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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/08/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant does not appear to make any arguments. Nonetheless, the newly recite limitations of claim 1 are found to be obvious in view of Khoshnevis (US 2005/0196484 A1), see below rejection.
The newly recite limitations of claim 18 are found to be obvious over Khoshnevis (US 2005/0196484 A1) in view of Kunihiro et al. (US 2020/0384683 A1), see rejection below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the PCT international search report is not considered to be an information disclosure statement (IDS) complying with 37 CFR 1.98. 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2) requires a legible copy of: (1) each foreign patent; (2) each publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; (3) for each cited pending U.S. application, the application specification including claims, and any drawing of the application, or that portion of the application which caused it to be listed including any claims directed to that portion, unless the cited pending U.S. application is stored in the Image File Wrapper (IFW) system; and (4) all other information, or that portion which caused it to be listed. In addition, each IDS must include a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office (see 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1) and (b)), and MPEP § 609.04(a), subsection I. states, “the list ... must be submitted on a separate paper.” Therefore, the references cited in the international search report have not been considered. Applicant is advised that the date of submission of any item of information in the international search report will be the date of submission of the IDS for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements for the IDS with 37 CFR 1.97, including all timing statement requirements of 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 was amended to remove language “two or more nozzles” but the claim status is (Original) instead of (Currently Amended). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 4 was amended to recite a misspelling of “fluid” as “flued”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 11 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims were amended but the claim status is (Original) instead of (Currently Amended). Appropriate correction is required.
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 5 and 9 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 5 recites “wherein each of the two or more nozzles” rendering the claim indefinite. The claim lacks antecedent basis for “the two or more nozzle” because it depends from claim 3 which recites “at least one nozzle”. For purposes of examination, claim 5 will be understood to depend from claim 4 which recites “two or more nozzles”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites “wherein the fluid comprises at least one of air and water” rendering the claim indefinite. Claim 1, from which it depends, was amended to recite the new limitation “wherein the fluid comprises air, water, and concrete”. Thus, claim 9 is now broader than claim 1. For purposes of examination, the fluid will be understood to comprise air, water, and concrete.
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.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khoshnevis (US 2005/0196484 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Khoshnevis discloses a three-dimensional (3D) printing and finishing device for forming and finishing a curable construction material to produce a 3D printed object (robotic system for automated construction through additive manufacturing of curable material; para. [0012-0014] & [0088]), the 3D printing and finishing device comprising: a structural support comprising a set of vertical supports, (side members 1930, Fig. 19, [0117]) a primary horizontal support (overhead beam 1920, Fig. 19) and a vertical beam (connecting member 1990 may be rigid [0120], Fig. 19) a delivery hose; (articulate feeding tube 1984, [0120]) a rectangular a print head (an outlet 1964, and a trowel 1966 configured to shape material extruded from the nozzle 1962, Fig. 20. Examiners notes parts 1964 and 1966 form a rectangular print head) suspended from the structural support (a nozzle assembly 1960 is suspended from part 1920, Fig. 19-20, [0117]) and moveable along at least two axes with respect to the structural support (Khoshnevis depicts in Fig. 19 the nozzle assembly 1960 moves in the z-axis along the side members 1930 and the x-axis along overhead beam 1920), the print head configured to dispense the curable construction material in layers along a predetermined pattern to form the 3D printed object (under computer or other control, the nozzle assembly may extrude the curable material to form the walls of an entire building, including several rooms; para. [0116]); wherein the print head is operable to move along three axes (Khoshnevis depicts in Fig. 19 the nozzle assembly 1960 moves in the z-axis along the side members 1930 and the x-axis along overhead beam 1920, and y-axis along rail 1940), and a finishing unit attached to the print head, (a painting system carried at one end of a controllable robotic arm which is coupled to a nozzle assembly described previously, para. [0179], Fig. 46) the finishing unit being disposed to align with at least one side of the layers of the curable construction material and being configured to dispense a fluid to modify a surface of the at least one side of the layers of the curable construction material, (a painting system configured to controllably paint a surface of extruded material, in accordance with a desired specification; para. [0179]) the finishing unit including at least one nozzle to dispense fluid toward the surface. (depicted as parts 4610 and 4620, Fig. 46, although this part number is not listed in the description, para. [0179] teaches a painting mechanism may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head).
wherein the fluid comprises air, water, and concrete. (Examiner notes the fluid dispensed by the apparatus is not positively recited and considered the intended use of the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2114. Khoshnevis meets the claim with a device that is capable of delivering a construction material (such as concrete) may be delivered in powder form to the mixer-extruder assembly 2800, where the powder may be mixed and extruded substantially concurrently, see [0183]).
Khoshnevis does not teach in a single embodiment and is rotatable along the axis perpendicular to the printing direction.
Khoshnevis teaches and is rotatable along the axis perpendicular to the printing direction
Nozzle assembly 2826 may rotate, under on-board computer control, with respect to the vertical axis of the feeding tube 2826, [0143].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine nozzle taught by Khoshnevis in Fig. 19-20 and the rotating nozzle of 2826 because with a 180 degree rotation of the nozzle assembly 2830, may also accomplish the construction of wall ends, see [0144].
Regarding claim 2, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, wherein the at least one nozzle is configured to align with one or more of the layers of the curable construction material (depicted as parts 4610 and 4620, Fig. 46, aligned with the construction material, although this part number is not listed in the description, para. [0179] teaches a painting mechanism may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head).
Regarding claim 3, Khoshnevis as modified discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 2, but does not disclose wherein the at least one nozzle comprises two or more nozzles where each of the two or more nozzles are configured to align with one of the layers of the curable construction material.
Khoshnevis teaches a painting mechanism para. [0179] and a multi-nozzle assembly may include a first nozzle configured to extrude material through a first outlet, a second nozzle configured to extrude material through a second outlet, and a third nozzle configured to extrude material through a third outlet; para. [0011].
The courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application, see MPEP § 2143(I).
Examiner finds that Khoshnevis differs from the claim only by the lack of a duplicate painting nozzle. Examiner finds that one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable: resulting in a second painting nozzle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine second nozzle taught by Khoshnevis in para. [0011] as the second painting nozzle taught in paragraph [0179] because it yields the predictable result allowing for a second color or texture to be painted without cleaning the first nozzle.
Regarding claim 4, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 3, wherein the fluid is dispensed from each of the two or more nozzles to flatten the layers of the curable construction material with which the two or more nozzles are aligned (Examiner notes the fluid dispensed by the apparatus is not positively recited and considered the intended use of the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2114. Khoshnevis meets the claim with a device that is a painting mechanism which may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head, para. [0179]).
Regarding claim 5, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 2, (Examiner notes that claim 5 is understood to depend from claim 3, see rejection under 35 USC 112(b) above.)wherein each of the two or more nozzles are configured to vertically align with a corresponding plurality of uppermost dispensed layers of the curable construction material. (depicted as parts 4610 and 4620, Fig. 46, vertically aligned with the curable material).
Regarding claim 6, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, wherein the fluid is dispensed from the nozzle to flatten a surface of the at least one side of the layers of the curable construction material (Examiner notes the fluid dispensed by the apparatus is not positively recited and considered the intended use of the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2114. Khoshnevis meets the claim with a device that is a painting mechanism which may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head, para. [0179]).
Regarding claim 7, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, further comprising position sensors to measure a gap distance from the surface wherein a flow rate of the fluid dispensed by the finishing unit is at least partially based on feedback from the position sensors (the robotic system may include a position controller that controls the position and movement of the gantry robot along the rails, as well as the position and movement of the gantry platform and the nozzle assembly; the robotic end-effector carrying the inkjet printing mechanism may include a fine global position sensing/adjusting system; the painting mechanism may be a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head; para. [0118] & [0180]).
Regarding claim 8, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 7, wherein the finishing unit comprises one or more actuators to move the at least one nozzle relative to the surface, and wherein the one or more actuators are controlled based on the feedback from the position sensors (the position controller may include a position sensor that senses the position of the nozzle assembly, and an actuator that controllably moves the nozzle assembly to a desired position, in response to the output of the position sensor; para. [0118] & [0180]).
Regarding claim 9, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, wherein the fluid comprises at least one of air and water. (Examiner notes the fluid dispensed by the apparatus is not positively recited and considered the intended use of the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2114. Khoshnevis meets the claim with a device that is a painting mechanism which may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head, para. [0179]).
Regarding claim 10, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 9, wherein the fluid further comprises a surface finish additive which provides at least one of a color, sheen, texture, curing function, or sealant to the at least one side of the layers of the curable construction material (Examiner notes the fluid dispensed by the apparatus is not positively recited and considered the intended use of the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2114. Khoshnevis meets the claim with a device that is a painting mechanism which may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head, para. [0179]).
Regarding claim 11, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 10, wherein the surface finish additive comprises one or more of glitter, salt, iron, paint, or silica (Examiner notes the fluid dispensed by the apparatus is not positively recited and considered the intended use of the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2114. Khoshnevis meets the claim with a device that is a painting mechanism which may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head, para. [0179]).
Regarding claim 12, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, wherein the print head is a round print head to dispense the curable construction material (the exterior nozzle may include an outlet, the interior nozzle may include an outlet, and the central nozzle may include an outlet; other cross-sectional shapes could be used, such as round or oval; para. [0083)).
Regarding claim 13, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, wherein the print head is a rectangular print head and is rotatable along a vertical axis (the exterior nozzle may include an outlet, the interior nozzle may include an outlet, and the central nozzle may include an outlet; each outlet is illustrated as having a rectangular cross-section; the horizontal direction of the nozzle assembly at the end of a pass may be altered by 90 degrees; para. [0082] & [0083]).
Regarding claim 14, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, wherein the print head comprises a split head that simultaneously dispenses the curable construction material in adjacent layers which are spaced apart a gap distance (a first filler layer may also be extruded between the first rim layers and by extruding material from the central nozzle at the same time that the second rim layers are being extruded; Fig. 4A, para. [0089]).
Regarding claim 15, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, wherein the curable construction material comprises at least one or more of concrete, a geopolymer, hempcrete, epoxy, foam, cement, cementitious materials, clay, mud, or concrete substitute (a high viscosity concrete paste, which cures much faster than the low viscosity mix; any type of material may be used and delivered into the inlet, including cement; para. [0080] & [0184]).
Regarding claim 16, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 1, wherein the finishing unit further comprises a pattern — wheel oriented to engage the surface and having an embossed pattern which transfers a decorative pattern to the surface (the nozzle assembly may include a roller that follows the extrusion and creates textures on the walls of the layers that are extruded; para. [0114]).
Regarding claim 17, Khoshnevis discloses the 3D printing and finishing device of claim 16, wherein the pattern wheel is a textured cylinder (the nozzle assembly may include a roller that follows the extrusion and creates textures on the walls of the layers that are extruded; para. [0114]).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khoshnevis (US 2005/0196484 A1) in view of Kunihiro et al. (US 2020/0384683 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Khoshnevis discloses a 3D printing finishing unit for use with three-dimensionally printed curable construction materials (robotic system for automated construction through additive manufacturing of curable material; para. [0012-0014] & [0088]), having multiple layers which are vertically stacked and having respective sides (Fig. 2, nozzle assembly 101 may be moved horizontally in a back-and-forth motion, each time being elevated in height by approximately the thickness of each extruded layer; the collective effect is to create a wall consisting of a stacked set of separately-extruded layers; para. [0081]), the finishing dispenser unit (a painting system carried at one end of a controllable robotic arm which is coupled to a nozzle assembly described previously, para. [0179], Fig. 46) including a finishing housing capable of moving along three axes and capable (Khoshnevis depicts in Fig. 19 the nozzle assembly 1960 moves in the z-axis along the side members 1930 and the x-axis along overhead beam 1920, and y-axis along rail 1940), being aligned with at least one side of the layers of the curable construction material and at least one nozzle to dispense a fluid toward the surface to modify the surface of the at least one side of the layers of the curable construction material (depicted as parts 4610 and 4620, Fig. 46, although this part number is not listed in the description, para. [0179] teaches a painting mechanism may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head).
Khoshnevis does not teach the finishing dispenser unit is formed from a solid block of metal.
Khoshnevis teaches a painting mechanism may be a simple roller to which liquid paint is automatically fed, a spray nozzle, or an inkjet printer head.
Kunihiro teaches the material for the nozzle portion 33 for dispensing molding material B is preferably a metal material, more preferably a material which does not deteriorate due to heating and dispensing of the material. The material can be suitably elected from iron, aluminum, copper, stainless steel, see [0082].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to select the metal nozzle of Kunihiro as the generic nozzle of Khoshnevis because metal does not deteriorate due to heating and dispensing of the material, see [0082].
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Normille et al. (US 2020/0238602 A1) [0060] Next, in step 314, the intermediary coating is applied to the surface of the build plate. One satisfactory technique involves setting the build plate in a substantially vertical position (meaning that the plane of the flat build surface is perpendicular to the direction of gravity) and then spraying the intermediary coating solution, such as by a handheld pump sprayer, aerosol sprayer, airbrush or an electric or pneumatic paint sprayer. As stated before, the consistency of the solution should permit spraying an even coat and yet the coating should not tend to run or sag so long as it is applied evenly and sparingly. The surface of the coating should remain sticky for time, at least long enough for step 316 to be performed effectively.
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 MICHAEL M. ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0467. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM.
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, Sam Zhao can be reached at (571)270-5343. 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.
/MICHAEL M. ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744