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/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-17 in the reply filed on 3/12/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no search burden. This is not found persuasive because although there may be some overlap of the search for the inventions there is nothing to indicate that the search would be coextensive. Further the examination on the merits of apparatus claims differs from that of method claims. Therefore the extra search and/or examination burden for addressing multiple inventions poses a serious burden to the examiner which makes the restriction requirement proper.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Buller (US2017/0165751 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Buller teaches s device for three-dimensional (3D) printing (abstract), the device comprising: a first body side having a contacting surface; and a second body side coupled with the first body side along the contacting surface (see figure 14) to form (i) a nozzle (1404), (ii) a channel in the nozzle (see arrow in 1404), and (iii) a cavity coupled to the channel of the nozzle (“venturi nozzle” [0251]), the cavity having a long axis [0249], the first body side and the second body side being asymmetrically related to each other (see figure 14),
the device being a portion of a layer dispensing mechanism configured to layerwise generate a material bed comprising pre-transformed material [0249], wherein at least a portion of the pre- transformed in the material bed is being transformed to print at least one 3D object during the 3D printing [0249]
the device being configured to, during use, attract the pre-transformed material from the material bed (a) into the nozzle through the channel and into the cavity, (b) in a direction opposing a gravitational vector pointing towards a gravitational center of an ambient environment external to the device, (c) while moving the device in a first lateral direction along an exposed surface of the material bed, (d) without the device contacting the exposed surface of the material bed, and (e) to generate the exposed surface that is planar (the Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the function they perform, as per MPEP §2114. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. As the apparatus of the prior art and the claimed apparatus are patentably indistinguishable in terms of structure, the apparatus of the prior art is reasonably expected to be able to perform the claimed functionalities).
Regarding claim 2, Buller teaches wherein the first body side and the second body side are asymmetrically related to each other at least in part by the first body side (1404 nozzle is asymmetrical)
comprising (I) a mount disposed above the nozzle during use of the device, the mount being configured to couple to one or more components to facilitate movement of the device along the first lateral direction during use of the device [0281], above being in a direction opposing the gravitational vector,
(II) an opening disposed asymmetrically along the long axis of the cavity (cavity found in [0249]), the opening being configured to allow evacuation of the pre-transformed material from the cavity during use of the device, the opening facing the first lateral direction of the movement of the device during use, or opposing the first lateral direction of movement of the device during use [0249], and during use of the device the long axis is disposed along a second direction different from the first direction and different from the gravitational vector.
Regarding claim 5, Buller depicts wherein the first body side comprises the opening disposed asymmetrically along the long axis of the cavity [0358].
Regarding claims 6-7, Applicant is reminded that the operation of the device/ function of the device is not given patentable weight. Apparatus claims are not limited by the function they perform, as per MPEP §2114. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. As the apparatus of the prior art and the claimed apparatus are patentably indistinguishable in terms of structure, the apparatus of the prior art is reasonably expected to be able to perform the claimed functionalities.
Regarding claim 8, Buller discloses wherein the mount is disposed along a first portion of the long axis of the cavity, and the opening is disposed along a second portion of the long axis of the cavity [0281].
Regarding claim 9, Buller discloses wherein upon use of the device, (a) the first body side comprises a first external surface configured to face the exposed surface of the material bed and form the first angle with a plane, and (b) the second body side comprises a second external surface configured to face the exposed surface of the material bed and form the second angle with the plane, each of the first angle and the second angle having a value from about 10 degrees to about 85 degrees, the plane being perpendicular to the gravitational vector; and optionally wherein each of the first angle and the second angle has a value from about 10 degrees to about 30 degrees (see figure 14 where the angle is between 10-85 degrees).
Regarding claim 10, wherein the material bed comprises deposited layers of the pre-transformed material; and wherein the device is configured to generate the exposed surface having a planarity, the planarity having a heigh variation of at most about 60% from a central tendency of heights of the deposited layers (the Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the function they perform, as per MPEP §2114. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. As the apparatus of the prior art and the claimed apparatus are patentably indistinguishable in terms of structure, the apparatus of the prior art is reasonably expected to be able to perform the claimed functionalities. Furthermore, Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the material worked upon as per MPEP §2115).
Regarding claim 11, wherein the device is configured to generate the exposed surface at a speed of movement of at least about 25 millimeters/second (mm/sec), (the Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the function they perform, as per MPEP §2114. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. As the apparatus of the prior art and the claimed apparatus are patentably indistinguishable in terms of structure, the apparatus of the prior art is reasonably expected to be able to perform the claimed functionalities).
Regarding claim 12, wherein the device is configured to attract the pre- transformed material (I) comprising a powder material, (II) comprising an elemental metal, a metal alloy, a ceramic, or an allotrope of elemental carbon, or (III) a combination of (I) and (II); Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the material worked upon as per MPEP §2115.
Regarding claim 13, wherein the direction being a first direction; and wherein the cavity comprises an end extending in a second direction beyond the channel of the nozzle, the second direction begin different from the second direction and different from the gravitational vector (figure 14).
Regarding claim 14, wherein the device is configured to attract the pre- transformed material from the material bed substantial uniformly along (i) an interior of the channel of the nozzle, (ii) an entrance port of the channel of the nozzle, or (iii) any combination of (i) and (ii), applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the function they perform, as per MPEP §2114. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. As the apparatus of the prior art and the claimed apparatus are patentably indistinguishable in terms of structure, the apparatus of the prior art is reasonably expected to be able to perform the claimed functionalities.
Regarding claim 15, wherein the device is configured to attract the pre- transformed material substantially uniformly along the entrance port of the channel of the nozzle, , the Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the function they perform, as per MPEP §2114. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. As the apparatus of the prior art and the claimed apparatus are patentably indistinguishable in terms of structure, the apparatus of the prior art is reasonably expected to be able to perform the claimed functionalities.
Regarding claim 16, wherein the device is configured to attract the pre- transformed material from the material bed substantial uniformly along the interior of the channel of the nozzle, Applicant is reminded that apparatus claims are not limited by the material worked upon as per MPEP §2115.
Regarding claim 17, Bueller teaches wherein (I) the device is configured to operatively couple to a tiling energy beam configured to for the three-dimensional printing comprising tiling [0006],
(II) the device comprises, or is operatively coupled with, a cyclonic separator configured to separate the pre-transformed material during use of the device,
(IV) the layer dispensing mechanism comprises a material dispenser [0034]
or a material leveler, (V) the device comprises, or is operatively coupled with, compliant mounting [0247],
(VI) the device is configured to evacuate the pre-transformed material from the cavity along a second direction [0249],
or (VII) the device comprises, or is operatively coupled with, an energy source, a scanner, or the scanner and the energy source, the scanner being configured to direct an energy beam to impinge on the material bed during the three- dimensional printing to transform the pre-transformed material to the transformed material that forms at least a portion of the at least one 3D object, the energy source being configured to generate the energy beam, the energy source, the scanner, or the energy source and the scanner, being controlled based at least in part on a physics simulation (since the claim requires “or”, it’s optional and is not required).
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 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(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buller (US2017/0165751 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Buller does not explicitly disclose the first body side comprising the mount. However, MPEP 2144.04 states Shifting the location of an element would not have modified the operation of device. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ7 (CCPA 1975) The particular placement of an element was held to be obvious. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the first body side comprising the mount since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. As for optionally, this step is not required.
Regarding claim 4, Buller does not explicitly disclose the mount on the second body side. One ordinary skill in the art would understand that to mean that the second body side does not have a mount on it. Further given the limited options for the body: either have a mount or not have a mount. MPEP 2144.05 states obvious to try is a prima facie evidence of obviousness given the limited number of options. Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to not have a mount since it’s not explicitly disclosed and given the limited number of options.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARAH N TAUFIQ whose telephone number is (571)272-6765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8:00 am-4:30 pm.
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.
/FARAH TAUFIQ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights