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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 1, the status of the non-provisional parent applications should be updated (the information should include the application number, the filing date and the patent number).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 24, 26 and 28-35 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.
In claim 24, line 2, the term “remainerd” is confusing and unclear.
In claim 26, line 2, the term “remainerd” is confusing and unclear.
In claim 28, line 1, there appears to be one or more words missing after the term “from”.
In claim 32, line 2, the term “remainerd” is confusing and unclear.
In claim 34, line 2, the term “remainerd” is confusing and unclear.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-23, 25, 27 and 36-40 are allowable over the prior art references currently of record.
Claims 24, 26 and 28-35 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art references currently of record, alone or in combination, disclose, suggest or teach a process of printing a three-dimensional part with an additive manufacturing system, including (1) providing a part material including one or more semi-crystalline polyethylene terephthalate polymers and one or more amorphous polyethylene terephthalate polymers that are configured to retard crystallization of the one or more semi-crystalline polyethylene terephthalate polymers, wherein the one or more amorphous polyethylene terephthalate polymers are substantially miscible with the one or more semi-crystalline polyethylene terephthalate polymers, and (2) melting the part material in an additive manufacturing system (as recited in claim 21). None of the prior art references currently of record, alone or in combination, disclose, suggest or teach a process of printing a three-dimensional part with an additive manufacturing system, including (1) providing a part material including one or more semi-crystalline polyethylene terephthalate polymers and one or more amorphous polymers that are substantially miscible with the one or more semi-crystalline polyethylene terephthalate polymers, and (2) melting the part material in a print head (as recited in claim 28). None of the prior art references currently of record, alone or in combination, disclose, suggest or teach a process of printing a three-dimensional part with an additive manufacturing system, including (1) providing a part material including one or more semi-crystalline polyethylene terephthalate polymers and one or more amorphous polyethylene terephthalate polymers that are substantially miscible with the one or more semi-crystalline polymers, and (2) melting the part material in an additive manufacturing system (as recited in claim 36).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEO B. TENTONI whose telephone number is (571)272-1209. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:00 ET M-F.
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, Christina A. Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1176. 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.
LEO B. TENTONI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/LEO B TENTONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights