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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 5-8, in the reply filed on November 11, 2025 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 6-8 are 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.
Claim 6 recites “the discharging bin.” It is unclear whether the bin is referring back to the discharging bin for the discharging control unit for steel fibers or the discharging control unit for pre-mixed mortar, rendering the claim indefinite.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the bottom." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the other end." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the top." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites “the valve has a measuring range of 5 kg.” A single value for measurement is not a range, rendering the claim indefinite.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the top”, “the middle” and “the bottom” of the mixing mechanism. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the mixing motor." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “a long time” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the connecting portion." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Arun (“Fiber orientation effects on ultra-high performance concrete formed by 3D printing,” Cement and Concrete Research, Volume 143, 2021, 106384, ISSN 0008-8846).
Claim 5: Arun discloses a manufacturing system for preparing adaptive steel-fiber-reinforced precast concrete members (abstract). The system includes a discharging control mechanism (fig. 1b; material feeder controlling the amount of discharged material by at least the size of the feeder and the size of the opening into the extruder; additionally p. 3, “steel plate was connected diagonally to the extruder inlet to ease [i.e., control] the material feeding process”), a mixing mechanism (fig. 1b; extruder), a direction adjustment mechanism for steel fibers (fig. 1b; nozzle; abstract “nozzle size . . . significantly enhanced the fiber alignment parallel to the printing direction”), and a 3D printing mechanism (fig. 1a; gantry), all of which are set in sequence and connected to each other (fig. 1), and both the discharging control mechanism and the direction adjustment mechanism are connected to a same locator (fig. 1a; controller).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY THROWER whose telephone number is (571)270-5517. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm MT M-F.
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.
/LARRY W THROWER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights