DETAILED ACTION
In Reply filed on 02/25/2026, claims 1-11 are pending. Claims 5-11 are withdrawn based on the restriction requirement. Claim 1 is currently amended. Claims 1-4 are considered in the current Office 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 Previous Objections/Rejections
Previous 35 USC 103 rejections are withdrawn based on the Applicant’s amendment. However, new rejections have been established.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
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).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN101489765 (“Johannes et al” hereinafter Johannes), machine translation provided, in view of CN112519209 (Ji), machine translation provided, and US2021/0162653 (Nelson).
Regarding Claim 1, Johannes teaches a stereo lithography apparatus (Figure 1) comprising:
a modeling tank (Figure 1, reservoir 2) configured to retain a photo-curable resin (page 3, lines 55-59), and in which a light transmission portion is provided on a bottom surface of the modeling tank (Figure 1 and page 4, line 15, the structure shaper 6 may include a window transparent to the radiation rays 15);
a light irradiation unit (Figure 1, coagulation device 9) configured to irradiate light for curing the photo-curable resin through the light transmission portion (page 4, lines 11-15);
a platform (Figure 1, carrier plate 20) that is disposed opposite the light transmission portion (Figure 1) and that raised and lowered raises and lowers with respect to the modeling tank (page 4, lines 19-22);
bulkheads (Figure 1, the combination of boundaries 40 and side wall of the reservoir 2 formed the bulkheads) and forms an airtight space in cooperation with the platform (Figure 1 and page 4, lines 39-40, the substantially airtight boundary of the decompression chamber 39 41 includes a boundary 40 that connects the carrier plate 20 to the side wall of the reservoir 2);
a raising and lowering control unit (Figure 1, carrier plate actuator 21) configured to raise and lower the platform and the bulkheads (page 4, lines 19-20 and lines 39-43; as the platform is raises and lowers, the flexible boundary 40 also raises and lowers) and form a photo-curable resin layer having a predetermined thickness between the light transmission portion and both a bottom surface of each of the bulkheads and a lower surface of the airtight space (page 1, lines 22-31 and annotated Figure 1);
an irradiation control unit (Figure 1, controller 60 and page 6, lines 8-10) configured to form a cured layer by irradiating the photo-curable resin layer from the light irradiation unit with the light corresponding to a cross-sectional shape of a target modeling object at a predetermined height position (page 4, lines 5-15);
a chamber internal pressure control unit (Figure 1, pressure control device 42) configured to adjust an internal pressure of the chamber (page 4, lines 46-60) to align a position of the lower surface of the airtight space with lower surfaces of the bulkheads (page 4, line 46-page 5, line 21, the pressure control device adjust the pressure in the gap and the gap is form between the lower surface of the airtight space with lower surfaces of the bulkheads. The pressure difference between the pressure in the gap 35 and the pressure in the rest of the internal space 36 impact the amount of external force needed to separate a formed layer from the structure sharper 6. Thus, prior to the forming of the first layer, the gap will be at the minimum since no force is needed to separate any layers as no layer has been form, thus, the lower surface of the airtight space must align with the lower surfaces of the bulkheads).
PNG
media_image1.png
630
922
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Johannes fails to teach bulkheads each of which is formed in a cylindrical shape.
However, Ji teaches bulkheads each of which is formed in a cylindrical shape (Figure 1, cylinder sleeve 2). Ji further teaches when moving, the cylinder sleeve is directly or indirectly sealed with the light-transmitting part when the cylinder sleeve is in the printing position, the cylinder sleeve, the light-transmitting part, and the forming platform form the working cavity, and the cylinder liner moves away from the light-transmitting part (page 1, lines 49-51).
Johannes and Ji are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of vat polymerization with a light transmissive plate and an adjustable printing volume. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the apparatus of Johannes such that it discloses all of the above discussed limitations as taught by Ji to directly or indirectly sealed the printing volume to improve the convenience of taking a printed model for a pressurizable printing device (page 1, lines 37-38 and lines 49-51).
The modified Johannes fails to teach a chamber in which the modeling tank, the light irradiation unit, the platform. and the bulkheads are accommodated.
However, Nelson teaches a chamber (Figure 4, the combination of the enclosure 480 and the base 410 formed a chamber) in which the modeling tank (Figure 4, vat 415), the light irradiation unit (Figure 4, light source 420), the platform (Figure 4, build platform 460) and the bulkheads (Figure 4, bulkheads of the vat 415) are accommodated (Figure 4).
Johannes and Nelson are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of vat polymerization with a light transmissive plate and an adjustable printing volume. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Johannes such that it discloses all of the above discussed limitations as taught by Nelson to conditioning and control the environment within the enclosure such that the temperature and vapor pressure of solvent evaporating from the gel may be higher within an enclosed region. Also, flow rates of air may be higher across external surfaces than across shielded or internal walls ([0030]).
Regarding Claim 2, the modified Johannes teaches the stereo lithography apparatus according to claim 1, wherein each of the bulkheads allows the platform to be raised and lowered (Johannes, page 4, lines 19-20 and lines 39-43; as the platform is raises and lowers, the flexible boundary 40 also raises and lowers), and is disposed on an outer side of the platform by way of an airtight member (Figure 1, the flexible boundary 40 are located on the outer side of the carrier plate 20).
Regarding Claim 3, the modified Johannes teaches the stereo lithography apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the raising and lowering control unit (Johannes, Figure 1, carrier plate actuator 21 and the controller 60 is also communicatively connected to the carrier board actuator 21 via a line 62 for controlling the operation of the carrier board actuator 21, page 6, lines 7-8) relatively lowers each of the bulkheads by an amount corresponding to the predetermined thickness with respect to the platform every time formation of the cured layer has been completed (page 1, lines 22-31).
Regarding Claim 4, the modified Johannes teaches the stereo lithography apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the raising and lowering control unit temporarily raises the platform and the bulkheads up to a position above the photo-curable resin (Johannes, page 1, lines 22-31 and page 4, lines 17-25).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because they pertain to new limitations and have been rejected as stated above.
The Applicant argues one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that Johannes fails to teach and/or suggest a chamber comprising bulkheads. Rather, at most, the boundaries 40, contended as bulkheads. Next, as clear from Johannes FIG. 1, lower surfaces of pleats or folding portions of the folding boundaries 40 are merely spaced from a lower surface of the decompression chamber 41 or reservoir 2 (e.g., an upper surface of bottom platform 7 or anti-adhesion layer 8, which together are comprised by the structural shaper 6, as stated at Johannes, page 3, lines 55-59). There is no specified alignment of any position of the folding portions of the boundaries 40 with the structural shaper 6. At most, layer thickness of the layers 34 may be controlled by alignment between the upper plate 20 and the structure shaper 6, but not between the boundaries 40 and the structural shaper 6.
The Examiner respectfully disagreed. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), the words of a claim must be given their plain meaning unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification, and it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification into the claim. In this case, the limitation “bulkhead” is interpreted as a dividing wall or a barrier. Johannes discloses “the decompression chamber 41 includes a boundary 40 that connects the carrier plate 20 to the side wall of the reservoir 2. Since the carrier plate 20 is movable relative to the reservoir 2 in the direction 25, these boundaries 40 include folding walls (page 4, lines 39-42)”. Thus, Johannes does teach a plurality of bulkheads. Secondly, the pressure control device adjust the pressure in the gap and the gap is form between the lower surface of the airtight space with lower surfaces of the bulkheads. The pressure difference between the pressure in the gap 35 and the pressure in the rest of the internal space 36 impact the amount of external force needed to separate a formed layer from the structure sharper 6 (page 4, line 46-page 5, line 21). Thus, prior to the forming of the first layer, the gap will be at the minimum since no force is needed to separate any layers as no layer has been form, thus, the lower surface of the airtight space must align with the lower surfaces of the bulkheads. 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).
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 XINWEN (Cindy) YE whose telephone number is (571)272-3010. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30 - 17:00.
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.
XINWEN (CINDY) YE
Examiner
Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights