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 .
Status of Claims
The Amendment filed 01/12/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-13 are currently pending in the application. Claim 5 has been amended. No new claims have been added.
Response to Amendment
35 USC 112(b). The amendments to claim 5 have overcome the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) as being indefinite set forth in the Office Action mailed 07/14/2025. The rejection is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
35 USC 102. Applicant's remarks regarding the rejection of claims 1, 5, 8-9, and 13 under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Constabeber (US 2016/0151974 A1) have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant concedes that “Costabeber further discloses that in other embodiments, the thrusting device comprises a plunger arranged in each reservoir 5, 5a. (Costabeber, [0102])” (Remarks, PG 8). However, Applicant asserts that “Costabeber does not teach or otherwise disclose any feeding means using a movable structure,” “Costabeber does not teach or otherwise disclose that the thrusting device is a movable structure within the first chamber and, in fact, suggests the contrary,” “the feeding means comprising a thrusting device is depicted in Fig 6…resides on the boundary of the reservoir, not within the reservoir,” “Constabeber fails to define or disclose any details regarding the plunger,” and “based on the ordinary mechanisms of a plunger, the thrusting device must necessarily remain outside of the reservoir given the positioning of the seal formed by the plunger at the first end of the reservoir. Accordingly, the thrusting device cannot be a structure movable within the first chamber (i.e., reservoir). Furthermore, every embodiment of the feeding mechanism disclosed or taught by Costabeber employs a mechanism to supply air into the reservoir to manipulate pressure to facilitate the flow of material from the reservoir to the container. Costabeber does not disclose a movable structure within the chamber as claimed by Applicant” (Remarks, Pg 8-10).
Examiner notes that Costabeber discloses that the thrusting device comprises a plunger arranged in each reservoir 5, 5 a and a thrusting device 18 suited to thrust the materials 6, 6 a from the reservoirs 5, 5 a (a structure, movable within the first chamber adapted to transfer a portion of the printing material from the first chamber) towards the container 3, wherein the modelling platform 14 is arranged in contact with the material 6, 6 a or 6 b present in the container 3, and wherein the movement of the platform 14 is parallel to the bottom 9 of the container 3 (a printing area between a surface of a window and the platform in the second chamber for receiving a curing light for curing a layer of the printing material onto the platform or onto a cured layer of the printing material on the platform, in order to build the 3D object on the platform) (¶0099,0102,0152-0160). Accordingly, Constabeber teaches a structure, movable within the first chamber (plunger) adapted to transfer a portion of the printing material from the first chamber to a printing area between a surface of a window and the platform in the second chamber.
Accordingly, based upon the reasons stated above, the rejection of claims 1, 5, 8-9, and 13 set forth in the Office Action mailed 07/14/2025 is maintained. The rejection of claims 1, 5, 8-9, and 13 is provided below.
Applicant’s arguments that prior art cited in the rejection of dependent claims do not make up for the deficiencies of the prior art cited in the rejection of independent claim 1 is not persuasive. The rejection of claim 1 is not considered to be deficient as argued above. The rejection of amended claims 2-4, 6-7, and 10-12 is provided below.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 01/14/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 12,128,624 and 12,128,625 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
The terminal disclaimer filed on 01/12/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of any patent granted on Application No. 18/401,160, 18/401,155, and 18/543,791 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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.
Claims 1, 5, 8-9, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Constabeber (US 2016/0151974 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Constabeber teaches a cartridge 2 (a container assembly adapted to store a printing material) comprising supporting structure 34 (body adapted to be aligned with a curing light engine external to the container assembly), the supporting structure 34 housing conveyance ducts 8 (channel), a reservoir 5 (first chamber; the first chamber is adapted to sealably store a printing material), a thrusting device (structure movable within the first chamber; structure movable within the first chamber is adapted to transfer a portion of the printing material from the first chamber to a printing area between a surface of a window and the platform in the second chamber for receiving a curing light from the curing light engine for curing a layer of the printing material onto the platform or onto a cured layer of the printing material on the platform, in order to build the 3D object on the platform), a container 3 (second chamber), and a modeling platform 14 (platform movable within the second chamber); and wherein the conveyance ducts 8 are formed on an intermediate wall 16 (side wall of the second chamber to allow fluid communication between the first chamber and the second chamber) (Fig 4 and ¶0078-0095,0099-0108).
Costabeber discloses that the thrusting device comprises a plunger arranged in each reservoir 5, 5 a and a thrusting device 18 suited to thrust the materials 6, 6 a from the reservoirs 5, 5 a (a structure, movable within the first chamber adapted to transfer a portion of the printing material from the first chamber) towards the container 3, wherein the modelling platform 14 is arranged in contact with the material 6, 6 a or 6 b present in the container 3, and wherein the movement of the platform 14 is parallel to the bottom 9 of the container 3 (a printing area between a surface of a window and the platform in the second chamber for receiving a curing light for curing a layer of the printing material onto the platform or onto a cured layer of the printing material on the platform, in order to build the 3D object on the platform) (¶0099,0102,0152-0160). Accordingly, Constabeber teaches a structure, movable within the first chamber (plunger) adapted to transfer a portion of the printing material from the first chamber to a printing area between a surface of a window and the platform in the second chamber.
Regarding claim 5, as applied to claim 1, Constabeber teaches a container assembly wherein the supporting structure 34 (body) is a single-use or disposable body (¶0129).
Regarding claim 8, as applied to claim 1, Constabeber teaches a container assembly wherein modeling platform 14 (platform) is adapted to be removed from container 3 (second chamber) to facilitate removal of the 3D object built onto the modeling platform 14 (¶0165).
Regarding claim 9, as applied to claim 1, Constabeber teaches a container assembly further comprising a door 12 and shaped portion 12 a (removable seal, collectively) that keeps the reservoir 5 (first chamber) and the container 3 (second chamber) airtight until a door 12 and shaped portion 12 a is removed (Fig 3-4 and ¶0126,0165).
Regarding claim 13, as applied to claim 1, Constabeber teaches a container assembly comprising a first chamber, structure, window, platform, and second chamber, a claim is only limited by positively recited elements. MPEP 2115. Regarding the limitations “the first chamber is adapted to hold a plurality of printing materials in lieu of the printing material” and “the structure, movable within the first chamber is adapted to transfer a portion of each of the plurality of printing materials from the first chamber to the to the printing area between the surface of the window and the platform in the second chamber for receiving the curing light for curing a layer of each of the printing materials onto the platform or onto a cured layer of one of the plurality of printing materials on the platform, in order to build the 3D object on the platform,” the inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 2-4, 6, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Constabeber (US 2016/0151974 A1), as applied to claim 1, and in view of Holt (US 2021/0122104 A1).
Regarding claims 2-4, as applied to claim 1, while Constabeber teaches a container assembly comprising a structure (base device), Constabeber does not explicitly teach a container assembly wherein the structure is a piston inside the first chamber adapted to hydraulically move the platform in the second chamber when transferring the portion of the printing material from the first chamber to the printing area in the second chamber; wherein the structure is adapted to be pushed or pulled into the first chamber in order to transfer the portion of the printing material from the first chamber to the printing area in the second chamber; nor wherein the platform is adapted to be pushed or pulled away from the printing area inside the second chamber.
However, in the same field of endeavor, stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printing, Holt discloses a method wherein a print platform 105 can be moved away from the base of the build vessel 108 by either delivering upwards force to the arm 106 or by delivering downward force to a piston attached to a platform 110 in the resin reservoir chamber 101 adjacent and connected to it via transfer pipe 102, wherein the resin is pumped in to achieve the desired thickness of layer, and wherein the print platform 105 is then forced to lift by a height determined by the volume of resin that has entered the chamber, which will become the build layer thickness (wherein the structure is a piston inside the first chamber adapted to hydraulically move the platform in the second chamber when transferring the portion of the printing material from the first chamber to the printing area in the second chamber; wherein the structure is adapted to be pushed or pulled into the first chamber in order to transfer the portion of the printing material from the first chamber to the printing area in the second chamber; wherein the platform is adapted to be pushed or pulled away from the printing area inside the second chamber) (Fig 1 and ¶0061) (known technique applicable to the base method).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the container assembly disclosed in Constabeber by applying the known technique wherein the structure is a piston inside the first chamber adapted to hydraulically move the platform in the second chamber when transferring the portion of the printing material from the first chamber to the printing area in the second chamber; wherein the structure is adapted to be pushed or pulled into the first chamber in order to transfer the portion of the printing material from the first chamber to the printing area in the second chamber; and wherein the platform is adapted to be pushed or pulled away from the printing area inside the second chamber as disclosed in Holt to the container assembly disclosed in Constabeber with predictable results and resulting in an improved apparatus. MPEP 2143(D).
Regarding claim 6, as applied to claim 1, while Constabeber teaches a container assembly comprising a first chamber and a second chamber (base device), Constabeber does not explicitly disclose wherein the first chamber and second chamber are non-overlapping.
However, in the same field of endeavor, stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printing apparatus, Holt discloses a system further comprising a transfer pipe 102 (channel), chamber 101 (first chamber), and a build vessel 108 (second chamber), wherein chamber 101 is non-overlapping with build vessel 108 (Fig 1 and ¶0061) (known technique applicable to the base device).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the system disclosed in Constabeber by applying the known technique wherein the first chamber and second chamber are non-overlapping as disclosed in Holt to the container assembly disclosed in Constabeber with predictable results and resulting in an improved apparatus. MPEP 2143(D).
Regarding claims 11-12, as applied to claim 1, while Constabeber discloses a container assembly comprising a transparent bottom 9 (window) (Fig 3-4 and ¶0079-0081) (base device), Constabeber does not disclose a film or coating layer disposed over an interior surface of the window nor wherein the film or coating layer disposed over an interior surface of the window comprises a polymethyl pentene (PMP) film.
However, Holt discloses a method wherein the screen can be protected by a very low energy surface coating or film 109 on the inner surface to reduce adhesion of the layer to the screen after printing, wherein the layer 109 may be a coating or film of Polymethylpentene (PMP) (¶0061).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the container assembly disclosed in Constabeber by disposing the PMP film disclosed in Holt over an interior surface of the window disclosed in Constabeber in view of Holt in order to reduce adhesion of the layer after printing (Holt, ¶0061).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Constabeber (US 2016/0151974 A1).
Regarding claim 7, as applied to claim 1, while Constabeber teaches a container assembly comprising a second chamber and a platform (base device), Constabeber does not explicitly teach wherein the second chamber is adapted to limit or prevent a rotation of the platform.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the container assembly disclosed in Constabeber such that the second chamber is shaped and adapted to limit or prevent a rotation of the platform, since it has been held that the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)-(B).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Constabeber (US 2016/0151974 A1), as applied to claim 1, and in view of Perret (US 2008/0131546 A1).
Regarding claim 10, as applied to claim 1, Constabeber does not teach a container assembly further comprising a removable cover to prevent light from passing through the window.
However, reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned (removable covers to prevent light from passing; see MPEP 2141.01(a)), Perret discloses an apparatus wherein shutter 15 is implemented by a mechanical slide (removable cover), which blocks a beam passage (¶0040).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the container assembly disclosed in Constabeber by adding the shutter (removable cover) disclosed in Perret to the container assembly disclosed in Constabeber in order to block a beam passage (Perret, ¶0040).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 JaMel M Nelson whose telephone number is (571)272-8174. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM ET - 5:00 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, Galen Hauth can be reached on (571) 270-5516. 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.
/JAMEL M NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743