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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claim 1 has been amended. The previous rejection under 35 USC 112b is withdrawn in view of the amendment. The rejection under 35 USC 112a is maintained. The rejection under 35 USC 103 is modified in view of the amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claims 1-20 recite a sensor that detects a ratio of a degraded powder material to a non-degraded powder material in a first powder material.
At best, [0247] describes the degradation and perhaps could be used to choose a sensor that measures some proxy for degradation that could be related to the ratio. Such a sensor and method, such as an oxygen sensor detecting that the oxygen level has gotten too high, however, would operate by a different process than the recited method. [0218] teaches a sensor that measures an amount of powder.
The claims recite any sensor that can measure the ratio of degraded to non-degraded powder. The nature of this invention is for a sensor in a powder conveyance system, such as those listed in [0122]. References such as Mark (US 2019/0255612; US 11,913,724) teach moisture sensors to detect reduction-oxidation equilibrium points [0110-11] to determine how much the environment favors degradation (oxidation). Perhaps this information in combination with other data could be used to derive the ratio of degraded powder to non-degraded powder, but this is not a connection explicit in the reference nor taught by Applicant. At best, [0118] of Rushton (US 2022/0247180; US 12,121,967) teaches using big data analysis tools to track key process variables to determine the amount of metal powder recycling that is appropriate. This analysis would lead to ratios and proportions of the virgin powder needed, which could be phrased in terms of the ratio of degraded to non-degraded powder within the recycled powder passing through the powder conveyance system. However, [0019] of Rushton teaches assessing with substitutional element chemistry, which would test for powder being degraded (having other elements in the metal powder). This relies on processes not taught by Applicant. A person of ordinary skill in this art would have an understanding of powder conveyances, associated sensors, and the challenges of powder oxidation or other degradation. Sensor output is predictable in this art area, and perhaps kinetics would be understandable or rates of degradation. The inventor does not provide any direction as to how sensor information would detect the ratio as claimed. Applicant has not presented an example of such a sensor. Considerable experimentation would be needed to determine if one of the types of sensors taught by Applicant in [0122] could be used to measure something that in turn, through calibration, could be used to derive an imputed ratio of degraded to nondegraded powder.
In short, Applicant recites a method with a sensor detecting a ratio of degraded to non-degraded powder in a powder conveyance system without teaching what the sensor is measuring to figure that out or how that ratio could be derived from various measurable properties of the conveyance system. The prior art teaches sensors in powder conveyance systems, as well as concern over powder degradation, including by oxidation. Perhaps a detailed knowledge of the state of the powder conveyance system and the kinetics of the degrading reaction (such as oxidation) could be modeled and understood to derive the claimed ratio, but that is well beyond what Applicant has disclosed. Accordingly, these claims have not been enabled by Applicant’s disclosure.
Further, the claims would apply to any sensor. The scope would include a sensor measuring a property that has not been disclosed by Applicant in any form. Applicant’s disclosure fails to enable the breadth of these claims.
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.
Claim 8 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, “a sensor.” Claim 8, which depends from claim 1, also recites “a sensor.” Further, the sensor of claim 8 is performing the same function, detecting the ratio of the degraded portion of the second powder material to the remaining portion of the second powder material. It is unclear if claim 8 refers to the same sensor or a different sensor. For the purpose of examination, claim 8 is considered to refer to the same sensor.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwab (US 2024/0157447) in view of Kopschinski (US 2024/0269751) and Rushton (US 2022/0274180).
Regarding claim 1, Schwab discloses a device for three-dimensional (3D) printing a three-dimensional (3D) object (additive manufacturing system 200, [0014] [0024], Fig. 2), the device comprising: a buffer reservoir configured to enclose a first powder material to be used for the 3D printing (virgin powder in one of the powder source containers 210A-D, [0024] [0034], Fig. 2); configured to provide the first powder material to a second powder material to generate a starting material for the 3D printing (mix of virgin powder and unused powder that has been recycled in one of the powder source containers 210A-D, [0024] [0034], Fig. 2), the second powder material being previously used in the 3D printing or in another 3D printing operation (unused powder, [0024] [0034], Fig. 2); a powder conveyance system operatively coupled to the valve (loop shown in Fig. 2 extends through powder source containers, [0024] [0034], Fig. 2), the powder conveyance system being configured to allow the starting material to pass therethrough (unused powder enters, is mixed, and is deployed for printing, [0024] [0034], Fig. 2); wherein at least a portion of the second powder material is degraded during its passage in the powder conveyance system or during the 3D printing (effect of oxygen on the powder, [0031]); and wherein the system is configured to facilitate addition of the first material to the powder conveyance system if a ratio of the degraded portion of the second powder material to the remaining portion of the second powder material is above a threshold (mixture with more virgin powder based on oxidation resistance, [0027]; the system’s ability to adapt the blend constitutes the ability to function as recited and therefore is configured to do so) detected by a sensor operatively couped to a controller that actuates the valve (a number of sensors for the stored environment and/or build environment to detect degradation and usability of the powder, Schwab [0021] [0026-29]; this is utilized for a use based model using machine learning techniques).
Schwab teaches a system substantially as claimed. Schwab does not disclose how blended virgin and unused (recycled) powder is added to a powder source container 210A-D. Accordingly, Schwab does not disclose a valve operatively coupled to the buffer reservoir and configured to provide the first powder material to a second powder material to generate a starting material for the 3D printing, a valve operatively coupled to the buffer reservoir and configured to provide the first powder material to a second powder material to generate a starting material for the 3D printing. (permission of powder from supply 29 to reservoir 7, [0055], Fig. 1), and wherein the valve is configured to facilitate addition of the first material to the powder conveyance system if a ratio of the degraded portion of the second powder material to the remaining portion of the second powder material is above a threshold. It is not explicit that the sensors of Schwab are detecting a ratio as claimed.
However, in the same field of endeavor of handling recycled powder for an additive manufacturing system (additive manufacturing machines 3, abstract, [0053], Fig. 1), Kopschinski teaches a buffer reservoir configured to enclose a first powder material to be used for the 3D printing (raw material powder supply 29, [0055], Fig. 1); a valve operatively coupled to the buffer reservoir and configured to provide the first powder material to a second powder material to generate a starting material for the 3D printing (permission of powder from supply 29 to pass to reservoir 7, [0055], Fig. 1), the second powder material being previously used in the 3D printing or in another 3D printing operation (reservoir 7 also fed by raw material power recycling stream 31, [0055], Fig. 1); a powder conveyance system operatively coupled to the valve (loop from each machine 3 to recycle stream 31 to reservoir 7 and fed back to machines 3, [0055], Fig. 1) and configured to allow the starting material to pass therethrough (reservoir 7 that has been filled with virgin and recycled powder and passes through from there, [0055-56], Fig. 1); and wherein the valve is configured to facilitate addition of the first material to the powder conveyance system if a ratio of the degraded portion of the second powder material to the remaining portion of the second powder material is above a threshold (capable of controlling proportion of recycled and virgin powder added to reservoir and therefore configured to, [0055-56], Fig. 1).
Additionally, in the same field of endeavor of additive manufacturing with recycling of powder, detecting degradation and additions of appropriate levels of virgin powder, [0004-05]), Rushton teaches a ratio above a threshold detected by a sensor configured to detect the ratio of the degraded portion of the second powder material to the remaining portion of the second powder material (optical assessment with substitutional chemistry detects proportion of degradation (addition of other elements getting into the powder), [0019-20], with big data analysis tools to determine the amount of metal powder recycling that is appropriate (how oxidized / whether it is overly oxidized), [0087] [0118]; the amount of metal powder recycling that is appropriate would include the ratio of the degraded to non-degraded powder so that the virgin powder would restore the non-degraded portion to the appropriate amount, [0087]).
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 system of Schwab such that storage containers 210A-D are filled as in the manner of Kopschinski filling the reservoir with controlled blends of recycled and virgin powder because Schwab teaches that some storage containers 210A-D have mixtures of unused and virgin powder [0024] and [0055-56] of Kopschinski teaches a way to do so. Accordingly, as modified a valve from the stored virgin powder controls flow to a storage container 210 of Schwab. 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 system of Schwab to utilize sensors as taught in Rushton because [0029] of Schwab teaches using machine learning to develop a use based model and [0118] of Rushton similarly teaches using big data analysis to accomplish this goal. [0087] [0118] of Rushton further clarifies that this analysis determines the appropriate amount of metal powder recycling, and hence the ratio of degraded to non-degraded powder such that the amount of virgin powder results in the proper amount of non-degraded powder.
Regarding claim 2, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the powder conveyance system is configured to enclose a robust gas comprising a reactive agent in a concentration lower than that in an ambient atmosphere external to the powder conveyance system (build environment enclosed in a relatively inert environment with oxygen monitoring, Schwab [0026]; unused powder in circulation subject to moisture removal or dehydration, thus lower concentration of water, Schwab [0027]), the reactive agent being configured to react with the powder material to generate a reaction product (a) during propagation of the powder material in the powder conveyance system (moisture, Schwab [0027]) and/or (b) during the printing (oxygen, Schwab [0026]), the degradation of the powder material comprising the reaction product (oxidation of the powder material).
Regarding claim 3, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the first powder material and the second powder material include elemental metal, metal alloy, an allotrope of elemental carbon, or a ceramic (Schwab, [0013]).
Regarding claim 4, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the powder conveyance system further comprises a separator operatively coupled to the valve (filtered, Schwab [0027]; the phrase “operatively coupled” is interpreted to encompass fluid communication between the sieve and the valve, which would be the case for a system where the sieve is upstream of the valve; in any event, virgin powder that is added, after use, would circulate through the recycle system of Schwab and any unused portion would eventually be filtered, [0026-27], Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the separator includes a cyclonic separator or a sieve assembly (filtering in this context constitutes operation of a sieve assembly, Schwab, [0026-27]).
Regarding claim 6, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the powder conveyance system is configured to mix the first powder material with the second powder material to generate the starting material (as modified, mixed in reservoir 7 of Kopschinski, [0055-56], before entry to storage container 210 of Schwab, [0024]).
Regarding claim 7, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the powder conveyance system is configured to mix the first powder material with the second powder material at least in part by adding the first powder material and the second powder material into a reservoir of the powder conveyance system (as modified, virgin powder and unused powder added to reservoir 7 of Kopschinski and mixed, [0055-56], before entry to storage container 210 of Schwab, [0024]).
Regarding claim 8, Schwab as modified teaches [the] sensor configured to detect the ratio of the degraded portion of the second powder material to the remaining portion of the second powder material (as modified, Rushton [0087] [0118]).
Regarding claim 9, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the valve is configured to control flow of the first powder material into the powder conveyance system continuously, intermittently, or not flow (control of flow to reservoir with some or none entails the recited control, Kopschinski [0055-56]).
Regarding claim 10, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the powder conveyance system is configured to direct the starting material to a material dispensing mechanism configured to dispense the starting material layerwise to facilitate print the 3D object (Schwab [0024-25]).
Regarding claim 11, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the buffer reservoir is configured to enclose an internal atmosphere that is different by at least one characteristic from an ambient environment external to the buffer reservoir (controlled stored environment, like the controlled build environment with inert gas, Schwab [0029].
Schwab teaches a system substantially as claimed. Schwab might not be explicit that the stored environment and any other steps of the powder conveyance are under an inert environment.
However, in the same field of endeavor of additive manufacturing with recycling of powder, detecting degradation and additions of appropriate levels of virgin powder, [0004-05]), Rushton is explicit, teaching wherein the buffer reservoir is configured to enclose an internal atmosphere that is different by at least one characteristic from an ambient environment external to the buffer reservoir (all steps under an inert environment, [0005] [0011] [0065-66] [0090]).
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 system of Schwab such that the buffer reservoir is configured to enclose an internal atmosphere that is different by at least one characteristic from an ambient environment external to the buffer reservoir (inert gas instead of ambient air) because [0005] of Rushton teaches doing so to manage against the risk of powder oxidation.
Regarding claim 12, Schwab discloses a system for three-dimensional (3D) printing a three-dimensional (3D) object (additive manufacturing system 200, [0014] [0024], Fig. 2) comprising one or more memory devices configured to store instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to ([0006]): detect, via a sensor, a ratio of a degraded powder material to a non-degraded powder material in a first powder material (a number of sensors for the stored environment and/or build environment to detect degradation and usability of the powder, Schwab [0021] [0026-29]; this is utilized for a use based model using machine learning techniques), wherein at least a portion of the first powder material is disposed within a powder conveyance system (unused powder is circulating, [0024] [0034], Fig. 2); determine, via a processor, if the ratio of the degraded powder material to the non-degraded powder material is above a threshold (no longer viable due to oxygen effects, [0031]); actuate a valve to provide an amount of non-degraded powder material from a second powder material to the portion of the first powder material disposed within the powder conveyance system (create a mix of virgin powder and unused powder that has been recycled in one of the powder source containers 210A-D, [0024] [0034], Fig. 2) and mix, via the powder conveyance system, the first powder material with the second powder material to form a starting material (mix of virgin powder and unused powder that has been recycled in one of the powder source containers 210A-D, [0024] [0034], Fig. 2).
Schwab teaches a system substantially as claimed. Schwab does not disclose how blended virgin and unused (recycled) powder is added to a powder source container 210A-D. It is not explicit that the sensors of Schwab are detecting a ratio of a degraded powder material to a non-degraded powder material in a first powder material. Schwab does not disclose if the ratio of the degraded powder material to the non-degraded powder material is above the threshold, actuate a valve to provide an amount of non-degraded powder material from a second powder material disposed within a buffer reservoir to the portion of the first powder material disposed within the powder conveyance system, the buffer reservoir being coupled to the powder conveyance system via the valve.
However, in the same field of endeavor of handling recycled powder for an additive manufacturing system (additive manufacturing machines 3, abstract, [0053], Fig. 1), Kopschinski teaches actuate a valve to provide an amount of non-degraded powder material from a second powder material disposed within a buffer reservoir to the portion of the first powder material disposed within the powder conveyance system (permission of powder from supply 29 to pass to reservoir 7 where it is joined by powder from raw material powder recycling stream 31, [0055], Fig. 1), the buffer reservoir being coupled to the powder conveyance system via the valve (structure that provides permission of powder from supply 29 to pass to reservoir 7, [0055], Fig. 1).
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 system of Schwab such that storage containers 210A-D are filled as in the manner of Kopschinski filling the reservoir with controlled blends of recycled and virgin powder because Schwab teaches that some storage containers 210A-D have mixtures of unused and virgin powder [0024] and [0055-56] of Kopschinski teaches a way to do so. Accordingly, as modified a valve from the stored virgin powder controls flow to a storage container 210 of Schwab. Additionally, in the same field of endeavor of additive manufacturing with recycling of powder, detecting degradation and additions of appropriate levels of virgin powder, [0004-05]), Rushton teaches detect, via a sensor, a ratio of a degraded powder material to a non-degraded powder material in a first powder material (optical assessment with substitutional chemistry detects proportion of degradation (addition of other elements getting into the powder), [0019-20], with big data analysis tools to determine the amount of metal powder recycling that is appropriate (how oxidized / whether it is overly oxidized), [0087] [0118]; the amount of metal powder recycling that is appropriate would include the ratio of the degraded to non-degraded powder so that the virgin powder would restore the non-degraded portion to the appropriate amount, [0087]), if the ratio of the degraded powder material to the non-degraded powder material is above the threshold, actuate a valve to provide an amount of non-degraded powder material from a second powder material disposed within a buffer reservoir to the portion of the first powder material disposed within the powder conveyance system (ensuring the appropriate amount of powder recycling is the ratio of the degraded to non-degraded powder so that the virgin powder would restore the non-degraded portion to the appropriate amount, [0087] [0118]).
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 system of Schwab to utilize sensors as taught in Rushton because [0029] of Schwab teaches using machine learning to develop a use based model and [0118] of Rushton similarly teaches using big data analysis to accomplish this goal. [0087] [0118] of Rushton further clarifies that this analysis determines the appropriate amount of metal powder recycling, and hence the ratio of degraded to non-degraded powder such that the amount of virgin powder results in the proper amount of non-degraded powder.
Regarding claim 13, Schwab as modified teaches a system substantially as claimed. Schwab does not disclose wherein the powder conveyance system is configured to enclose a robust gas comprising a reactive agent in a concentration lower than that in an ambient atmosphere external to the powder conveyance system, the reactive agent being configured to react with the first powder material to generate a reaction product while the powder material is disposed within the powder conveyance system or during the 3D printing.
However, in the same field of endeavor of additive manufacturing with recycling of powder, detecting degradation and additions of appropriate levels of virgin powder, [0004-05]), Rushton teaches wherein the powder conveyance system is configured to enclose a robust gas comprising a reactive agent in a concentration lower than that in an ambient atmosphere external to the powder conveyance system (all steps under an inert environment, and oxygen sensors are described because that is not going to be perfectly inert,[0005] [0011] [0065-66] [0090-91]), the reactive agent being configured to react with the first powder material to generate a reaction product while the powder material is disposed within the powder conveyance system or during the 3D printing (oxidation of the powder, [0005]).
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 system of Schwab such the powder conveyance system is configured to enclose a robust gas comprising a reactive agent in a concentration lower than that in an ambient atmosphere external to the powder conveyance system (inert gas instead of ambient air means a lower oxygen concentration) because [0005] of Rushton teaches doing so to manage against the risk of powder oxidation.
Regarding claim 14, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the first powder material and the second powder material include elemental metal, metal alloy, an allotrope of elemental carbon, or a ceramic (Schwab, [0013]).
Regarding claim 15, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the powder conveyance system further comprises a separator operatively coupled to the valve (filtered, Schwab [0027]; the phrase “operatively coupled” is interpreted to encompass fluid communication between the sieve and the valve, which would be the case for a system where the sieve is upstream of the valve; in any event, virgin powder that is added, after use, would circulate through the recycle system of Schwab and any unused portion would eventually be filtered, [0026-27], Fig. 2; see also, [0013] of Rushton).
Regarding claim 16, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the separator includes a cyclonic separator or a sieve assembly (filtering in this context constitutes operation of a sieve assembly, Schwab, [0026-27]; see also, [0013] of Rushton).
Regarding claim 17, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the powder conveyance system is configured to mix the first powder material with the second powder material at least in part by adding the first powder material and the second powder material into a reservoir of the powder conveyance system (as modified, virgin powder and unused powder added to reservoir 7 of Kopschinski and mixed, [0055-56], before entry to storage container 210 of Schwab, [0024]).
Regarding claim 18, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the valve is configured to control flow of the second powder material into the powder conveyance system continuously, intermittently, or not flow (control of flow to reservoir with some or none entails the recited control, Kopschinski [0055-56]).
Regarding claim 19, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the powder conveyance system is configured to direct the starting material to a material dispensing mechanism configured to dispense the starting material layerwise to facilitate the 3D printing (Schwab [0024-25]).
Regarding claim 11, Schwab as modified teaches wherein the buffer reservoir is configured to enclose an internal atmosphere that is different by at least one characteristic from an ambient environment external to the buffer reservoir (controlled stored environment, like the controlled build environment with inert gas, Schwab [0029].
Schwab teaches a system substantially as claimed. Schwab might not be explicit that the stored environment and any other steps of the powder conveyance are under an inert environment.
However, in the same field of endeavor of additive manufacturing with recycling of powder, detecting degradation and additions of appropriate levels of virgin powder, [0004-05]), Rushton is explicit, teaching wherein the buffer reservoir is configured to enclose an internal atmosphere that is different by at least one characteristic from an ambient environment external to the buffer reservoir (all steps under an inert environment, [0005] [0011] [0065-66] [0090]).
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 system of Schwab such that the buffer reservoir is configured to enclose an internal atmosphere that is different by at least one characteristic from an ambient environment external to the buffer reservoir (inert gas instead of ambient air) because [0005] of Rushton teaches doing so to manage against the risk of powder oxidation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 8, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the disclosure does enable a sensor configured to detect the ratio of the degraded portion of the second powder material to the remaining portion of the second powder material. Applicant points to various parts of the disclosure, arguing that the disclosure teaches environmental monitoring and degradation phenomena. Applicant argues that [0218] teaches powder level and reactive-agent sensors.
This argument is not persuasive because a powder level sensor does not detect the claimed ratio. This argument is also not persuasive because [0218] does not actually disclose a reactive-agent sensor.
Applicant, about 22 months after filing, and about 34 months after filing a provisional application, now seeks to disclose a reactive-agent sensor which would be used to detect a ratio of degraded to non-degraded powder. Such new matter is not eligible for entry, as enablement is based on the date of filing.
Applicant also argues that only routine experimentation is required, presumably based on teachings of degradation mechanisms. However, as noted above, Applicant has not disclosed a sensor measuring something based on one of the disclosed degradation mechanisms. Of note, Applicant’s argument, if persuasive, would mean that Schwab’s teachings in [0021] [0026-29] are sufficient on their own to make the claimed sensor and its function obvious.
Further, even if Applicant is correct that a particular sensor could be justified and used based on routine experimentation, that would not apply to sensors that measure a property correlated with degradation that Applicant has not disclosed as potentially having such a relationship.
Regarding the rejection under 35 USC 103, Applicant argues that Schwab’s virgin powder container cannot constitute a buffer reservoir because it is not “specifically configured for selective supplementation of recycled powder based on a degradation threshold or ratio. The containers are general storage, not part of a degradation-managed refresh system.” Applicant makes a similar argument about raw material powder supply 29 of Kopschinski.
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’s arguments are not persuasive because they are based on the alleged intended use of these powder reservoirs in the references. The argument is not based on the inclusion of the powder reservoir, nor how the reservoirs are used in the combination, but as stand-alone components. These reservoirs supply fresh powder, and in the combination, do so in response to a signal that the ratio of degraded/nondegraded powder is above a threshold.
Next, Applicant argues that the references do not teach detecting the ratio of degraded/nondegraded powder and refreshing the powder with fresh powder when it is above a threshold. This argument is not persuasive because [0087] [0118] of Rushton teaches determining when a powder is too degraded (oxidized/out of specification). [0016] of Schwab teaches testing a powder for reusability and [0039] [0044] [0050] [0059] and [0065] of Schwab all teach blending recycled powder with virgin powder for the reuse of the recycled powder. The combined prior art teaches testing the powder for how degraded it is and blending powder to meet specifications for use.
If Applicant still finds any of this insufficient, further reference can be made to Fung (US 2021/0402697), which teaches a recyclability ratio concept, the proportion of recycled material that should be used with virgin powder. Fung was cited in the last official action but was not addressed by Applicant.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 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
/XIAO S ZHAO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights