Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/534,246

Powder Bed Measurement For Additive Manufacturing

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Examiner
GROUX, JENNIFER LILA
Art Unit
1754
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Seurat Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
36%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 36% of cases
36%
Career Allow Rate
41 granted / 115 resolved
-29.3% vs TC avg
Strong +49% interview lift
Without
With
+48.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
175
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
44.6%
+4.6% vs TC avg
§102
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
§112
32.8%
-7.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 115 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A, claims 1-5, in the reply filed on 01/05/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 6-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/05/2026. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: in Fig. 2A, reference number 60A mentioned in para. [0023] of the filed specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: para. [0023], in the next to last sentence, with reference to Fig. 2A, recites “The small diameter spheres response to 15A is exemplified by the detected spread on 75A of 72A while the large spheres response is exemplified by 72A on 75A.” The sentence indicates that the differently sized spheres produce the same response (72A) on the detection plane 75A. This appears to contradict the intended detection scheme. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1, in the line beginning “a print bed able to…” contains a colon at the end of the line which should be a semicolon. Appropriate correction is required. 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. (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. Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Vorontsov, US 20190009369 A1. Regarding claim 1, Vorontsov discloses a print engine of an additive manufacturing system (Fig. 3) that supports powder measurement systems (includes powder bed sensing modules 500, Fig. 3, [0053]), comprising: A print bed (powder bed having surface 100.8, Fig. 3) able to hold powder of varying sizes (holding powder and thus capable of holding powder of varying sizes); A laser energy patterning system (laser head 400 with beam forming optics 100.5, Fig. 3, [0053]) directable against the print bed (Fig. 3); and A backscatter detection system able to evaluate scattered light distribution from powder on the print bed (powder sensing module(s) 500 which may detect backscattered probe beam light 300.2, Fig. 3, [0053]; further detailed in Fig. 14, [0090]-[0095]) and determine powder size (used for characterization of powder particles prior to LAM processing, [0059], providing in situ information about stock material properties such as powder particle size distribution, [0098]). Regarding claim 2, Vorontsov discloses the print engine of claim 1, wherein the laser energy patterning system is able to direct a two dimensional laser image against the print bed (Fig. 3). Regarding claim 3, Vorontsov discloses the print engine of claim 1, wherein the laser energy patterning system comprises a high fluence laser (laser capable of effecting melting for performing additive manufacturing, [0053], and thus is considered to meet high fluence). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vorontsov, US 20190009369 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Bayramian et al., US 20210370402 A1. Regarding claim 4, Vorontsov discloses the print engine of claim 1. Vorontsov discloses the additive manufacturing system uses a fiber array laser head ([0053]). Vorontsov does not disclose the laser energy patterning system comprises a diode laser. In the analogous art, Bayramian discloses a print engine and additive manufacturing system (Abstract, Fig. 3) for powder bed fusion additive manufacturing ([0138], Figs. 2-3). Bayramian discloses a laser source used for fusing, sintering, or melting of the powder ([0131]) can be a diode laser or a solid state, e.g., fiber, laser ([0132]-[0133]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a diode laser for a fiber laser as a substitution of one known laser type for another yielding predictable results of providing a laser source suitable for powder bed fusion additive manufacturing as shown by Bayramian. See MPEP 2143(I)(B). In this case, each laser type was known for performing equivalent functions of heating and melting powder for layer modification. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vorontsov, US 20190009369 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Ruiz et al., EP 3608653 A1. Regarding claim 5, Vorontsov discloses the print engine of claim 1. Vorontsov does not disclose the backscatter detection system uses an optical Fourier transform. In the analogous art directed to measuring particle size using backscattered light (Abstract, [0001]), Ruiz discloses a backscatter detection system ([0014]-[0015]) using an optical Fourier transform ([0016]). Ruiz discloses using a Fourier transform enables angular frequencies of a light intensity distribution pattern to be obtained in order to calculate particle sizes ([0016]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify the backscatter detection system uses an optical Fourier transform as a known technique for determining particle size in a backscatter detection system, as taught by Ruiz. All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art, MPEP 2143(I)(A). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20210107215 A1, Bauza et al. disclose arrangements for performing measurements during additive manufacturing, including measuring particle dimensions, including by detection of laser light reflected from a material layer (e.g., [0011], [0013], [0064]-[0065], Fig. 3). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER L GROUX whose telephone number is (571)272-7938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am - 5pm ET. 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. /J.L.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1754 /SUSAN D LEONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 01, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12552127
Embossing System with Embossing Cassette
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12539669
COAXIAL LASER-WIRE OPTICAL SYSTEM FOR USE IN ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12508785
A COMPOSITE PART PRODUCTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12472560
MULTI-BEAM COAXIAL LASER OPTICAL SYSTEM FOR USE IN ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12455503
Lithographic Method for Imprinting Three-Dimensional Microstructures Having Oversized Structural Heights Into a Carrier Material
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
36%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+48.6%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 115 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month