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 and Application
This non-final action on the merits is in response to the election of invention received by the office 11 August 2026. Claims 1-26 are pending. Claims 17-26 are withdrawn as non-elected
Election/Restrictions
Claims 17-26 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11 August 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-8, 13, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0117854 to Hart et al. (‘854 hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, ‘854 teaches a build plate assembly, comprising: a body dimensioned for use in a 3D printing device, the body comprising an interior cavity formed through a top of the body, and extending to an opening at a first side of the body (Fig 4 items 200 and 210); and a solid insert of a metal or metal alloy comprising a top surface for forming a 3D printed metal object in the 3D printing device, the solid insert configured to slidably couple, through the opening at the first side of the body, into the interior cavity of the body (Fig. 4 item 214).
Regarding claim 2, ‘854 teaches the build plate further comprising: a gate configured to removably couple to the first side of the body after the solid insert slidably couples into the interior cavity, the gate configured to block the opening at the first side of the body (Fig. 9 item 214).
Regarding claim 3, ‘854 teaches the build plate assembly wherein the gate slidably couples to the first side of the body (Fig 9 item 214).
Regarding claim 4, ‘854 teaches the build plate wherein: the interior cavity comprises a first mortise or a first tenon (Fig 4 item 238); the solid insert comprises a second mortise configured to be slidably received by the first tenon, or a second tenon configured to be slidably received by the first mortise (Fig.4 item 214); and the gate comprises a third mortise configured to be slidably received by the first tenon, or a third tenon configured to be slidably received by the first mortise (Fig 9 items 214).
Regarding claim 6, ‘854 teaches the build plate assembly wherein: the interior cavity comprises a first mortise or a first tenon (Fig 4 item 238); and the solid insert comprises a second mortise configured to be slidably received by the first tenon, or a second tenon configured to be slidably received by the first mortise (Fig. 4 item 214).
Regarding claim 7, ‘854 teaches the build plate wherein the first mortise or the first tenon are angled relative to a perpendicular direction to the top surface of the solid insert, and the second mortise or the second tenon are angled relative to the perpendicular direction to prevent movement of the solid insert along the perpendicular direction after the solid insert slidably couples to the interior cavity (Fig.4 item 232 and 238)
Regarding claim 8, ‘854 teaches the build plate assembly wherein: the interior cavity comprises the first mortise and the first tenon (Fig 4 items 232 and 238); and the solid insert comprises the second mortise configured to be slidably received by the first tenon, and the second tenon configured to be slidably received by the first mortise (Fig 4 item 214).
Regarding claim 13, ‘854 teaches the build plate assembly wherein the metal or metal alloy has a solidus temperature that is lower than a solidus temperature of the 3D printed metal object insofar as this rejection is a recitation of intended use of the claimed apparatus. (See MPEP 2114 (II) for guidance regarding the effect of the use of a claimed apparatus on patentability)
Regarding claim 15, ‘854 teaches the build plate assembly wherein: the interior cavity comprises one or more subtractive features (Fig 4 item 232); the solid insert comprises one or more additive features coupled to the one or more subtractive features when the solid insert is slidably coupled in the interior cavity (Fig 4 item 238); and the one or more additive features coupled to the one or more subtractive features is configured to prevent lift-up of the solid insert during 3D printing in the 3D printing device (Fig 4 items 232, 238 and 214).
Regarding claim 16, ‘854 teaches the build plate assembly wherein: the interior cavity comprises one or more additive features (Fig 4 item 238); the solid insert comprises one or more subtractive features coupled to the one or more additive features when the solid insert is slidably coupled in the interior cavity; and the one or more subtractive features coupled to the one or more additive features is configured to prevent lift-up of the solid insert during 3D printing in the 3D printing device (Fig 4 item 214).
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.
Claim(s) 5, 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘854 as applied to claims 2, 1, or 13 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0053122 to Socha et al. (‘122 hereafter).
Regarding claim 5, ‘854 does not teach through holes as claimed. In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, ‘122 teaches the build plate assembly wherein: the gate comprises one or more first through holes extending through the gate (Fig 11, items 201); the body comprises one or more second through holes extending through the body (Fig 11, items 280); after the gate is removably coupled to the first side of the body, the one or more first through holes are aligned with the one or more second through holes (Fig 11 items 210 and 280); and the one or more first through holes aligned with the one or more second through holes are configured to receive one or more structural protrusions of the 3D printing device to hold the build plate assembly in place during 3D printing (Fig 11 items 210 and 280) for the benefit of securing the elements together. It would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘854 with those of ‘122 for the benefit of securing an assembly together.
Regarding claim 12, ‘854 does not teach through holes as claimed. In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, ‘122 teaches the build plate assembly wherein the body comprises one or more through holes configured to receive a tool for slidably removing the solid insert from the interior cavity of the body, the one or more through holes extending through a second side of the body, opposite the first side, from an exterior of the second side to the interior cavity printing (Fig 11 items 201) easing disassembly of the apparatus. It would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘854 with those of ‘122 for the benefit of easing disassembly.
Regarding claim 14, ‘854 does not teach the solidus temperature claimed. In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, ‘122 teaches the build plate assembly wherein the solidus temperature of the metal or metal alloy is between 50C and 250C (paragraph 0082) for the benefit of facilitation of part separation from the build surface. It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings ‘854 with those of ‘122 for the benefit of facilitation part separation.
Claim(s) 9and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘854 as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0402480 to Matthew B Sweetland (‘480 hereafter).
Regarding claim 9, ‘854 discloses that it is contemplatable to try different combinations of mortice and tenon pairs (paragraph 0030), it does not teach plurality of mortises and tenons. In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, ‘480 teaches the build plate assembly wherein: the interior cavity comprises a first plurality of mortises including the first mortise, and a first plurality of tenons including the first tenon (Fig 11A item 120) ;the solid insert comprises a second plurality of mortises including the second mortise, and a second plurality of tenons including the second tenon (Fig 11A item 130); the first plurality of mortises are configured to slidably receive the second plurality of tenons (Fig 11A); and the first plurality of tenons are configured to slidably receive the second plurality of mortises (Fig 11A) for the benefit of promoting stiffness of the build surface (0083). It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘854 with those of ‘480 for the benefit of promoting a stiffened build surface.
Regarding claim 10, ‘480 teaches the build plate assembly wherein the first plurality of mortises, the first plurality of tenons, the second plurality of mortises, and the second plurality of tenons is each angled relative to a perpendicular direction to the top surface of the solid insert to prevent movement of the solid insert along the perpendicular direction after the solid insert slidably couples to the interior cavity (Fig. 11A items 110 and 130) for the benefit of promoting stiffness of the build surface (0083). It would have been obvious to one possessed of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to combine the teachings of ‘854 with those of ‘480 for the benefit of promoting a stiffened build surface.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘854 as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of an alternative embodiment disclosed in ‘854.
Regarding claim 11, ‘854 teaches the build plate assembly wherein: the interior cavity comprises a first bottom surface including the first mortise or the first tenon; and the solid insert comprises a second bottom surface, opposite the top surface, the second bottom surface comprising the second mortise or the second tenon (paragraph 0030) for the benefit of forming different combinations of surfaces. It would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan as of the time of effective filing to combine the different embodiments of ‘854 for the benefit of forming different arrangements of build surface.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John P Robitaille whose telephone number is (571)270-7006. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-6:00PM.
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 at (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.
/JPR/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
