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
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on August 13, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-16 are pending. Claims 14-16 have been withdrawn. Claim 1 has been amended. A rejection under 35 USC 112b is added in view of the amendment and Applicant’s arguments. The prior art rejection has been revised in view of the amendment.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the melt cushions must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
As noted below, Applicant is disputing whether the recited melt cushions are melt cushions or shooting pots. There are no drawings depicting the melt cushions which would have resolved the alleged ambiguity.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 3 recites, “each of the at least two build materials is melted.” The word “is” should be “are” to agree with the plurality of “each of the at least two build materials.” Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-13 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 in part recites, “each of the at least two build materials is melted and provided as a melt cushion… wherein, for each build material, only the build material volume derived for a respective build portion is melted and provided as the melt cushion for the respective build material, wherein the melt cushion for the respective build material is emptied during discharge of the respective build material, and wherein new build material is provided and/or melted after the melt cushion is emptied.”
The above claim limitation is based on the following section of p. 5 of Applicant’s disclosure (lines 23-30), “For example, the build material can be prepared discontinuously in a plasticizing unit, preferably according to a corresponding specification regarding the volume, for example from a data set, and provided as a melt cushion. Preferably, it can be provided that only a corresponding volume of build material is to be melted for a specific build portion. The melt cushion is then emptied during the discharge process. Afterwards, "new" build material can be provided and/or melted again. The melted build material can then be fed into the nozzle as soon as build material has been discharged from the nozzle. The nozzle is therefore always filled with build material.”
The specification appears to be disclosing a melt cushion with the melted build material in the melt cushion being displaced as material is injected, with new material filling in the space, hence the “nozzle is therefore always filled with build material.”
Regarding this claim limitation, Applicant argues that the melt cushion is not “a residual amount of melt that remains in the barrel after an injection stroke.” (See p. 6-7 of Applicant’s August 13, 2026 remarks). Applicant appears to be arguing that instead of a melt cushion, which is such a residual amount of melt and space for it, Applicant is reciting a shooting pot (See Belzile (US 2018/0345558)). A shooting pot, similar to Applicant’s argument, has a shooting pot cavity. Melted material fills the entire volume of the shooting pot cavity, the entire volume is ejected during injection, and then the shooting pot refills. A shooting pot is inconsistent with p. 5 of Applicant’s disclosure because the nozzle in not always filled with build material when the shooting pot is empty.
Accordingly, given the tension between the term Applicant uses, the disclosure, and Applicant’s argument, it is unclear if the term “melt cushion” refers to a melt cushion or refers to a shooting pot. For the purpose of examination, both interpretations are within the scope of claim 1.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swanson (US 2014/0252684) in view of Fakhouri (US 2021/0016237), Schmidt (US 2021/0170656), and Hedge (US 2023/0002558), and Morrison (US 2022/0288842).
Regarding claim 1, Swanson discloses a method for producing at least one component by means of an additive manufacturing method or a 3D-printing process (abstract), comprising at least two build materials wherein each of the at least two build materials [are] melted and provided into a respective separate nozzle per build material (multiple print heads, respective printing of part material and support material, [0004]), each build material having a critical residence time T_x_max in which no degradation or thermal stress of the build material occurs as a result of a residence time (inherent property of materials in nozzles in this context), said method comprising the steps of.- providing data for producing the component ([0005]), - carrying out at least one adaptation of the data (purging at each layer reduces residence time, [0032]), such that the respective resulting residence times t_x are less than the respective critical residence times T_x_max of the build materials (purging at each layer reduces residence time, [0032]).
Swanson teaches a method substantially as claimed. Swanson does not disclose dividing the component into at least one build portion having corresponding build portion information, deriving, for each build material, at least one build material volume and at least one average discharge rate per build portion from the build portion information, wherein, for each build material, only the build material volume derived for a respective build portion is melted and provided as the melt cushion for the respective build material, wherein the melt cushion for the respective build material is emptied during discharge of the respective build material, and wherein new build material is provided and/or melted after the melt cushion is emptied, calculating at least one build time per build portion and at least one resulting residence time tx for each build material from the build material volume and the discharge rate, wherein the resulting residence time t_x is the time, during which a build material is melted in a machine under thermal stress and remains in a heated nozzle at a temperature until the build material is discharged, e comparing the resulting residence times tx with the respective critical residence times T_x_max of the build materials, if at least one resulting residence time tx exceeds the respective critical residence time T_x_max of the corresponding build material, using the data to produce the component.
However, in the same field of endeavor of FDM (extruding from a printhead to produce 3D structures layer by layer, [0003]) and solving the same problem of preventing problems in the material due to excessive time at an elevated temperature ([0061-62] [0081]), Fakhouri teaches providing data for producing the component (step 702, [0078], Fig. 7)), - dividing the component into at least one build portion having corresponding build portion information ([0078]), - deriving, for each build material, at least one build material volume and at least one average discharge rate per build portion from the build portion information (steps 704, 706, [0079-80], Fig. 7), - calculating at least one build time per build portion and at least one resulting residence time t_x for each build material from the build material volume and the discharge rate ([0081]), wherein the resulting residence time t_x is the time, during which a build material is melted in a machine under thermal stress and remains in a heated nozzle at a temperature until the build material is discharged (definition of residence time, process in [0081]), - comparing the resulting residence times t_x with the respective critical residence times T_x_max of the build materials (residence time as set compared to lookup table, [0081]; residence time must be less than gel time, [0061-62]), - carrying out at least one adaptation of the data (mixer rotational speed set to ensure residence time is as desired, [0081]), such that the respective resulting residence times t_x are less than the respective critical residence times T_x_max of the build materials, if at least one resulting residence time t_x exceeds the respective critical residence time T_x_max of the corresponding build material (residence time as modified based on lookup table to ensure it is shorter than the gelling time, [0061-62] [0081]), - using the data to produce the component (steps 710, 712, 714, 716, 718, 720, 722, [0082-87], Fig. 7).
Additionally, in the same field of endeavor of extrusion (abstract) and solving the same problem of preventing problems in the material due to excessive time at an elevated temperature ([0009]), Schmidt teaches herein the build materials are melted and each build material is provided as a melt cushion and is then fed into a respective nozzle ([0004]), wherein, for each build material, only the build material volume derived for a respective build portion is melted and provided as the melt cushion for the respective build material (material volume derived to provide the respective build portion, shot size for proper metering, [0004-06]), wherein the melt cushion for the respective build material is emptied during discharge of the respective build material (portion of the material in the melt cushion area is injected as part of the injection process, [0006]), and wherein new build material is provided and/or melted after the melt cushion is emptied (material displaced by screw to fill the melt cushion, [0004]).
Additionally, in the same field of endeavor of FDM printing ([0006]), and solving the same problem of preventing problems in the material due to excessive time at an elevated temperature ([0002] [0004]), Hedge teaches each build material having a critical residence time T_x_max in which no degradation or thermal stress of the build material occurs as a result of a residence time (Residence time must be optimized, because excessive residence time will result in loss of flow due to chain extension and increasing viscosity, [0004]).
Additionally, in the same field of endeavor of additive manufacturing by extrusion with a plastic material, (abstract) and solving the same problem of preventing problems in the material due to excessive time at an elevated temperature ([0057]), Morrison teaches each build material having a critical residence time T_x_max in which no degradation or thermal stress of the build material occurs as a result of a residence time (plastic material remains in the heating zone 43 for a comparatively short period to avoid degradation of the plastic material, [0057]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Swanson to provide each build material as a melt cushion because [0004] of Schmidt teaches that doing so helps to prevent the screw from bottoming out with the injection stroke. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the method of Swanson to recalculate the production process as taught by Fakhouri because [0004] of Hedge teaches that residence time must be optimized because excessive residence time will result in loss of flow (must be under T_max) and [0081] of Fakhouri teaches a lookup table with concern over a maximum residence time resulting in gelling [0061-62] and Fakhouri teaches a method of controlling residence time by reviewing the construction plan and making adjustments, including to the speed of a mixer, ([0081], Fig. 7). Accordingly, for part materials made as in Fakhouri, it would have been obvious to combine these teachings because [0057] of Morrison teaches that plastic materials can only remain in the heating zone for a comparatively short period of time to avoid degradation. All of these references address the problem of excessive time at elevated temperatures in the nozzle and their teachings are combinable in addressing that problem.
Regarding claim 2, Swanson as modified teaches wherein the adaptation is carried out in such a way that at least one of the at least one build portion and the build portion information are changed (purge planning changes the build in that the purge tower is also built, Swanson [0030] [0032] [0034] [0084], the purging reduces residence build time, Swanson [0032]).
Regarding claim 3, Swanson as modified teaches wherein the adaptation is carried out such that at least one resulting residence time t_x is changed (purging reduces residence time, Swanson [0032]; changing the mixer speed changes residence time, Fakhouri [0081]).
Regarding claim 4, Swanson as modified teaches wherein the resulting residence time t_x is reduced; by producing at least one additional element (building purge tower reduces residence time, Swanson [0032]).
Regarding claim 5, Swanson as modified teaches wherein the additional element is at least one further component which is at least partially inverse to the component (purge tower built by back and forth switching, producing build material on the purge tower when support material is part of the build plan for that layer, producing support material on the purge tower when the build material is part of the build plan for that layer, thereby producing an inverse component, Swanson [0084]).
Regarding claim 6, Swanson as modified teaches wherein a build material is deposited in at least one build portion first on the additional element (back and forth switching, build material is built on the purge tower before production of the build material for the object layer, Swanson [0084]; this is true vice-versa for the support material, Swanson [0084]).
Regarding claim 7, Swanson as modified teaches wherein the additional element is implemented in the component or is removed after the component has been produced (purge tower 24 is recycled or discarded, Swanson [0055]).
Regarding claim 8, Swanson as modified teaches wherein the adaptation is carried out such that at least one critical residence time T_x_max is changed (in stand-by mode, the print head is cooled down, which prevents thermal degradation because it increases T_x_max, Swanson [0028]).
Regarding claim 9, Swanson as modified teaches wherein the critical residence time T_x_max is increased; by reducing, the temperature of at least one build material for at least a certain period of time (in stand-by mode, the print head is cooled down, which prevents thermal degradation because it increases T_x_max, Swanson [0028]).
Regarding claim 10, Swanson as modified teaches wherein the adaptation comprises a plurality of adaptations, wherein several adaptations are combined with each other (change in mixer speed, Fakhouri [0081]; Purging, Swanson [0084]; cooling, Swanson [0028]).
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swanson (US 2014/0252684) in view of Fakhouri (US 2021/0016237), Schmidt (US 2021/0170656), and Hedge (US 2023/0002558), and Morrison (US 2022/0288842) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Minardi (US 2017/0052516).
Regarding claim 11. Swanson as modified teaches a method substantially as claimed. Swanson does not disclose wherein monitoring of at least one of at least one of the resulting residence times t_x and at least one of the flow properties of the build materials is carried out during the production of the component.
However, in the same field of endeavor of 3D printing by extrusion and managing residence time ([0014], [0108]), Minardi teaches wherein monitoring of at least one of at least one of the resulting residence times t_x and at least one of the flow properties of the build materials is carried out during the production of the component (timer tracking how long the material has been mixed, [0108]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the method of Swanson to track the passage of time because [0108] of Minardi teaches that doing so helps determine when a mixture needs to be purged to prevent a clog.
Regarding claim 12, Swanson as modified teaches wherein if at least one resulting residence time t_x exceeds the corresponding critical residence time T_x_max of a build material or if the flow properties of at least one build material change, the build material is discharged, new build material is provided or the build material is discharged and new build material is provided (mixture is purged before a cure time associated with the mixture is reached, Minardi [0108]).
Regarding claim 13, Swanson as modified teaches wherein at least one flushing process is initiated if at least one of the following occurs: at least one resulting residence time t_x exceeds the corresponding critical residence time T_x_max of a build material, or if the flow properties change (mixture is purged before a cure time associated with the mixture is reached, Minardi [0108]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 13, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the modification in view of Schmidt does not remedy the deficiencies of Swanson because when Applicant recites a “melt cushion” Applicant does not mean a melt cushion but a shooting pot. Applicant describes the cavity of the melt cushion emptying, then replenished, but somehow the nozzle is also continually full (see p. 5 of Applicant’s disclosure). Perhaps there was a translation issue, and a shooting pot, which would be in-line with Applicant’s arguments, was the intended disclosure. However, claim 1 recites a melt cushion. For the sake of a saving construction, and to resolve the ambiguity, claim 1 is interpreted as including a melt cushion and ordinary melt cushion function, with emptying referring to the material in the melt cushion being completely displaced. Accordingly, Applicant’s argument is unpersuasive because it relies on unrecited subject matter, namely, a shooting pot. Of note, shooting pots are known structures in an injection molding device (see Belzile (US 2018/0345558)), and would have been an ordinary inclusion with the method of Swanson.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant argues that some of the references are not relevant because the particular problem from prolonged exposure at a high temperature is something other than polymer degradation due to heat. This argument is not persuasive. First, because [0057] of Morrison teaches that prolonged exposure at a high temperature causes polymer degradation and this problem must be guarded against. Second, each of the references each relate to solving the problem of such prolonged exposure. This is either by noting the problem, or by tracking the time and providing for a response to prevent the problem. It is not teaching away when the particular problem for the melt is something other than polymer degradation when there is a problem that is ameliorated or prevented the same way, namely by tracking residence time and ensuring it does not get too long.
Applicant’s remaining arguments are based on the alleged deficiencies noted above and are similarly unpersuasive.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J CHIDIAC whose telephone number is (571)272-6131. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 6:00 PM.
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, Sam Xiao Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/NICHOLAS J CHIDIAC/ Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/EMMANUEL S LUK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights