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/RestrictionsApplicant’s election without traverse of Species AI, BI, CI & DI (Claim(s) 1 – 3, 5 – 7, 9 – 20) in the reply filed on (4 – 17 – 2026) is acknowledged. Consequently, Species AII, BII, CII and DII (Claim(s) 4, 8) are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the same reply filed on (4 – 17 – 2026).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show a lamp module, nor is the first and second secondary outlets 78_1 and 78_2 connected at equal distances to corresponding interfacing inlets shown, nor is the motion control device for carriage 30 shown and as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 17 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Currently claim 17 reads a “…flow rate and/or flow direction at the first primary inlet, temperature at the first secondary inlet” it should read “…flow rate .
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.
Claim(s) 11 is / 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(s) 11 recites the limitation "…the secondary conduit…” in lines (1) . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Highlighting, applicant does have antecedent basis for first secondary conduit in claim 1 in which claim 11 depends from. Adding, that this choice is also supported by similar language being used and reflected in claim(s) 6, 15 and 18 i.e., the first flow controller located within the first secondary conduit. Accordingly, for the purposes of examination it will be understood to be the first secondary conduit.
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.
A.) Claim(s) 1 – 2, 3 – 12, 14 – 20 , is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mauck et al. (US 20180370263 A1, hereinafter Mauck) in view of Iskra et al. (US 20040003741 A1, hereinafter Iskra) in further view of Lopez et al. (WO 2020023032 A1, with numbering and translation provided by US 20210354391 A1, hereinafter Lopez)Regarding claim 1,
An apparatus for the layer-by-layer formation of three-dimensional objects, the apparatus comprising
a gas extraction system and
an enclosed working space from which gas is to be extracted,
wherein the working space is enclosed by side walls,
a ceiling and
a working surface, and
comprises a working space inlet for allowing gas to enter into the working space,
a working space outlet for allowing gas to exit the working space, and
a build bed surface in which a layer of the object is formed;
wherein the gas extraction system comprises:
a primary conduit comprising a first primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space,
a first interfacing inlet, and
a primary outlet connectable to an external extraction source so as to suction gas from the primary conduit; and
a first secondary conduit comprising a first secondary inlet and a respective first secondary outlet,
the first secondary inlet being in fluidic communication with the working space for extracting gas from the working space, and
the first secondary outlet being in fluidic communication with the first interfacing inlet;
wherein the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and
from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit.
Mauck teaches the following:
(Abstract) teaches that the present teachings relate to various embodiments of a gas enclosure system that can have various components comprising a particle control system that can provide a low-particle zone proximal to a substrate. As illustrated in (Figs. 22 – 24 & 30A – 32B), a gas extraction system is provided. In summary, a gas extraction system is understood to be disclosed.
([0191]) teaches that gas enclosure system 505 of (Fig. 22) can include a gas enclosure assembly 1100, which can house an OLED inkjet printing system 2001, as well as circulation and filtration system 1500. As illustrated in (Fig. 22), the gas enclosure assembly 1100 acts as applicant’s enclosed working space from which gas is to be extracted. In summary, the gas enclosure assembly 1100 / an enclosed working space from which gas is to be extracted is understood to be disclosed.
PNG
media_image1.png
612
636
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, d.) & e.) ([0148]) teaches that substrate floatation table 2200 of OLED printing system can support substrate 2050. ([0197]) adds that as depicted in (Fig. 24) the gas enclosure assembly 1100 of gas enclosure system 507 is provided. As illustrated in (Fig. 24), the gas enclosure assembly 1100 is found to be enclosed by side walls and a ceiling and a working surface. In summary, the gas enclosure assembly 1100 is enclosed by side walls, a ceiling and a working surface.
& g.) As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided within, the workspace is provided with an inlet for allowing gas to enter into the working space (top arrows) and a working space outlet for allowing gas to exit the working space (bottom arrows). Noting, that the outlets are found beyond workspace / work being performed on the substrate 2050 found on substrate holder 2200. In summary, a working space inlet for allowing gas to enter into the working space, and a working space outlet for allowing gas to exit the working space are understood to be disclosed.
([0196]) teaches that the gas enclosure system of the present teachings having a particle control system can provide a low-particle zone proximal to a substrate, such as substrate 2050 of (Fig. 24), which can be supported by substrate support apparatus 2200. Where the substrate support apparatus 2200 acts as applicant’s build bed surface in which a layer of the object is formed.
& j.) As illustrated in (Fig. 22) (and provided within), a first ductwork outlet 1575 and a first ductwork outlet 1576, are illustrated to show the flow of gas travel
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
directly into a primary conduit (top arrows pointing to the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566) via the first and second secondary outlets to a first interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) and a second interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) of the primary conduit. Namely, the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566 (top arrows) acts as applicant’s primary conduit comprising interfacing inlets (bottom arrows). With ([0155]) adding that inert gas purified of solvent and other reactive gas species, such as oxygen and water vapor, are then returned to gas enclosure assembly 1011 through inlet line 3133. As illustrated in (Fig. 22), inlet line 3133 acts as applicant’s primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space. In summary, the common area or space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566 / a primary conduit comprising an inlet line 3133 / a primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space is understood to be disclosed.
([0218]) teaches that space 1580 can be in fluid communication with a gas purification system 3130 (Figs. 12 – 13) through gas purification outlet line 3131 and gas purification inlet line 3133. As such, an extraction of gas transpires through a primary outlet / line 3131. With the gas being extracted though line 3131 being from the same gas stream (bottom) that enters into the common space / primary conduit though the ductwork conduit 1574 or is fed back into the same the common space / primary conduit via purification inlet 3133, remarking that the gas is in fluid communication at two points. Accordingly, an arrangement that provides for a placement in which both a primary outlet / line 3131 and gas purification inlet line 3133 is found in contact with the common space / primary conduit (i.e., above second ductwork outlet 1576 and below purification inlet line 3133) is understood to be a rearrangement of parts. Accordingly, the case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, It has generally been recognized by the courts that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400, MPEP 2144.
& m.) ([0192]) teaches that the ductwork assembly 1501 can that
PNG
media_image3.png
240
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
include first ductwork conduit 1573 and second ductwork conduit 1574 as depicted in the simplified schematic of (Fig. 22). Where the ductwork assembly 1501 acts as applicant’s first and second secondary conduits with secondary inlets as illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within. Highlighting, that the first secondary inlets are in fluidic communication with the working space for extracting gas from the working space and into the ductwork.
([0192]) teaches that first ductwork conduit 1573 can receive gas through a first ductwork inlet 1571 and can exit through a first ductwork outlet 1575. Similarly, second ductwork conduit 1574 can receive gas through second ductwork inlet 1572 exit through second ductwork outlet 1576. As such, the first secondary outlet of the first secondary conduit are found to be in fluidic communication with the first interfacing inlets of the primary conduit / the common area or space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566.
([0153]) teaches that a plurality of heat exchangers can be provided operating with, or used in conjunction with, a fan or another gas circulating device. ([0190]) teaches that one or more fan units can be disposed adjacent the interior ceiling, and the one or more ductwork inlets can comprise a plurality of inlet openings disposed adjacent the bottom interior periphery that are part of a ductwork system. Namely, the use of fans in conjunction with the heat exchangers are understood to act as applicant’s internal flow control device(s). In summary, the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit.
Regarding Claim 1, Mauck is silent regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. In analogous art for additive manufacturing system that comprises a chamber with an air valve system, the air valve system used to control of the temperature of the working region of the 3D printing chamber, (Abstract), Iskra suggests details regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
& p.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for additive manufacturing, the apparatus comprises an enclosure that has an air regulating system with various components including sensors, hoses, inlets and outlets providing as a means for temperature control of the additive manufacturing enclosure and substrate of Mauck. By modifying the air regulating system to include a pair of valves 742 and a sensor system and alarm, as taught by Iskra. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement a pair of valves 742 as it provides for adjusting the ratio of air entering the ventilation system 720 through the inlet 722 and one would be motivated to implement a sensor system which includes an alarm as it provides for increased safety such that the system can communicate across both the sensors and an alarm to coordinate and can act to shut off or disable certain machine functions, ([0120]). Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143.
Regarding Claim 1, Mauck as modified by Iskra is silent regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. In analogous art for additive manufacturing system that comprises a chamber with an air valve system, the air valve system comprising an air valve controller connected to the air valve system to regulate the temperature in the 3D printing chamber, (Abstract), Lopez suggests details regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit, and in this regard, Lopez teaches the following:
& p.) ([0018]) teaches that the system comprise a second sensor measuring a temperature representative of the temperature at the external air input 150. ([0021]) adding that an air valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements. A quantity or an amount of air may comprise a volume, a mass or a molecular weight of this air. A quantity of air may also comprise mass flux or volumetric flux. In some examples, a temperature representative of the temperature of the external air input 150 may be measured by a second sensor. Temperatures measured by these sensors may also be taken into account by the air valve controller to regulate the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. The air valve system may comprise one or more fan mechanisms to move the air through the air valve system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for additive manufacturing, the apparatus comprises an enclosure that has an air regulating system with various components including sensors, hoses, inlets and outlets providing as a means for temperature control of the additive manufacturing enclosure and substrate of Mauck as modified by Iskra. By further augmenting the gas ventilation system to include a valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements, as taught by Lopez. Highlighting, one would be motivated implement valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements as it provides for regulating the temperature in a 3D printing chamber by taking into account the measurements taken with the sensors, ([0021]). Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143.
Regarding claim 2 as applied to claim 1,
Further comprising
a second secondary conduit comprising a secondary inlet in fluidic communication with the working space, and
further wherein:
(a) the primary conduit further comprises a second interfacing inlet in fluidic communication with the second secondary outlet; or
(b) the second secondary conduit further comprises a confluent portion having first and second ends, wherein the first secondary outlet and the second secondary outlet are in fluidic communication with the first end of the confluent portion and arranged so as to combine the flows from the first and second secondary outlets into the confluent portion, and wherein the first interfacing inlet is in fluidic communication with the second end of the confluent portion, so as to receive the combined flows from the confluent portion.
Mauck teaches the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
([0192]) teaches that the ductwork assembly 1501 can that
PNG
media_image3.png
240
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
include first ductwork conduit 1573 and second ductwork conduit 1574 as depicted in the simplified schematic of (Fig. 22). Where the ductwork assembly 1501 acts as applicant’s first and second secondary conduits with secondary inlets as illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within. Highlighting, that the secondary inlet is in fluidic communication with the working space for extracting gas from the working space and into the ductwork.
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) (and provided within), a first ductwork outlet 1575 and a first ductwork outlet 1576, are illustrated to show the flow of gas travel directly into a primary conduit (top arrows pointing to the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566) via the first and second secondary outlets to a first interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) and a second interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) of the primary conduit.
Highlighting, that only a single limitation amongst (b) and (c) is required.
Regarding claim 5 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the flow controller is located in the first secondary conduit.
Mauck teaches the following:
([0224]) teaches that the printhead assembly exhaust system second conduit 2614 can have fan 2622 for promoting gas movement through printhead assembly exhaust system 2614.
Regarding Claim 5, Mauck is silent regarding the flow controller is located in the first secondary conduit. In analogous art as applied above, Iskra suggests details regarding the flow controller is located in the first secondary conduit, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 49) the pair of valves 742 are found in their respective conduits. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1,
Further comprising
a second secondary conduit comprising a secondary inlet in fluidic communication with the working space, and
wherein the primary conduit further comprises a second interfacing inlet in fluidic communication with the second secondary outlet,
wherein the flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and
the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit.
PNG
media_image3.png
240
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Mauck teaches the following:
([0192]) teaches that the ductwork assembly 1501 can that include first ductwork conduit 1573 and second ductwork conduit 1574 as depicted in the simplified schematic of (Fig. 22). Where the ductwork assembly 1501 acts as applicant’s first and second secondary conduits with secondary inlets as illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within. Highlighting, that the secondary inlet is in fluidic communication with the working space for extracting gas from the working space and into the ductwork.
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) (and provided within), a first ductwork outlet 1575 and a first ductwork outlet 1576, are illustrated to show the flow of gas travel directly
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
into a primary conduit (top arrows pointing to the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566) via the first and second secondary outlets to a first interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) and a second interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) of the primary conduit.
Regarding Claim 6, Mauck is silent regarding the flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. In analogous art as applied above, Iskra suggests details regarding the flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
& d.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 49) the pair of valves 742 are found in their respective conduits. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400. Additionally, as Iskra on ([0196]) a pair of valves 742 (i.e. two valves) within their own respective conduits. There are no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra providing for a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. The case law for duplication of parts may be recited. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 6,
Wherein each of the first flow controller and the second flow controller is a fan.
Mauck teaches the following:
([0153]) teaches that a plurality of heat exchangers can be provided operating with, or used in conjunction with, a fan or another gas circulating device. ([0190]) teaches that one or more fan units can be disposed adjacent the interior ceiling, and the one or more ductwork inlets can comprise a plurality of inlet openings disposed adjacent the bottom interior periphery that are part of a ductwork system. As such the use of fans in conjunction with the heat exchangers are understood to be provided as the internal flow control device(s).
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 6,
Wherein each of the first flow controller and the second flow controller is a fan.
Mauck teaches the following:
([0153]) teaches that a plurality of heat exchangers can be provided operating with, or used in conjunction with, a fan or another gas circulating device. ([0190]) teaches that one or more fan units can be disposed adjacent the interior ceiling, and the one or more ductwork inlets can comprise a plurality of inlet openings disposed adjacent the bottom interior periphery that are part of a ductwork system. As such the use of fans in conjunction with the heat exchangers are understood to be provided as the internal flow control device(s).
Regarding Claim 7, Mauck as modified by Iskra is silent regarding each of the first flow controller and the second flow controller is a fan. In analogous art as applied above,, Lopez suggests details regarding each of the first flow controller and the second flow controller is a fan, and in this regard, Lopez teaches the following:
([0018]) teaches that the system comprise a second sensor measuring a temperature representative of the temperature at the external air input 150. ([0021]) adding that an air valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements. A quantity or an amount of air may comprise a volume, a mass or a molecular weight of this air. A quantity of air may also comprise mass flux or volumetric flux. In some examples, a temperature representative of the temperature of the external air input 150 may be measured by a second sensor. Temperatures measured by these sensors may also be taken into account by the air valve controller to regulate the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. The air valve system may comprise one or more fan mechanisms to move the air through the air valve system.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 9 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the primary inlet is unimpeded to inflowing gas flow.
Mauck teaches the following:
As illustrated in (Fig. 22), inlet line 3133 acts as applicant’s primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space, as depicted the inlet line 3133 is shown to be unimpeded to inflowing gas flow. In summary, the inlet line 3133 / primary inlet is unimpeded to inflowing gas flow is understood to be disclosed.
Regarding claim 10 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the primary conduit further comprises a second primary inlet being at least partially open to the environment external to the working space.
Mauck teaches the following:
([0218]) teaches that space 1580 can be in fluid communication with a gas purification system 3130 (Figs. 12 – 13) through gas purification outlet line 3131 and gas purification inlet line 3133. As such, an extraction of gas transpires through a primary outlet / line 3131. With the gas being extracted though line 3131 being from the same gas stream (bottom) that enters into the common space / primary conduit though the ductwork conduit 1574 or is fed back into the same the common space / primary conduit via purification inlet 3133, remarking that the gas is in fluid communication at two points. As such, the gas purification system acts the external extraction source, a flow of gas from an environment external to the working space into the primary conduit via inlet line 3133 / primary inlet of the primary conduit that is open to the environment external to the working space, such that the gas extracted from the primary conduit in step (c) is a mixture of gas extracted from the working space via the first and second interfacing inlets, or via the first and second interfacing inlet and gas suctioned from the external environment to the working space via the inlet line 3133 / primary inlet. Accordingly, an arrangement that provides for a gas purification inlet line 3133 with a first primary inlet and a second primary inlet is found to be a duplication of parts is found to be a duplication of parts. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
Regarding claim 11 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the flow controller comprises a first flow controller located within the secondary conduit, and
the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located between the first primary inlet and the first interfacing inlet,
wherein the first interfacing inlet is located in the flow path between the primary inlet and the primary outlet.
Mauck teaches the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
([0192]) teaches that the ductwork assembly 1501 can that
PNG
media_image3.png
240
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
include first ductwork conduit 1573 and second ductwork conduit 1574 as depicted in the simplified schematic of (Fig. 22). Where the ductwork assembly 1501 acts as applicant’s first and second secondary conduits with secondary inlets as illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within. Highlighting, that the first secondary inlets are in fluidic communication with the working space for extracting gas from the working space and into the ductwork.
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within the first interfacing inlet (bottom arrows) are located in the flow path between the inlet line 3133 / primary inlet and the outlet line 3131 / primary outlet, noting, that the first interfacing inlet sits between the primary inlet and the primary outlet, such that the inlet line 3133 exists / empties into the first interfacing inlet of the primary conduit.
Regarding Claim 11, Mauck is silent regarding the flow controller comprises a first flow controller located within the secondary conduit, and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located between the first primary inlet and the first interfacing inlet. In analogous art as applied above, Iskra suggests details regarding the flow controller comprises a first flow controller located within the secondary conduit, and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located between the first primary inlet and the first interfacing inlet, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
& b.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas located within the secondary conduit the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located between the first primary inlet and the first interfacing inlet. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding Claim 11, Mauck as modified by Iskra is silent regarding the flow controller comprises a first flow controller located within the secondary conduit, and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located between the first primary inlet and the first interfacing inlet. In analogous art as applied above, Lopez suggests details regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit, and in this regard, Lopez teaches the following:
& b.) ([0018]) teaches that the system comprise a second sensor measuring a temperature representative of the temperature at the external air input 150. ([0021]) adding that an air valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements. A quantity or an amount of air may comprise a volume, a mass or a molecular weight of this air. A quantity of air may also comprise mass flux or volumetric flux. In some examples, a temperature representative of the temperature of the external air input 150 may be measured by a second sensor. Temperatures measured by these sensors may also be taken into account by the air valve controller to regulate the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. The air valve system may comprise one or more fan mechanisms to move the air through the air valve system. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Lopez’s placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim ,
Wherein the flow resistance of the flow path from the primary inlet to the primary outlet is lower than the flow resistance of the flow path from the secondary inlet to the secondary outlet.
Regarding Claim 12, Mauck as modified by Iskra is silent regarding the flow controller comprises a first flow controller located within the secondary conduit, and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located between the first primary inlet and the first interfacing inlet. In analogous art as applied above, Lopez suggests details regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit, and in this regard, Lopez teaches the following:
& b.) ([0018]) teaches that the system comprise a second sensor measuring a temperature representative of the temperature at the external air input 150. ([0021]) adding that an air valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements. A quantity or an amount of air may comprise a volume, a mass or a molecular weight of this air. A quantity of air may also comprise mass flux or volumetric flux. In some examples, a temperature representative of the temperature of the external air input 150 may be measured by a second sensor. Temperatures measured by these sensors may also be taken into account by the air valve controller to regulate the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. The air valve system may comprise one or more fan mechanisms to move the air through the air valve system. Namely, the fans and air valve system provide for regulating and optimizing the amount of air / the flow resistance provided to the flow path due to its impact on the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. As such, optimizing the amount of air / the flow resistance provided from the primary inlet to the primary outlet is lower than the flow resistance of the flow path from the secondary inlet to the secondary outlet is understood to be a result effective variable. Accordingly, the case law for result effective variables may be recited. Where, it is well settled that determination of optimum values of cause effective variables such as these process parameters is within the skill of one practicing in the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977), MPEP 2143 II (B).
Additionally, choosing a flow resistance of the flow path from the primary inlet to the primary outlet is lower than the flow resistance of the flow path from the secondary inlet to the secondary outlet is understood to be a trinary option i.e., the flow resistances are the same, the flow resistance of the flow path from the primary inlet to the primary outlet is lower than the flow resistance of the flow path from the secondary inlet to the secondary outlet, or flow resistance of the flow path from the primary inlet to the primary outlet is higher than the flow resistance of the flow path from the secondary inlet to the secondary outlet. As such, choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success and / or the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 13,
An apparatus for the layer-by-layer formation of three-dimensional objects, the apparatus comprising
a gas extraction system and
an enclosed working space from which gas is to be extracted,
wherein the working space is enclosed by side walls,
a ceiling and
a working surface and
comprises a working space inlet to allow gas to enter into the working space,
wherein the working surface comprises a build bed surface in which a layer of the object is formed, and
wherein the gas extraction system comprises:
a primary conduit comprising a first primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space and,
a first interfacing inlet, and
a primary outlet connectable to an external extraction source so as to suction gas from the primary conduit;
a first secondary conduit comprising a first secondary inlet in fluidic communication with the working space for extracting gas from the working space, and
a first secondary outlet in fluidic communication with the first interfacing inlet;
a second secondary conduit comprising a second secondary inlet in fluidic communication with the working space, and
a second secondary outlet, and
further wherein:
option (a) - the primary conduit further comprises a second primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space, and
a second interfacing inlet in fluidic communication with the second secondary outlet, or
option (b) - the gas extraction system further comprises a confluent portion having first and second ends, wherein the first secondary outlet and the second secondary outlet are in fluidic communication with the first end of the confluent portion and arranged so as to combine the flows from the first and second secondary outlets into the confluent portion, and wherein the first interfacing inlet is in fluidic communication with the second end of the confluent portion, so as to receive the combined flows from the confluent portion;
wherein the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first and second secondary conduits and
from the first and second secondary conduits into the primary outlet of the primary conduit,
wherein the first and second secondary inlets are located in the ceiling of the working space, each facing an area at or near opposite ends of the build bed surface.
Mauck teaches the following:
(Abstract) teaches that the present teachings relate to various embodiments of a gas enclosure system that can have various components comprising a particle control system that can provide a low-particle zone proximal to a substrate. As illustrated in (Figs. 22 – 24 & 30A – 32B), a gas extraction system is provided. In summary, a gas extraction system is understood to be disclosed.
([0191]) teaches that gas enclosure system 505 of (Fig. 22) can include a gas enclosure assembly 1100, which can house an OLED inkjet printing system 2001, as well as circulation and filtration system 1500. As illustrated in (Fig. 22), the gas enclosure assembly 1100 acts as applicant’s enclosed working space from which gas is to be extracted. In summary, the gas enclosure assembly 1100 / an enclosed working space from which gas is to be extracted is understood to be disclosed.
, d.) & e.) ([0148]) teaches that substrate floatation table 2200 of OLED printing system can support substrate 2050. ([0197]) adds that as depicted in (Fig. 24) the gas enclosure assembly 1100 of gas enclosure system 507 is provided. As illustrated in (Fig. 24), the gas enclosure assembly 1100 is found to be enclosed by side walls and a ceiling and a working surface. In summary, the gas enclosure assembly 1100 is enclosed by side walls, a ceiling and a working surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
612
636
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided within, the workspace is provided with an inlet for allowing gas to enter into the working space (top arrows) and a working space outlet for allowing gas to exit the working space (bottom arrows). Noting, that the outlets are found beyond workspace / work being performed on the substrate 2050 found on substrate holder 2200. In summary, a working space inlet for allowing gas to enter into the working space, and a working space outlet for allowing gas to exit the working space are understood to be disclosed.
([0196]) teaches that the gas enclosure system of the present teachings having a particle control system can provide a low-particle zone proximal to a substrate, such as substrate 2050 of (Fig. 24), which can be supported by substrate support apparatus 2200. Where the substrate support apparatus 2200 acts as applicant’s build bed surface in which a layer of the object is formed.
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
& i.) As illustrated in (Fig. 22) (and provided within), a first ductwork outlet 1575 and a first ductwork outlet 1576, are illustrated to show the flow of gas travel directly into a primary conduit (top arrows pointing to the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566) via the first and second secondary outlets to a first interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) and a second interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) of the primary conduit. Namely, the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566 (top arrows) acts as applicant’s primary conduit comprising interfacing inlets (bottom arrows). With ([0155]) adding that inert gas purified of solvent and other reactive gas species, such as oxygen and water vapor, are then returned to gas enclosure assembly 1011 through inlet line 3133. As illustrated in (Fig. 22), inlet line 3133 acts as applicant’s primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space. In summary, the common area or space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566 / a primary conduit comprising an inlet line 3133 / a primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space is understood to be disclosed.
([0218]) teaches that space 1580 can be in fluid communication with a gas purification system 3130 (Figs. 12 – 13) through gas purification outlet line 3131 and gas purification inlet line 3133. As such, an extraction of gas transpires through a primary outlet / line 3131. With the gas being extracted though line 3131 being from the same gas stream (bottom) that enters into the common space / primary conduit though the ductwork conduit 1574 or is fed back into the same the common space / primary conduit via purification inlet 3133, remarking that the gas is in fluid communication at two points. Accordingly, an arrangement that provides for a placement in which both a primary outlet / line 3131 and gas purification inlet line 3133 is found in contact with the common space / primary conduit (i.e., above second ductwork outlet 1576 and below purification inlet line 3133) is understood to be a rearrangement of parts. Accordingly, the case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, It has generally been recognized by the courts that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400, MPEP 2144.
PNG
media_image3.png
240
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, m.) & n.) ([0192]) teaches that the ductwork assembly 1501 can that include first ductwork conduit 1573 and second ductwork conduit 1574 as depicted in the simplified schematic of (Fig. 22). Where the ductwork assembly 1501 acts as applicant’s first and second secondary conduits with secondary inlets as illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within. Highlighting, that the first secondary inlets are in fluidic communication with the working space for extracting gas from the working space and into the ductwork.
([0192]) teaches that first ductwork conduit 1573 can receive gas through a first ductwork inlet 1571 and can exit through a first ductwork outlet 1575. Similarly, second ductwork conduit 1574 can receive gas through second ductwork inlet 1572 exit through second ductwork outlet 1576. As such, the first secondary outlet of the first secondary conduit are found to be in fluidic communication with the first interfacing inlets of the primary conduit / the common area or space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566.
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided within, a first ductwork outlet 1575 and a first ductwork outlet 1576, are illustrated to show the flow of gas travel directly into a primary conduit (top arrows pointing to the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566) via the first and second secondary outlets to a first interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) and a second interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) of the primary conduit.
([0155]) adding that inert gas purified of solvent and other reactive gas species, such as oxygen and water vapor, are then returned to gas enclosure assembly 1011 through inlet line 3133. As illustrated in (Fig. 22), inlet line 3133 acts as applicant’s primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space. In summary, the common area or space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566 / a primary conduit comprising an inlet line 3133 / a primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space is understood to be disclosed. Accordingly, while only a single inlet line 3133 / a primary inlet is depicted. The case law for duplication of parts may be recited. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
Highlighting, that only a single limitation amongst ((o) & (p)) and (q) is required.
([0153]) teaches that a plurality of heat exchangers can be provided operating with, or used in conjunction with, a fan or another gas circulating device. ([0190]) teaches that one or more fan units can be disposed adjacent the interior ceiling, and the one or more ductwork inlets can comprise a plurality of inlet openings disposed adjacent the bottom interior periphery that are part of a ductwork system. Namely, the use of fans in conjunction with the heat exchangers are understood to act as applicant’s internal flow control device(s). In summary, the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit.
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above the first and second secondary inlets are located in the working space, each facing an area at or near opposite ends of the build bed surface. Accordingly, while the first and second secondary inlets are not shown to be located in the ceiling of the working space the case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, the courts held that when shifting the location of an element would not have modified the operation of device. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ7 (CCPA 1975), MPEP 2144. The particular placement of an element was held to be obvious.
Regarding Claim 13, Mauck is silent regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. In analogous art for additive manufacturing system that comprises a chamber with an air valve system, the air valve system used to control of the temperature of the working region of the 3D printing chamber, (Abstract), Iskra suggests details regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
& s.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for additive manufacturing, the apparatus comprises an enclosure that has an air regulating system with various components including sensors, hoses, inlets and outlets providing as a means for temperature control of the additive manufacturing enclosure and substrate of Mauck. By modifying the air regulating system to include a pair of valves 742 and a sensor system and alarm, as taught by Iskra. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement a pair of valves 742 as it provides for adjusting the ratio of air entering the ventilation system 720 through the inlet 722 and one would be motivated to implement a sensor system which includes an alarm as it provides for increased safety such that the system can communicate across both the sensors and an alarm to coordinate and can act to shut off or disable certain machine functions, ([0120]). Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143.
Regarding Claim 13, Mauck as modified by Iskra is silent regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. In analogous art for additive manufacturing system that comprises a chamber with an air valve system, the air valve system comprising an air valve controller connected to the air valve system to regulate the temperature in the 3D printing chamber, (Abstract), Lopez suggests details regarding the gas extraction system further comprises a flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit, and in this regard, Lopez teaches the following:
& s.) ([0018]) teaches that the system comprise a second sensor measuring a temperature representative of the temperature at the external air input 150. ([0021]) adding that an air valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements. A quantity or an amount of air may comprise a volume, a mass or a molecular weight of this air. A quantity of air may also comprise mass flux or volumetric flux. In some examples, a temperature representative of the temperature of the external air input 150 may be measured by a second sensor. Temperatures measured by these sensors may also be taken into account by the air valve controller to regulate the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. The air valve system may comprise one or more fan mechanisms to move the air through the air valve system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for additive manufacturing, the apparatus comprises an enclosure that has an air regulating system with various components including sensors, hoses, inlets and outlets providing as a means for temperature control of the additive manufacturing enclosure and substrate of Mauck as modified by Iskra. By further augmenting the gas ventilation system to include a valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements, as taught by Lopez. Highlighting, one would be motivated implement valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements as it provides for regulating the temperature in a 3D printing chamber by taking into account the measurements taken with the sensors, ([0021]). Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143.
Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 13,
Further comprising
a sensor at one or more of the primary outlet, the first primary inlet, the second primary inlet, the first secondary inlet, the second secondary inlet, the first secondary conduit, the second secondary conduit, and within the working space;
wherein the sensor is one or more of a temperature sensor, flow meter or pressure sensor; and
a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements of: flow rate in at least one of the first and second secondary conduits; flow rate into the primary outlet; temperature at one or both of the first and second primary inlets; flow rate and/or flow direction at one or both of the first and second primary inlets; and temperature at one or both of the first and second secondary inlets.
Mauck teaches the following:
([0155]) teaches that the purification loop 3130 may also include appropriate conduits and connections, and sensors, for example, oxygen, water vapor and solvent vapor sensors.
Regarding Claim 14, Mauck is silent regarding the placement of a sensor and a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements. In analogous art as applied above, Iskra suggests details regarding the placement of a sensor and a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
& b.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 49) the pair of valves 742 are found in their respective conduits. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Namely, the temperature sensor acts as applicant’s sensor at one or more various location along the gas extraction system. In summary, a temperature sensor Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the sensor. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the sensor. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
Additionally, as Iskra discloses on ([0196]) a pair of valves 742 (i.e. two valves) within their own respective conduits. Namely, valves 742 acts as one or more flow controllers. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra providing for a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. The case law for duplication of parts may be recited. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 13, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding Claim 14, Mauck as modified by Iskra is silent regarding a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements. In analogous art as applied above, Lopez suggests details regarding a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements, and in this regard, Lopez teaches the following:
& b.) ([0018]) teaches that the system comprise a second sensor measuring a temperature representative of the temperature at the external air input 150. ([0021]) adding that an air valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements. A quantity or an amount of air may comprise a volume, a mass or a molecular weight of this air. A quantity of air may also comprise mass flux or volumetric flux. In some examples, a temperature representative of the temperature of the external air input 150 may be measured by a second sensor. Temperatures measured by these sensors may also be taken into account by the air valve controller to regulate the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. Namely, a temperature sensor is understood to be provided for within the conduit. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Lopez placement of the sensor. However, if it is determined that Lopez does not disclose the placement of the sensor. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The air valve system may comprise one or more fan mechanisms to move the air through the air valve system. Namely, the air valve controller 170 acts as applicant’s controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements. In summary, air valve controller 170 / a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements is understood to be disclosed. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Lopez placement of the internal flow control device within the confluent portion. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the confluent portion. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 13, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 15 as applied to claim 13,
Comprising option (a), and
wherein the flow controller comprises a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit, and
the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit
Mauck teaches the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided within, a first ductwork outlet 1575 and a first ductwork outlet 1576, are illustrated to show the flow of gas travel directly into a primary conduit (top arrows pointing to the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566) via the first and second secondary outlets to a first interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) and a second interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) of the primary conduit. ([0155]) adding that inert gas purified of solvent and other reactive gas species, such as oxygen and water vapor, are then returned to gas enclosure assembly 1011 through inlet line 3133. As illustrated in (Fig. 22), inlet line 3133 acts as applicant’s primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space. In summary, the common area or space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566 / a primary conduit comprising an inlet line 3133 / a primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space is understood to be disclosed. Accordingly, while only a single inlet line 3133 / a primary inlet is depicted. The case law for duplication of parts may be recited. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
Regarding Claim 6, Mauck is silent regarding the flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. In analogous art as applied above, Iskra suggests details regarding the flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
& c.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 49) the pair of valves 742 are found in their respective conduits. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400. Additionally, as Iskra on ([0196]) a pair of valves 742 (i.e. two valves) within their own respective conduits. There are no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra providing for a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. The case law for duplication of parts may be recited. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 13, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.Regarding claim 16 as applied to claim 13,
comprising option (b), and
wherein the flow controller is located in the confluent portion.
option (b) - the gas extraction system further comprises a confluent portion having first and second ends,
Regarding Claim 16, Mauck is silent regarding the flow controller is located in the confluent portion the gas extraction system further comprises a confluent portion having first and second ends. In analogous art as applied above, Iskra suggests details regarding the flow controller is located in the confluent portion the gas extraction system further comprises a confluent portion having first and second ends, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
, b.) & c.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the internal flow control device within the confluent portion. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the confluent portion. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 13, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.Regarding Claim 13, Mauck as modified by Iskra is silent regarding the flow controller is located in the confluent portion the gas extraction system further comprises a confluent portion having first and second ends. In analogous art as applied above, Lopez suggests details regarding the flow controller is located in the confluent portion the gas extraction system further comprises a confluent portion having first and second ends, and in this regard, Lopez teaches the following:
, b.) & c.) ([0018]) teaches that the system comprise a second sensor measuring a temperature representative of the temperature at the external air input 150. ([0021]) adding that an air valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements. A quantity or an amount of air may comprise a volume, a mass or a molecular weight of this air. A quantity of air may also comprise mass flux or volumetric flux. In some examples, a temperature representative of the temperature of the external air input 150 may be measured by a second sensor. Temperatures measured by these sensors may also be taken into account by the air valve controller to regulate the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. The air valve system may comprise one or more fan mechanisms to move the air through the air valve system. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Lopez placement of the internal flow control device within the confluent portion. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the confluent portion. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 13, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 17 as applied to claim 1,
Further comprising
a sensor at one or more of the primary outlet, the first primary inlet, the first secondary inlet, the first secondary conduit, and within the working space;
wherein the sensor is one or more of a temperature sensor, flow meter or pressure sensor; and
a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements of: flow rate in the first secondary conduit, flow rate into the primary outlet, temperature at the first primary inlet, flow rate and/or flow direction at the first primary inlet, temperature at the first secondary inlet.
Mauck teaches the following:
([0155]) teaches that the purification loop 3130 may also include appropriate conduits and connections, and sensors, for example, oxygen, water vapor and solvent vapor sensors.
Regarding Claim 17, Mauck is silent regarding the placement of a sensor and a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements. In analogous art as applied above, Iskra suggests details regarding the placement of a sensor and a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
& b.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 49) the pair of valves 742 are found in their respective conduits. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Namely, the temperature sensor acts as applicant’s sensor at one or more various location along the gas extraction system. In summary, a temperature sensor Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the sensor. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the sensor. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
Additionally, as Iskra discloses on ([0196]) a pair of valves 742 (i.e. two valves) within their own respective conduits. Namely, valves 742 acts as one or more flow controllers. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra providing for a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. The case law for duplication of parts may be recited. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 13, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding Claim 17, Mauck as modified by Iskra is silent regarding a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements. In analogous art as applied above, Lopez suggests details regarding a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements, and in this regard, Lopez teaches the following:
& b.) ([0018]) teaches that the system comprise a second sensor measuring a temperature representative of the temperature at the external air input 150. ([0021]) adding that an air valve controller 170 may control an aperture of the first 141 and of the second 142 valve elements. A quantity or an amount of air may comprise a volume, a mass or a molecular weight of this air. A quantity of air may also comprise mass flux or volumetric flux. In some examples, a temperature representative of the temperature of the external air input 150 may be measured by a second sensor. Temperatures measured by these sensors may also be taken into account by the air valve controller to regulate the temperature in a 3D printing chamber. Namely, a temperature sensor is understood to be provided for within the conduit. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Lopez placement of the sensor. However, if it is determined that Lopez does not disclose the placement of the sensor. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The air valve system may comprise one or more fan mechanisms to move the air through the air valve system. Namely, the air valve controller 170 acts as applicant’s controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements. In summary, air valve controller 170 / a controller for controlling the one or more flow controllers in response to one or more measurements is understood to be disclosed. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Lopez placement of the internal flow control device within the confluent portion. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the confluent portion. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 13, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 18 as applied to claim 1,
Further comprising
a second secondary conduit,
wherein the second secondary conduit comprises a second secondary inlet in fluidic communication with the working space, and
a second secondary outlet;
wherein the primary conduit further comprises a second interfacing inlet in fluidic communication with the second secondary outlet;
wherein the flow controller comprises a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit, and
the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit.
PNG
media_image3.png
240
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Mauck teaches the following:
& b.) ([0192]) teaches that the ductwork assembly 1501 can that include first ductwork conduit 1573 and second ductwork conduit 1574 as depicted in the simplified schematic of (Fig. 22). Where the ductwork assembly 1501 acts as applicant’s first and second secondary conduits with secondary inlets as illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within. Highlighting, that the secondary inlet is in fluidic communication with the working space for extracting gas from the working space and into the ductwork.
& d.) As illustrated in (Fig. 22) (and provided within), a first ductwork outlet 1575 and a first ductwork outlet 1576, are illustrated to show the flow of gas travel directly
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
into a primary conduit (top arrows pointing to the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566) via the first and second secondary outlets to a first interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) and a second interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) of the primary conduit.
Regarding Claim 18, Mauck is silent regarding the flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. In analogous art as applied above, Iskra suggests details regarding the flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and the apparatus further comprises a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit, and in this regard, Iskra teaches the following:
& f.) ([0196]) teaches that a recirculation port 740 may be used to draw air from the enclosure 702, through yet another hose 726 to the intake manifold 728. A pair of valves 742 can be manipulated to adjust the ratio of fresh air entering the ventilation system 720 from the external environment through the inlet 722, to recycled air entering the ventilation system from the enclosure 702 through the recirculation port 740. As such, the valve act as applicant’s flow controller configured to control the flow of gas from the working space into the first secondary conduit, and from the first secondary conduit into the primary outlet of the primary conduit. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 49) the pair of valves 742 are found in their respective conduits. Additionally, ([0208]) teaches that the air or gas handling apparatus of the present invention can also include one or more sensors or devices for measuring the concentration of organic solvent vapors in the air being handled. The information obtained from such a sensor or device can be used to generate a warning or alarm or can be used as feedback to adjust an operating parameter such as airflow or can be used to cause a shutdown of at least some portion of the machine. As such, the airflow direction i.e. on or off is understood to be controlled by sensor inputs. Highlighting, while Iskra is ambiguous on the placement of the sensor, it is understood that the sensor lies within the air or gas handling apparatus, i.e., the ventilation system 720, which includes various the components including the inlets and outlets. Highlighting, while no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose the placement of the internal flow control device within the secondary conduit. The case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited. Where, it has generally been recognized that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400. Additionally, as Iskra discloses a pair of valves 742 (i.e. two valves) within their own respective conduits. There are no discrepancies are perceived to exist regarding Iskra providing for a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. However, if it is determined that Iskra does not disclose a flow controller is a first flow controller located in the first secondary conduit and a second flow controller located in the second secondary conduit. The case law for duplication of parts may be recited. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 13, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 20 as applied to claim 13,
Comprising option (a), and
wherein the first and second primary inlets are located at opposing ends of the primary conduit and
wherein the first and second interfacing inlets are located between the first and second primary inlets.
Mauck teaches the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
492
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided within, a first ductwork outlet 1575 and a first ductwork outlet 1576, are illustrated to show the flow of gas travel directly into a primary conduit (top arrows pointing to the common area / space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566) via the first and second secondary outlets to a first interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) and a second interfacing inlet (bottom arrow) of the primary conduit. ([0155]) adding that inert gas purified of solvent and other reactive gas species, such as oxygen and water vapor, are then returned to gas enclosure assembly 1011 through inlet line 3133. As illustrated in (Fig. 22), inlet line 3133 acts as applicant’s primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space. In summary, the common area or space above heat exchangers 1562, 1564 and 1566 / a primary conduit comprising an inlet line 3133 / a primary inlet open to an environment external to the working space is understood to be disclosed. Accordingly, while only a single inlet line 3133 / a primary inlet is depicted. The case law for duplication of parts may be recited. Where, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within the first interfacing inlet (bottom arrows) are located in the flow path between the inlet line 3133 / primary inlet and the outlet line 3131 / primary outlet, noting, that the first interfacing inlet sits between the primary inlet and the primary outlet, such that the inlet line 3133 exists / empties into the first interfacing inlet of the primary conduit. As noted above, a duplication of parts case law was recited regarding implementing a second primary inlet. Accordingly, the case law for rearrangement of parts may be recited regarding the placement of the second primary inlet being located at an opposing end of the primary conduit in comparison to the first primary inlet. Where, the courts held that when shifting the location of an element would not have modified the operation of device. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ7 (CCPA 1975), MPEP 2144. The particular placement of an element was held to be obvious.
As illustrated in (Fig. 22) and provided above within the first interfacing inlet (bottom arrows) are located in the flow path between the inlet line 3133 / primary inlet and the outlet line 3131 / primary outlet, noting, that the first interfacing inlet sits between the primary inlet and the primary outlet, such that the inlet line 3133 exists / empties into the first interfacing inlet of the primary conduit.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 3 & 19 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrés E. Behrens Jr. whose telephone number is (571)-272-9096. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30 AM-5:30 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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on (571)-270-7001. 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.
/Andrés E. Behrens Jr./Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/JaMel M Nelson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights