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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim s 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-31 of copending Application No. 18/196829. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the scope of claims 1-20 are encompassed by the scope of claims 1-31 of copending application 18/196829.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
PRODUCT BY PROCESS CLAIM:
“ The subject matter present is regarded as a product by process claim in which a product is introduced by the method in which it is made. It is the general practice of this office to examine the final product described regardless of the method provided by the applicant.”
The above office policy applies to the limitations “ …3D-printed…printing technology….” In claims 1-20
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “ column hider panel” is confusing. Appropriate correction is 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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meredith et al (2007/0044411) in view of Dubov et al (2021/0277648).
Meredith figures 1-4, 31-35, shows a 3D building panel system configured to form a portion of an overall building, the system comprising: a plurality of 3D building panels using a photocurable composite material, a plurality of connectors(30, 14 figure 6) coupled to one or more of the 3D building panels and configured to couple the 3D-building panels to each other, to one or more separate building components of the overall building, or to any combination thereof; and one or more load transfer components(18, figure 4) coupled to one or more of the 3D building panels and configured to transfer loads across the 3D building panels, wherein the one or more load transfer components are configured to form at least a portion of an overall super structure for the overall building.
Meredith does not show the 3D-printed integrated building panel system formed by 3D printing technology using a photocurable composite material, at least a portion of the building panels is integrally formed.
Dubov figures 1-7, shows building structures formed by a plurality of 3D-printed panels (200, 600, 700) formed by 3D printing technology (see product by process policy above) using a photocurable composite material, wherein each of the at least a portion of the plurality of 3D-printed panels is integrally formed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Meredith’s structures to show the 3D-printed integrated building panel system formed by 3D printing technology using a photocurable composite material, at least a portion of the building panels is integrally formed as taught by Dubov with a reasonable expectation of success in order to use 3D-printed insulating panels to fast form insulating walls for buildings.
Per claim 2, Meredith as modified further shows the 3D printed integrated building panel system forms a modular unit configured to be readily installed to the overall building during construction(able to function as claimed).
Per claim 3, Meredith as modified further shows one or more load transfer components include one or more horizontally oriented beams, one or more vertically oriented columnar members or both (18, figure 4, 20 figure 4, 14 figure 3).
Per claim 4, Meredith as modified further shows the one or more load transfer components combine to form a frame support super structure (figure 1 is a super structure as super is subjective).
Per claim 5, Meredith et al as modified further shows the one or more load transfer components include one or more steel I-beams, W-beams, hollow structural sections, or any combination thereof.
Per claim 6, Meredith et al as modified further shows the plurality of 3D-printed building panels includes at least one straight panel, at least one corner panel(3, 50) and at least one column hider panel(181, figure 19).
Per claim 7, Meredith et al as modified further shows at least one of the 3D-printed building panels includes one or more vertically oriented slots(figure 24 shows vertical oriented slots formed in parts 14, 32) formed into its top surface, its bottom surface, or both, and wherein the one or more vertically oriented slots are configured to accept one or more connectors inserted therein to facilitate coupling to one of the load transfer components.
Per claim 8, Meredith et al as modified shows all the claimed limitations except for at least one of the 3D-printed building panels includes an outer frame shell defining a geometric shape having an interior outer surface, an exterior outer surface, side edges between the interior and exterior outer surfaces, and an infill structure within
the outer frame shell, the infill structure forming internal cavities within the outer frame shell.
Dubov further shows an outer frame shell defining a geometric shape having an interior outer surface, an exterior outer surface, side edges between the interior and exterior outer surfaces, and an infill structure within the outer frame shell, the infill structure forming internal cavities within the outer frame shell.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Meredith’s modified structures to show at least one of the 3D-printed building panels includes an outer frame shell defining a geometric shape having an interior outer surface, an exterior outer surface, side edges between the interior and exterior outer surfaces, and an infill structure within the outer frame shell, the infill structure forming internal cavities within the outer frame shells taught by Dubov with a reasonable expectation of success in order easily form a 3D panel system with 3D technology and photocurable material.
Per claim 9, Meredith as modified further shows the 3D-printed integrated building panel system meets construction industry requirements regarding structural performance, thermal efficiency, fire performance, and waterproofing (inherently so as the building system is made to building codes).
Per claim 10, Meredith(figure 1) as modified further shows the one or more separate building components of the overall building include one or more window frames, door frames, traditional wall segments, foundations, or any combination thereof.
Per claim 11, Meredith as modified further shows at least a portion of the plurality of connectors are coupled directly to at least a portion of the one or more load transfer components(31 figure 24, 105 figure 20).
Per claim 12, Meredith as modified by Dubov further shows a building panel configured to form a portion of a 3D-printed integrated building panel system that is in turn configured to form a portion of an overall building, the building panel comprising: a 3D-printed structure formed by 3D printing technology using a photocurable composite
material, wherein the 3D-printed structure is integrally formed and includes:
an outer frame shell defining a geometric shape having an interior outer surface,
an exterior outer surface, and side edges between the interior outer surface and exterior
outer surface, and one or more coupling features formed along edges of the 3D-printed structure, wherein the one or more coupling features are configured to facilitate coupling the 3D- printed structure to a load transfer component within the 3D-printed integrated building panel system, the load transfer component being configured to form at least a portion of an overall super structure for the overall building.
Per claim 13, Meredith as modified further shows the 3D-printed structure further includes an infill structure within the outer frame shell, the infill structure forming internal cavities within the outer frame shell(per Dubov et al).
Per claim 14, Meredith as modified further shows the one or more coupling features formed in the 3D-printed structure include one or more vertically oriented slots formed into top and bottom edges thereof (figure 24 shows the slots to couple structures together with couplers 35).
Per claim 15, Meredith as modified further shows the one or more vertically oriented slots(where parts 35 inserted) are configured to accept one or more connectors (35) inserted therein to facilitate coupling the 3D-printed structure to the load transfer component.
Per claim 16, Meredith as modified further shows the building panel forms a modular unit configured to be readily installed to the 3D-printed integrated building panel system.
Per claim 17, Meredith as modified further shows the load transfer component is a horizontally oriented beam or a vertically oriented columnar member (figures 8, 19).
Per claim 18, Meredith as modified further shows the load transfer component is a steel I-beam, W-beam, or hollow structural section.
Per claim 19, Meredith as modified further shows the load transfer component.
Per claim 20, Meredith as modified further shows the interior outer surface, the exterior outer surface, or both are covered by one or more finishing coatings(10).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art shows different building systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHI D Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-6864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, BRIAN GLESSNER can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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.
/PHI D A/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633