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 Acknowledged
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, encompassing claim 12 and new claims 14-23, in the reply filed on 06/24/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-8 and 13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-8 and 12-23 are pending. Of the pending claims, claims 12 and 14-23 are presented for examination on the merits, and claims 1-8 and 13 are withdrawn from examination.
Claims 9-11 are canceled. Claims 14-23 are new.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Two (2) information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) were submitted on 03/15/2024 and 11/29/2024. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS are being considered by the examiner.
Objection to the Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
FIG. 1: 62, 63, 70, 80
FIG. 2: 70
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 12 and 14-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0033819 (A1) (also WO 2022/138505 (A1)) to Kato (“Kato”).
US 2024/0033819 (A1) is the pre-grant publication of U.S. appl. ser. no. 18/258,491, which is a 371 national stage application of PCT/JP2021/046827, published by WIPO as WO 2022/138505 (A1). The pre-grant publication will serve as an equivalent of and the translation for the WIPO publication.
Regarding claim 12, Kato discloses a method of producing an aluminum sintered body by metal additive manufacturing (additive manufacturing method). Title; para. [0002], [0028], [0030]. The method includes the following steps (para. [0041]):
(i) a step of providing raw material powder for additive manufacturing in the form of a metal powder layer (forming a powder layer using a material for additive manufacturing);
(ii) spraying resin on the metal powder layer (applying a liquid resin including a resin to solidify the powder layer);
(iii) repeatedly laminating the powder layer to obtain a metal powder green body to solidify into a three-dimensional shape (repeating the forming and applying to produce a sintering precursor);
(iv) degreasing (removing the resin from the sintering precursor); and
(v) sintering (sintering the sintering precursor from which resin is removed).
The raw material powder contains starting material powder (corresponds to powder A) and an aluminum alloy powder (corresponds to powder B). Para. [0035]. The starting material powder may be pure aluminum or an aluminum alloy (powder A including an alloy or pure metal). Para. [0017]. The aluminum alloy powder has a different melting point (powder B, therefore an alloy composition different from a composition of powder A). Para. [0019], [0032].
In the sintering step, the raw material powder is heated to a temperature, such as 580°C-650°C, in which a liquid phase is generated from the aluminum alloy powder that has a low melting point and spreads with respect to the starting material powder. Para. [0033], [0034], [0042]. The starting material has a melting point of approximately 660°C. Para. [0080]. Because this is below the sintering temperature, the liquid phase ratio of the starting material powder should be low (temperature range results in the liquid phase ratio of powder A being 30% by mass or less relative to the total mass of powder A).
The aluminum alloy powder is selected to have a melting point difference of 40°C or more relative to the starting material powder. Para. [0019], [0020], [0083]; claim 2. For a starting material melting point of approximately 660°C, the melting point of the aluminum alloy powder is about 620°C or lower. For a sintering temperature of 580°C-650°C, the aluminum alloy powder would mostly or completely melt (temperature range results in the liquid phase ratio of powder B being 70% by mass or greater relative to the total mass of powder B).
The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select from among the prior art ranges because there is utility over an entire range disclosed in the prior art.
Regarding claim 14, Kato does not explicitly identify a percentage of particles having a particle size of 106 µm or greater. However, Kato discloses that the rate or sintering may be slowed and sufficient density may not be obtained if the volume median diameter exceeds 50 µm. Para. [0064], [0065]. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to minimize the amount of large particles in the build powder mixture, such as limiting the percentage of particles twice the median diameter, in order to produce a product with adequate density and to avoid prolonging the sintering time.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Kato discloses that the starting material powder (corresponds to powder A) is mixed with 5-30% by mass aluminum alloy powder (corresponds to powder B). Para. [0035], [0067], [0068]. Since mass is proportional to volume by density, the mass proportion scales with volume proportion, with Kato’s quantity thereby encompassing the claimed range.
Regarding claim 17, Kato discloses examples where the D50 (volume median diameter and average – para. [0096]) of Powder 1 (corresponds to powder A) is larger than the D50 of Powder 2 (corresponds to powder B). See, for example, Example Nos. 2, 6, 8, 11, and 12 in Table 1.
Regarding claim 18, Kato discloses examples where the D50 (volume median diameter and average – para. [0096]) of Powder 1 (corresponds to powder A) is larger than the D50 of Powder 2 (corresponds to powder B). In one example, the D50 ratio of Powder 1 to Powder 2 is 1:0.6 (Table 1 – Example 2), which falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 19, Kato discloses examples where the D50 (volume median diameter and average – para. [0096]) of Powder 1 (corresponds to powder A) is larger than the D50 of Powder 2 (corresponds to powder B). In Example No. 2, the D50 ratio of Powder 1 is 50 µm, which falls within the claimed range, and the D50 ratio of Powder 2 is 30 µm, which falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 20, Kato discloses examples where the D50 (volume median diameter and average – para. [0096]) of Powder 2 (corresponds to powder B) is larger than the D50 of Powder 1 (corresponds to powder A). See, for example, Example Nos. 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, and 14 in Table 1.
Regarding claim 21, Kato discloses that the starting material powder (corresponds to powder A) and aluminum alloy powder (corresponds to powder B) may each be aluminum alloy. Para. [0017].
Regarding claim 22, Kato teaches that Si, Cu, and Mg may be alloying elements. Para. [0057]-[0061]; Table 1.
Regarding claim 23, Kato discloses that the aluminum alloy powder (corresponds to powder B) may contain Si in ana amount of 5-30% by mass (para. [0017], [0057]-[0059], [0081], [0091]; Table 1), which overlaps the claimed range.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
CN 114012085 (A) to Zhu et al. (computer-generated translation is attached) is directed to a mixed bi-modal powder containing coarse powders and fine powders. The powders are used in a 3D printing method. Abstract; pp. 1-2.
US 2019/0344344 (A1) to Shivanath is directed to a method of binder jet additive manufacturing. Abstract. The powders are a mixture in composition and size. Para. [0048], [0049], [0051], [0052].
US 2020/0261973 (A1) to Tsunoya is directed to a method for shaping a three-dimensional article comprising supplying first powders and second powder to a spray process. FIGS. 1 and 2. The powders have different diameters. Para. [0011].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANESSA T. LUK whose telephone number is (571)270-3587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM 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, Keith D. Hendricks, can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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.
/VANESSA T. LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
August 31, 2026
Prosecution Insights