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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is a final Office Action in response to a non-final Office Action reply filed 1/21/26 in which claims 1, 12 and 20-21 were amended and claims 22-28 were added.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8, 10, 12 and 20-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gale et al (US 6287428, already of record) in view of Park et al (KR 20170015442).
For claims 1, 5, 22-23 and 27, Gale et al teach a porous mold for producing a molded fiber part comprising: a 3D porous body having at least a first body surface and a second body surface not coplanar with the first body surface (Fig. 1 – element 21, col 2 ln 66 to col 3 ln 6, Examiner notes that various areas of mold surface 21 are not coplanar with each other); and a continuous, porous, fiber contact screen (element 31) on the first body surface and the second body surface, the fiber contact screen containing a plurality of pores in fluid communication with the 3D porous body (Figs 1 & 2, col 3 lns 10-16 & col 4 lns 15-26), the fiber contact screen created from a set of layers of material bonded together in a continuous fill pattern that, where adjacent to the first body surface, is orthogonal to the first body surface and where adjacent to the second body surface is orthogonal to the second body surface, each layer in the set of layers follows the contour of the 3D porous body (Figs 2 & 3, col 3 ln 58 to col 4 ln 19), wherein the porous mold further comprises a machine attachment surface shaped to engage a molded fiber processing machine and allow fluid flow between the 3D porous body and the molded fiber processing machine (Fig. 4, col 6 lns 26-28); wherein at least one of the 3D porous body and the continuous, porous, fiber contact screen is stable at a temperature of 300 F (col 4 lns 52-54) which is about 149 C.
Gale et al do not teach an exterior fiber contact surface of the fiber contact screen is formed by an orthogonally printed outermost layer that follows a contour of the 3D porous body.
However, in a related field of endeavor pertaining to a multiaxial 3D printer, Parker et al teach 3D printing can performed by controlling the print head and the work table to move relatively along multiple axes of 5 or more axes, so that not only flat surfaces, but also curved or angled surfaces can be printed smoothly with high precision (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Parker et al with those of Gale et al by forming an exterior fiber contact surface of the fiber contact screen by an orthogonally printed outermost layer that follows a contour of the 3D porous body in order to have the surface be printed smoothly with high precision as suggested by Parker et al (see citation above). It would follow that the exterior fiber contact surface is not formed by portions of multiple 2D printed layers.
For claims 3, 6, 8 and 10, Gale et al teach the 3D porous body is created from a set of layers of material bonded together in a fill pattern that allows fluid flow through the 3D porous body; at least one of the 3D porous body and the continuous, porous, fiber contact screen was created as a single printed part by a multi-axis 3D printer; and the fiber contact screen is created by an additive manufacturing device (see citations above).
For claims 12 and 24, the apparatus used by the previous combination would have a computer-readable medium storing computer-readable instructions which, when acted upon by a 3D printer, cause the 3D printer to create a porous mold component, the porous mold component comprising: a continuous, porous, fiber contact screen to be assembled on a 3D porous body; the 3D porous body having at least a first body surface and a second body surface not coplanar with the first body surface; and the continuous, porous, fiber contact screen containing a plurality of pores in fluid communication with the 3D porous body, the fiber contact screen created from a set of layers of material bonded together in a continuous fill pattern that when assembled with 3D porous body is orthogonal to the first body surface where adjacent to the first body surface and where adjacent to the second body surface is orthogonal to the second body surface, wherein an exterior fiber contact surface of the fiber contact screen is formed by an orthogonally printed outermost layer that follows a contour of the 3D porous body; and the exterior fiber contact surface is not formed by portions of multiple 2D printed layers (see citations above).
For claims 20, 25 and 28 the previous combination teaches a porous mold for producing a molded fiber part comprising: a 3D porous body having a plurality of external surfaces that are not coplanar; and a continuous, porous, fiber contact screen on the plurality of external surfaces, the fiber contact screen containing a plurality of pores in fluid communication with the 3D porous body, the fiber contact screen created from a set of layers of material bonded together in a continuous fill pattern that, where adjacent to the plurality of external surfaces, is orthogonal to the external surfaces, wherein the porous mold further comprises a machine attachment surface shaped to engage a molded fiber processing machine and allow fluid flow between the 3D porous body and the molded fiber processing machine; and an exterior fiber contact surface of the fiber contact screen is formed by an orthogonally printed outermost layer that follows a contour of the 3D porous body; and the exterior fiber contact surface is not formed by portions of multiple 2D printed layers (see citations above).
For claims 21 and 26, the previous combination teaches a porous mold for producing a molded fiber part comprising: a 3D porous body; and a continuous, porous, fiber contact screen having a 3D external fiber contacting surface formed by a single 3D printed layer of material that follows a contour of the 3D porous body; and the exterior fiber contact surface is not formed by portions of multiple 2D printed layers (see citations above).
Claims 4, 7, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gale et al (US 6287428, already of record) in view of Park et al (KR 20170015442) and further in view of Chou et al (EP 3878889).
The previous combination teaches the invention as discussed above. In addition, Gale et al teach using nylon to form the porous body and contact screen (col 3 lns 45-50)
The previous combination does not teach at least one of the 3D porous body and the continuous, porous, fiber contact screen is made of polyetherimide; at least one of the 3D porous body and the continuous, porous, fiber contact screen is made of PLA; the porous mold is created by a 3D extrusion printer; or the 3D porous body or the fiber contact screen or both are made of ULTEM.
However, in a related field of endeavor pertaining to thermoplastic polyamideimide (PAI) polymers for use in an additive manufacturing method, Chou et al teach FFF (Fused Filament Fabrication) is one of the most popular techniques of additive manufacturing along with SLS (Selective Laser Sintering) ([0002]) and the industrial market offers a broad variety of materials for additive manufacturing including PLA, nylon, polyetherimide ([0003]) and ULTEM ([0105]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chou et al with those of the previous combination by substituting Chou et al’s materials and technique for the previous combination’s since they perform equivalent functions, and have at least one of the 3D porous body and the continuous, porous, fiber contact screen be made of polyetherimide; at least one of the 3D porous body and the continuous, porous, fiber contact screen be made of PLA; the porous mold be created by a 3D extrusion printer; or the 3D porous body or the fiber contact screen or both be made of ULTEM.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/21/26 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 extension fee 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 JAMES SANDERS whose telephone number is (571)270-7007. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 11-7.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Galen Hauth can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES SANDERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights