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 .
The amendment filed April 28, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Amended claim 1 now requires a thermoplastic which is a solid at room temperature. There is no support in the application as filed for this limitation.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coonan (US 2007/0154666) in view of Kotz (Kotz, F. Three-dimensional printing of transparent fused silica glass. Nature 544, 337–339 (2017)).
Claim 1: Coonan discloses a moldable nanocomposite including an organic binder, wherein the organic binder is a non-polymerizable thermoplastic which can be hardened upon cooling and which is a solid at room temperature (¶¶ 12, 31); a glass powder dispersed in the organic binder (¶¶ 9, 29, 32); a phase-forming agent dispersed in the organic binder, the phase-forming agent being solid or viscous at room temperature and forming an internal phase in the organic binder (¶¶ 12, 31); wherein the glass powder is pre-modified with a dopant in the moldable nanocomposite or wherein one or more dopant reagents including metal complexes are contained in the moldable nanocomposite as at least one modifying agent, the at least one modifying agent being dispersed in the binder in a non-crystalline state, (¶ 31); and wherein the content of the glass powder in the moldable nanocomposite is at least 5 parts per volume based on 100 parts per volume of the organic binder (¶¶ 9, 32).
Coonan discloses fused-silica-type powder in the SEBS/fatty-alcohol feedstock (¶ 50), but is silent as to the glass powder being a fused silica glass powder particles having a mean diameter of 5 nm to 500 nm. However, Kotz discloses a nanocomposite for producing a transparent article made of multicomponent fused silica glass including an organic binder (p. 337); a fused silica glass powder dispersed in the organic binder (p. 337), the fused silica glass powder including fused silica glass particles having a diameter of 40 nm (p. 337). As taught by Kotz, using fused silica glass particles in the claimed range allows for three-dimensional printing of high-performance materials having unmatched optical transparency, outstanding mechanical, chemical and thermal resistance as well as thermal and electrical insulating properties (p. 337). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to have utilized the fused silica glass powder of Katz in the nanocomposite of Rapp in order to 3D print high-performance materials having unmatched optical transparency, outstanding mechanical, chemical and thermal resistance as well as thermal and electrical insulating properties.
Claim 4: Coonan discloses the particles having a diameter of 40 microns (p. 337).
Claim 5: Coonan discloses the dopant including Ti and P (¶ 31; claim 21).
Claim 6: Kotz discloses the fused silica content being 37.5 vol% (p. 340).
Claim 7: Coonan discloses the phase-forming agent and the thermoplastic in a weight ratio of about 60:30 (¶ 31).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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 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