ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING SYSTEM WITH PARTIALLY FLEXIBLE BUILD PLATFORM

DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE 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 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. Claim 1, 4-12, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaur (NPL 20231) In reference to claim 1, 12, Kaur shows a metal plate tacked down on a welding table and then metal layers printed onto the plate (Fig 1 and description thereof) PNG media_image1.png 784 770 media_image1.png Greyscale Fig 1 shows a build platform (plate) tacked to a base (fixture) Kaur indicates that the plate was tacked to the fixture in order to hold it. The term “fixture” in this context is understood to refer to a fixture table, or equivalent. Kaur does not use the term “adjustable”. The present claim and specification do not describe what adjustable means. Thus, any amount of adjustability of the Kaur fixture meets the claim. Examiner takes notice that it would be obvious to make the fixture adjustable with respect to size and position in order to accommodate differently sized plates, (e.g., it would be obvious to use a fixture table that can expand to accommodate large pieces) or allow leveling of the table with adjustable feet. In reference to claim 4-8, 10, 11, 15-20, see Fig 1 and description thereof. Fig 1 shows a build platform (plate) tacked to a base (fixture) that meets the claim as described as a claimed machine. Limitations regarding method of making or intended use are given weight only in as far as they imply or require structure. In reference to claim 9, see Fig 1 and description thereof and see “laser-cladded Inconel” in the intro. The Fig 1 plates are formed by GTAW (aka TIG welding), but the Kaur intro recognizes laser welding as an arc recognized means for metal deposition. The claimed combination is obvious. 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 NICHOLAS KRASNOW whose telephone number is (571)270-1154. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 8am-5pm. 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, Xiao 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. Examiner has utilized USPTO approved search resources, such as EIC or external tools, beyond routine search tools and/or leveraged experts in the field. Examiner has cited and explained the relevance of prior art not used in rejections but pertinent to the claims or disclosure. Examiner has provided detailed search documentation through detailed Search Notes, such as annotated search results that identify which data sets were reviewed. When citing the prior art examiner has used annotations clearly in prior art rejections such as, using item-to-item matching to the prior art, pairing exact claim language to particular language used in the prior art, and/or clearly explaining examiner’s interpretation as to how a citation maps to claim language especially when there is not a one-to-one matching of terms. 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. /NICHOLAS KRASNOW/Examiner, Art Unit 1744 1 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14644207231205193