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 Election/Restrictions and Status of Claims
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Claims 1-12, drawn to an additive manufacturing support, and wax form species i), drawn to a geometric shape, in the reply filed on June 22, 2026, is acknowledged.
Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, Group II, drawn to a method of additively manufacturing a part, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 4 recites wherein “at least one ceramic support is moveable within the at least one aperture”.
The instant specification states “The plurality of ceramic supports 206a may reduce friction and allow for movement (e.g., rolling) of the portions of the green body part 200a or brown body part in contact therewith. As such, during debinding and/or sintering, the green body part 200a or brown body part may move with or across the plurality of ceramic supports 206a as the part is shrinking, thereby reducing deformation or damage to the part” (para. [0046]),
“The plurality of apertures 212a may be designed such that at least one of the plurality of ceramic supports 206a is moveable within a respective aperture of the plurality of apertures 212a. For example, at least one of the plurality of ceramic supports 206a may roll within the aperture as the green body part 200a or brown body part in contact therewith shrinks. Such movement of the ceramic supports 206a within the apertures 212a may allow for movement of the part during shrinkage” (para. [0048]), and
“Each of the plurality of ceramic supports 206a may be any suitable shape and size that allows for movement of and/or supports the portions of the green body part 200a or brown body part in contact therewith during debinding or sintering. For example, in embodiments, each of the plurality of ceramic supports 206a may comprise a spherical shape, as shown in FIG. 6, or a rectangular shape, as described herein. Spherical and/or rectangular ceramic supports may allow for movement of and/or support the part during debinding or sintering” (para. [0049]).
Examiner therefore interprets that a support which allows for movement during the shrinkage resulting from debinding or sintering reads on the claimed term ‘moveable’ and reads on ‘moveable within the at least one aperture’.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “skater” in claim 7 is used by the claim to mean a support structure which may move or roll during debinding or sintering (see specification, para. [0056]), while the accepted meaning is “a person who skates”. The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Additionally, the specification recites “The ceramic skater 216b may be removed from the consolidated part after sintering, as described herein. In this manner, it will be understood that an interim body can be located between the green body part 200b and the additive manufacturing support 202b” (see specification, para. [0056]). Therefore, it is unclear if the interim body and the skater are the same component or not, and if the skater and/or interim body are considered part of the claimed additive manufacturing support structure, or is a separate feature to be used between the claimed additive manufacturing support and the green body part.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mark (cited by Applicant in IDS filed September 12, 2025, US 20180154574 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Mark discloses an additive manufacturing support (Fig. 4, Fig. 5D, Fig. 7), comprising:
soluble green body support, comprising a first and opposite second surface, composed of wax and comprising embedded ceramic spheres (para. [0120]-[0121]; Fig. 4; Fig. 5D, GS1 (green body support) with embedded SS1 (sintering support); para. [0158]; see also Image 1 below), and
sintering supports comprising ceramic powder within a polymer binder, embedded within the soluble green body support (Fig. 4, Fig. 5D, sintering supports (SH1); para. [0094] and [0153], ceramic sintering supports; para. [0111], ceramic powder in polymer binder for supports; see also Image 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
834
918
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Image 1: annotated Fig. 5D of Mark
Regarding Claim 2, Mark discloses wherein at least one ceramic support protrudes from at least one of the first surface or the second surface of the wax form (see Fig. 5D and Image 1 above, wherein SH1 structure protrudes from the top and bottom of GS1).
Regarding Claim 3, Mark discloses wherein ceramic spheres are embedded in the wax matrix (Fig. 5D, SS1 in matrix of GS1; para. [0120]), and one of ordinary skill in the art would understand there to be an aperture from which the ceramic sphere resided in the wax (the wax and the ceramic sphere cannot occupy the same space/volume), which reads on the claimed limitation wherein the wax form comprises at least one aperture within which the at least one ceramic support is disposed.
Further, the sintering supports (SH1) and the volume (wax) of the green body supports (GS1) would not occupy the same volume, and one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the sintering supports to be within apertures of the wax form/green body support (see Image 1 above).
Regarding Claim 4, Mark discloses wherein the at least one ceramic support is moveable (movement by shrinkage during debinding and sintering) within the at least one aperture (para. [0024]-[0025], wherein supports are designed to shrink upon debinding and/or sintering; [0120], wherein ceramic support becomes powder after debinding and sintering therefore moving via gravity to be removed; see claim interpretation above; see Fig. 5D and Fig. 7, wherein debinding would cause movement (powderization) of unconnected (SS1) embedded ceramic spheres; see claim interpretation above).
Regarding Claim 5, Mark discloses wherein the at least one ceramic support comprises a spherical shape or a rectangular shape (para. [0111], ceramic spheres; see also [0120] and [0131]; see para. [0151], rectangular support structures for easy removal).
Regarding Claim 6, Mark discloses wherein the at least one ceramic support comprises a plurality of ceramic supports (Fig. 4; Fig. 5D, plurality of SS1 and SH1 pieces).
Regarding Claim 7, Mark discloses a sliding release layer comprising ceramic particles in a binder, which is disposed on the sintering support layer, and therefore reads on a ceramic skater (para. [0024]; Fig. 4, layer SL1; see also SL2 disposed on SH1 in Fig. 5D; sliding release reads on ‘skater’ – see 112b rejection above).
Regarding Claim 8, Mark discloses wherein the wax form comprises a melting point greater than or equal to 40C (para. [0158], carnauba (about 82-86C), beeswax (about 62-64C), paraffin (about 46-68C)).
Regarding Claim 9, Mark discloses wherein the wax is paraffin wax (para. [0158]).
Regarding Claim 10, Mark discloses wherein the wax form comprises a geometric shape (see Fig. 5C, wax form (green body support) is rectangular; see also geometrically printed green body support in Fig. 5D).
Regarding Claim 11, Mark discloses wherein the ceramic support comprises alumina, aluminum nitride, zirconia, titania, silica, silicon nitride, silicon carbide, boron nitride, or a combination thereof (para. [0254], alumina; [0224], silica, zirconia).
Regarding Claim 12, Mark discloses a ceramic base plate and wherein the wax form and the at least one ceramic support are supported on the ceramic base plate (para. [0125], ceramic build plate 16; see Fig. 4).
Conclusion
Takeuchi (WO 2019111347 A1): teaches a support for an additively manufactured object comprising brown body supports embedded in a green body support matrix, whereby the green body matrix is removed during debinding (Abstract; Fig. 6; Fig. 11-13).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE P SMITH whose telephone number is (303)297-4428. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00-4:00 MT.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at (571)-272-3458. 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.
CATHERINE P. SMITH
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1735
/CATHERINE P SMITH/ Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights