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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of 1-4 in the reply filed on 7/7/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant thus elects the method of Group I, and the species drawn to an exhaust outlet in the top of a build box. Independent method claim 9 is generic to the exhaust and therefore, claim 9 and its dependent claims drawn to the elected subject matter (claims 9 and 12-15) are also treated as elected and will be examined.
Claims 5-8, 10-11, and 16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II and nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/7/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the build box body encompasses at least one part of bound build material powder and a body of unbound material powder; conducting a heating process in the processing chamber to cure the part.” One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that “bound build material powder” refers to powder bound or fused together and thus, may be considered to already be in a “cured” state. Additionally, the claim does not provide any basis for a binder or other component that would require a curing step. As a result, it is unclear what process is required by the “heating process in the processing chamber to cure the part,” and also unclear whether the curing step further/separately cures the bound build material (e.g. curing a binder or sintering) or whether the “part of bound build material” is drawn to an intermediate object formed by such curing. Additionally, if “to cure” is interpreted as a step of sintering or densifying, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the unbound build material powder would also fuse during such a process, and therefore, would need to be removed prior to heating. As a result, it is unclear what step and materials are required by the instantly claimed method. Claims 2-4 are indefinite based on their dependency.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1 and 9 each recite a “build box” but do not require any steps of “building” in said box. Therefore, the term is interpreted as only requiring the recited structure which is a box comprising a body, lid, and the stated components within and does not require that any “building” take place in said box.
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) 1-4, 9, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buller (US 11999110) in view of Woodard (US 2022/0008991).
With respect to Claims 1, 9, and 12, Buller teaches a method of providing an inert environment during a processing step, the method comprising a build chamber (i.e. build box), wherein the build box may be sealed and removed from a printer (col. 13, ln. 54-67), wherein the build box may comprise a door (col. 48, ln. 55-60), and wherein the build box encompasses at least one part bound or fused build material powder and a body of unbound build material powder. (col. 16, ln. 18-67; Fig. 4).
Buller further teaches a method of processing an additively manufactured part, which may include heating to cure and/or fuse build material powder, the method comprising a build box containing at least one part (finished or intermediate) of bound build material powder and a body of unbound build material powder, the method comprising flowing process gas over the top of the part and unbound powder, wherein the flowing process gas comprises providing process gas via a distribution plenum including at least one baffle that prevents direct impingement of the body of unbound build material powder by the flow of process gas and provides an exhaust flow. (Fig. 4; col. 25, ln. 1-50; col. 18, ln. 24-60). Buller also teaches that one or more gas inlets may be provided at the top of the build box. (Fig. 4; col. 25, ln. 1-50).
Thus, Buller teaches a method comprising a moveable build box that may comprise a door (i.e. lid) for sealing, wherein the build box encompasses at least one part of bound material powder and a body of unbound material powder, conducting a heating process in the processing chamber to cure/fuse the part, during at least a portion of the heating process, delivering a flow of process gas to an interior of the build box and causing an outflow of exhaust gas from the build box, and wherein the flow or process gas may be delivered from a top and/or side of the build box and may provided via a distribution plenum including at least one baffle that prevent direct impingement of the bound of unbound material by the flow or process gas and causes an outflow of gas through an exhaust outlet in the build box.
Buller does not specifically teach wherein the process gas provides an inert environment and wherein at least one gas inlet and at least one outlet is provided in the top of the build box.
Buller teaches a range of additive manufacturing techniques, including many comprising/requiring heating to cure, fuse, and/or sinter build material powder and in particular, encompasses binder jetting additive manufacturing wherein a binder is selectively deposited to bind portions of build material powder and is subsequently cure and/or sintered (col. 20, ln. 15-54; col. 16, ln. 18 to col. 17, ln. 27); however, the reference does not specifically teach disposing the build box in a process chamber of an oven as instantly claimed.
Woodard teaches a method of debinding and/or sintering green parts (i.e. at least one part of bound build material powder) formed by additive manufacturing, the method comprising providing the one or more green parts into a retort (i.e. build box) having a sealing door/lid, the retort disposed within the processing chamber of an oven having an ambient processing environment, wherein the build box is supplied with one or more gas inlets for providing inert processing gas and one or more exhaust gas outlets. (para. 10-14, 20-24, 68, 80-85, 100; Figs. 1-3, 7). Woodard teaches process gas/inlets in a variety of locations including the top, side, and bottom of the build box and/or furnace. (Figs. 1-3, 7).
Thus, Buller and Woodard are both drawn to processing bound build material powder parts, including heating and flowing inert gas. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Buller, to dispose the build box in a processing chamber of an oven that may have an ambient processing environment, as taught by Woodard, in order to enable processing of the build material powder, including heating the bound build material powder parts “to cure” the parts. In other words, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that additively manufactured bound build material parts (e.g. green parts) are conventionally subjected to debinding and/or sintering to fuse and/or densify the build material powder making up the part. Buller teaches a build box comprising environmental control and Woodard teaches a method wherein green parts are heated and debound and/or sintered in a chamber having the same functionality. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the methods of Buller and Woodard in order to reduce the number of devices needed to carry out such a method and prevent unwanted contamination and/or breakage by eliminating the need to remove parts from the build box prior to curing/heating/sintering.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Buller to have a lid/door as taught by Woodard in order to enable easier loading/unloading of parts. Furthermore, in view of the teachings of Buller and Woodard, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to dispose process gas inlets and exhausts outlets through the top of the build box. There exist a limited number of positions for such inlets/outlets and the prior art teach the ability to place process gas inlets and outlets in differing positions with a predictable result of success. MPEP 2144. Finally, it would have been obvious to select an inert gas, as taught by Woodard, as the process gas of Buller, in order to provide an inert environment in the build box to limit contamination and unwanted reactions (e.g. oxidation) of the build material powder.
With respect to Claims 2 and 13, Buller teaches wherein the method may comprise providing a valve. (col. 12, ln. 25-28). Similarly, Woodard teaches wherein the method may comprise providing one or more valves to control the environment within the build box and/or processing chamber of the oven. (para. 87, 89, 105, 111, 180-183). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a valve preventing gas backflow at the exhaust valve in order to allow enhanced control of the environment within the build box.
With respect to Claims 3 and 14, Buller teaches an exhaust outlet configured to remove gas from the build box/chamber, and deemed to comprise an outlet tube having a length-to-average-cross-section area ratio that in conjunction with the outflow of the exhaust substantially prevent backflow through the outlet tube. (Fig. 4). See also MPEP 2112.01.
With respect to Claims 4 and 15, Buller discusses controlling cooling parameters in the method. (see, e.g., col. 29, ln. 49-51; col. 64, ln. 30-34). Woodard teaches a method comprising a sintering oven comprising a build box within, wherein the structure of the assembly minimizes the need for water cooling and may comprise an air injection system. (para. 91, 98, 111). In view of the teachings of Buller and Woodard, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Buller in view of Woodard to comprise a step of cooling the build box using a flow/injection of ambient air over the build box, in order to obtain desired temperatures while eliminating the need for water cooling.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sachs (US 2019/0210277) in view of Buller (US 11999110) and Woodard (US 2022/0008991).
With respect to Claims 1, 9, and 12, Sachs teaches a method of providing a controlled inert environment during processing steps, the method comprising a print box (i.e. build box), wherein the build box, after a step of additive manufacturing such that it comprises at least one part bound or fused build material powder and a body of unbound build material powder may be moved within a furnace/oven and subjected to a heating step at a temperature sufficient to cure a binder defining the part, wherein at least the additive manufacturing portions of the method may be carried out in a controlled (e.g. inert) atmosphere. (para. 83, 94, 135, 161-163; Fig. 4).
Thus, Sachs teaches a method comprising disposing a build box in a processing chamber of an oven, wherein the build box has a body and comprises at least one part of bound build material and a body of unbound build material powder, conducting a heating process in the processing chamber to heat and to cure the part, and wherein the reference recognizes the benefit of a controlled, inert, processing environment. Sachs does not specifically teach a wherein the build box comprises a lid and wherein the build box comprises a flow or process gas to provide an inert environment and an exhaust.
Buller further teaches a method of processing an additively manufactured part, which may include heating to cure and/or fuse build material powder, the method comprising a build box containing at least one part (finished or intermediate) of bound build material powder and a body of unbound build material powder, the method comprising flowing process gas over the top of the part and unbound powder, wherein the flowing process gas comprises providing process gas via a distribution plenum including at least one baffle that prevents direct impingement of the body of unbound build material powder by the flow of process gas and provides an exhaust flow. (Fig. 4; col. 25, ln. 1-50; col. 18, ln. 24-60). Buller also teaches that one or more gas inlets may be provided at the top of the build box. (Fig. 4; col. 25, ln. 1-50).
Thus, Buller teaches a method comprising a moveable build box that may comprise a door (i.e. lid) for sealing, wherein the build box encompasses at least one part of bound material powder and a body of unbound material powder, conducting a heating process in the processing chamber to cure/fuse the part, during at least a portion of the heating process, delivering a flow of process gas to an interior of the build box and causing an outflow of exhaust gas from the build box, and wherein the flow or process gas may be delivered from a top and/or side of the build box and may provided via a distribution plenum including at least one baffle that prevent direct impingement of the bound of unbound material by the flow or process gas and causes an outflow of gas through an exhaust outlet in the build box.
Woodard teaches a method of debinding and/or sintering green parts (i.e. at least one part of bound build material powder) formed by additive manufacturing, the method comprising providing the one or more green parts into a retort (i.e. build box) having a sealing door/lid, the retort disposed within the processing chamber of an oven having an ambient processing environment, wherein the build box is supplied with one or more gas inlets for providing inert processing gas and one or more exhaust gas outlets. (para. 10-14, 20-24, 68, 80-85, 100; Figs. 1-3, 7). Woodard teaches process gas/inlets in a variety of locations including the top, side, and bottom of the build box and/or furnace. (Figs. 1-3, 7).
Thus, Sachs, Buller and Woodard are both drawn to processing bound build material powder parts, including heating and flowing inert gas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sachs to enable sealing of the build box, as taught by Buller, in order to prevent contamination and/or damage to the contents therein when moved from the additive manufacturing apparatus to the furnace/oven. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sachs in view of Buller to use a reversible door/lid for sealing the print box in order to enable easier sealing and unsealing to remove the part(s).
It would have been obvious to modify the method of Sachs to provide an inert process gas to form an inert atmosphere within the build box, as taught by Woodard, in order to limit contamination and unwanted reactions (e.g. oxidation) of the build material powder. Furthermore, in view of the teachings of Buller and Woodard, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to dispose process gas inlets and exhausts outlets through the top of the build box. There exist a limited number of positions for such inlets/outlets and the prior art teach the ability to place process gas inlets and outlets in differing positions with a predictable result of success. MPEP 2144.
Finally, with respect to Claims 1-2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sachs wherein the flowing of inert process gas comprises providing process gas via a distribution plenum including at least one baffle that prevents direct impingement of the body of unbound build material powder by the flow of process gas and provides an exhaust flow, as taught by Buller, in order to not disturb the unbound powder and part therein during heating/curing.
With respect to Claims 2 and 13, Buller teaches wherein the method may comprise providing a valve. (col. 12, ln. 25-28). Similarly, Woodard teaches wherein the method may comprise providing one or more valves to control the environment within the build box and/or processing chamber of the oven. (para. 87, 89, 105, 111, 180-183). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sachs in view of Buller and Woodard to include a valve preventing gas backflow at the exhaust valve in order to allow enhanced control of the environment within the build box.
With respect to Claims 3 and 14, Buller teaches an exhaust outlet configured to remove gas from the build box/chamber, and deemed to comprise an outlet tube having a length-to-average-cross-section area ratio that in conjunction with the outflow of the exhaust substantially prevent backflow through the outlet tube. (Fig. 4). See also MPEP 2112.01. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sachs in view of Buller and Woodard to include an exhaust outlet, as taught by Buller, in order to better control the environment within the build box.
With respect to Claims 4 and 15, Buller discusses controlling cooling parameters in the method. (see, e.g., col. 29, ln. 49-51; col. 64, ln. 30-34). Woodard teaches a method comprising a sintering oven comprising a build box within, wherein the structure of the assembly minimizes the need for water cooling and may comprise an air injection system. (para. 91, 98, 111). In view of the teachings of Buller and Woodard, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Sachs in view of Buller and Woodard to comprise a step of cooling the build box using a flow/injection of ambient air over the build box, in order to obtain desired temperatures while eliminating the need for water cooling.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. GO (US 2021/0046519) drawn to a method comprising a chamber having a process gas inlet and an outlet exhaust and comprising bound build material parts and unbound build material, but differing from claim 1 in that it is drawn to direct impingement of the gas on the unbound build material.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN A HEVEY whose telephone number is (571)270-0361. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/JOHN A HEVEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights