufacturing system and using a curing source to solidified liquid resin materials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the printing head of Rudolph such that it teaches all of the above mentioned limitations as taught by Stockett to allows for energy from cure enhancers to penetrate tip and prime the curing of the matrix, as the composite material passes therethrough in order to increase the speed of curing ([0021]).
Regarding Claim 2, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to calculate an optimum speed of printing the layer of the material based on the appropriate strength (Rudolph, [0042] and [0048]).
Regarding Claim 3, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to apply the first UV beam to the semitransparent nozzle (Rudolph, Figure 5 and [0021], [0055], [0072]).
Regarding Claim 10, Rudolph teaches a system for three-dimensional (3D) printing using a 3D printer (abstract and Figure 10), the system (Figure 10) comprising:
a printing head (Figure 10, nozzle 525) of the 3D printer for 3D printing a material including a photosensitive resin ([0037]);
a first UV light source adapted to direct a first UV beam towards the nozzle (Figure 5, UV radiation source 510 that partially cured the UV curable polymer at the perimeter 540 of the composite filament [0055]), wherein the first UV light source is positioned such that the first UV beam enters the nozzle (Figure 5) and irradiates the material while the material is inside the nozzle to increase a viscosity of the material prior to exiting an opening of the nozzle ([0055], as the first UV light source partial cure the polymer, the viscosity of the polymer increased);
a second UV light source (Figure 5, a second UV source 511 [0055]) adapted to direct a second UV beam towards the substrate, wherein the second UV light source is positioned such that the second UV beam is applied to the material after the material exits the opening of the nozzle (Figure 5 and [0055], second UV source applied UV beam to materials that have already exit the nozzle) and as the material is laid on a substrate ([0055]); and
a controller ([0022], the controller directs a direction and intensity of the UV radiation from the at least one light source in response to instructions provided to the controller) of the 3D printer configured to
direct the printing head to print a layer of the material ([0042], The position of the light beam will be controlled by the programmable logic controller (PLC) of the printer. It will be synchronized with the motion of the print head which implied the print head is also controlled),
calculate an appropriate strength of UV radiation in the first UV beam to increase the viscosity of the material within the nozzle ([0042], the amount of cure and the extent of cure can be controlled by steering the UV beam to a portion of the fiber as it is dispensed. Adjusting the exposure intensity and/or exposure time will affect the speed at which the filament can be dispensed and the residence time of the composite filament to UV exposure is depend upon the viscosity of the filament upon dispense [0061]),
direct the first UV light source to project the first UV beam at the appropriate strength into the nozzle while the material is flowing ([0055]) therein to controllably increase the viscosity of the material without fully solidifying ([0042]),
calculate an appropriate strength of UV radiation in the second UV beam to fully solidify the layer of the material after the layer of the material was partially solidified by the first UV beam and as it is laid on the substrate ([0072]), and
direct the second UV light source to project the second UV beam at the appropriate strength to fully solidify the layer of the material as it is laid on the substrate after the layer of the material has moved through the nozzle (Figure 5 and [0021], [0055], [0072]).
Rudolph fails to teach wherein the printing head includes a semitransparent nozzle having at least one semitransparent wall configured to transmit ultraviolet (UV) radiation into an interior of the semitransparent nozzle; wherein the first UV light source is positioned such that the first UV beam enters the semitransparent nozzle through the at least one semitransparent wall; direct the first UV light source to project the first UV beam at the appropriate strength through the semitransparent wall.
However, Stockett teaches wherein the printing head includes a semitransparent nozzle (Figure 1 and [0021], a tip 44 of nozzle may be at least partially transparent) having at least one semitransparent wall (Figure 1, wall of the tip 44 is at least partially transparent [0021]) configured to transmit ultraviolet (UV) radiation into an interior of the semitransparent nozzle ([0021], allow for energy from cure enhancers 20 to penetrate tip 44 and prime the curing of the matrix, as the composite material passes therethrough, which implied an interior space of the nozzle); wherein the first UV light source is positioned such that the first UV beam enters the semitransparent nozzle through the at least one semitransparent wall (Figure 3 and [0021], energy from cure enhancers 20 to penetrate tip 44 and prime the curing of the matrix. The tip of the nozzle comprises semitransparent walls and the energy penetrated the tip to cure the material); direct the first UV light source to project the first UV beam through the semitransparent wall ([0021]).
Rudolph and Stockett are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of additive manufacturing system and using a curing source to solidified liquid resin materials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the printing head of Rudolph such that it teaches all of the above mentioned limitations as taught by Stockett to allows for energy from cure enhancers to penetrate tip and prime the curing of the matrix, as the composite material passes therethrough in order to increase the speed of curing ([0021]).
Regarding Claim 13, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 10, wherein the controller is further configured to calculate an optimum speed of printing the layer of the material based on the appropriate strength of UV radiation in the first UV beam and the appropriate strength of UV radiation in the second UV beam (Rudolph, [0042] and [0048]).
Claim(s) 6-8 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2022/0184888 (Rudolph) and US2018/0207850 (“Stockett et al” hereinafter Stockett) as applied to claims 1 or 10 above, and further in view of US2017/0028633 (“Evans et al” hereinafter Evan).
PNG
media_image1.png
488
682
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 6 and 7, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 1, but fails to teach further comprising: a first robotic arm connected to the first UV light source, wherein the controller is further configured to direct the first robotic arm to move the first UV light source to a desired location based on a shape of a final 3D printed object.
However, Evans teaches a first robotic arm connected to the first UV light source (Evans, see annotated Figure 27), wherein the controller is further configured to direct the first robotic arm to move the first UV light source to a desired location based on a shape of a final 3D printed object ([0139] and [0306]).
Rudolph and Evans are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of additive manufacturing system and using a curing source to solidified liquid resin materials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the printing head of the modified Rudolph such that it teaches all of the above mentioned limitations as taught by Evans to actively control the location and position of the light source ([0140]).
Regarding Claim 8, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 7, further comprising: a second robotic arm connected to the second UV light source (Evans, see annotated Figure 27), wherein the controller is further configured to direct the second robotic arm to move the second UV light source to a desired location based on a shape of a final 3D printed object ([0139] and [0306]).
Regarding Claim 11, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 10, but fails to teach further comprising: a first robotic arm connected to the first UV light source, wherein the controller is further configured to direct the first robotic arm to move the first UV light source to a desired location based on a shape of a final 3D printed object.
However, Evans teaches a first robotic arm connected to the first UV light source (Evans, see annotated Figure 27), wherein the controller is further configured to direct the first robotic arm to move the first UV light source to a desired location based on a shape of a final 3D printed object ([0139] and [0306]).
Rudolph and Evans are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of additive manufacturing system and using a curing source to solidified liquid resin materials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the printing head of the modified Rudolph such that it teaches all of the above mentioned limitations as taught by Evans to actively control the location and position of the light source ([0140]).
Regarding Claim 12, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 11, further comprising: a second robotic arm connected to the second UV light source (Evans, see annotated Figure 27), wherein the controller is further configured to direct the second robotic arm to move the second UV light source to a desired location based on a shape of a final 3D printed object ([0139] and [0306]).
Claim(s) 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2022/0184888 (Rudolph) and US2018/0207850 (“Stockett et al” hereinafter Stockett) as applied to claims 1 or 10 above, and further in view of US2006/0016914 (“Bach et al” hereinafter Bach).
Regarding Claim 9, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 1, Stockett teaches a tip of nozzle may be at least partially transparent ([0021]) but fails to teach wherein the semitransparent nozzle is made of transparent aluminum.
However, Bach teaches the semitransparent nozzle is made of transparent aluminum ([0007], the nozzle is specified to have a main body and disposed on the main body a wear-resistant coating composed of a protective-coating material that comprises a metal material content and a non-metal material content, where the metal material might be aluminum and the non-metal material might be oxynitrides [0027]. [0028] of instant application disclosed aluminum oxynitrides as an example of transparent aluminum).
Bach is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of the instant application to increase the wear-resistant ability of the nozzle and increase the heat durability of the nozzle (Bach, [0004]-[0005]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the modified Rudolph such that the semitransparent nozzle is made of transparent aluminum as taught by Bach to provide a nozzle that is high thermal resistance, high oxidation resistance, high protection ([0007]).
Regarding Claim 14, the modified Rudolph teaches the system of claim 10, Stockett teaches a tip of nozzle may be at least partially transparent ([0021]) but fails to teach wherein the semitransparent nozzle is made of transparent aluminum.
However, Bach teaches the semitransparent nozzle is made of transparent aluminum ([0007], the nozzle is specified to have a main body and disposed on the main body a wear-resistant coating composed of a protective-coating material that comprises a metal material content and a non-metal material content, where the metal material might be aluminum and the non-metal material might be oxynitrides [0027]. [0028] of instant application disclosed aluminum oxynitrides as an example of transparent aluminum).
Bach is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of the instant application to increase the wear-resistant ability of the nozzle and increase the heat durability of the nozzle (Bach, [0004]-[0005]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the modified Rudolph such that the semitransparent nozzle is made of transparent aluminum as taught by Bach to provide a nozzle that is high thermal resistance, high oxidation resistance, high protection ([0007]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XINWEN (Cindy) YE whose telephone number is (571)272-3010. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30 - 17:00.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
XINWEN (CINDY) YE
Examiner
Art Unit 1754
/LARRY W THROWER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
