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 .
Claims 1-13 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/25/26.
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 14-19 in the reply filed on 2/25/26 is acknowledged.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO2022/204156.
14. A method of forming a three-dimensional object, comprising:
irradiating the resin composition of claim 1 with actinic radiation or light, thereby forming the three-dimensional object (WO2022/204156: paras. 0020,0022,0041,0052,0056,0061, and 0105; the piezoelectric composite, which comprises a piezoelectric particle covalently bonded to a polymer material that remains with the 3D printed article, constitutes the claimed resin composition; the polymer material can be a UV curable polymer material that is 3D printed).
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.
Claim(s) 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeSimone et al (USP2015/0097315) in view of WO2022/204156.
Regarding claim 15, DeSimone et al teach:
15. A method of forming a three-dimensional object, comprising:
(a) providing a carrier and an optically transparent member having a build surface, the carrier and the build surface defining a build region therebetween (DeSimone et al: figs 1-2);
(b) filling the build region with the resin composition (DeSimone et al: para. 0148; claims 1-13);
(c) irradiating the build region with light through the optically transparent member to solidify at least a portion of the resin composition (DeSimone et al: para. 0148; claims 1-13);
(d) advancing said carrier away from the build surface (DeSimone et al: para. 0148; claims 1-13); and
(e) repeating steps (b) through (d) to form a solid polymer scaffold (DeSimone et al: para. 0148; claims 1-13).
However, DeSimone et al do not teach the resin composition of claim 1. It should be noted that DeSimone et al using any polymerizable liquid including a polymer liquid containing any type of particle (DeSimone et al: paras. 0105 and 0121). WO2022/204156 teaches a piezoelectric composite, which comprises piezoelectric particles covalently bonded to a polymer material that remains with the 3D printed article (WO2022/204156: paras. 0020,0022,0041,0052,0056,0061, and 0105). Since DeSimone et al and WO2022/204156 are analogous with respect to 3D printing polymerizable liquids containing particles, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the piezoelectric particles of WO2022/204156 into the polymerizable liquid of DeSimone et al in order to efficiently form a piezoelectric composite having an enhances piezoelectric response when mechanically strained.
Regarding claim 16, DeSimone et al teach the claimed three-dimensional intermediate (DeSimone et al: para. 0148; claims 1-13) but do not explicitly teach the claimed further reacted to form the three-dimensional object. Since dual curing stereolithography is well-known in the additive manufacturing art, as supported by the instant specification at para 0005, for its efficiency, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a further reacting step into the process of DeSimone et al in order to improve efficiency without compromising product quality.
Regarding claim 17, DeSimone et al do not explicitly teach the claimed further reacted comprising heating, microwave irradiation, irradiation at a same or different wavelength, and/or exposure to moisture. Since dual curing stereolithography including a further heating and/or exposure to moisture are well-known in the additive manufacturing art, as supported by the instant specification at para 0005, for its efficiency, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a further reacting step of heating and/or moisture into the process of DeSimone et al in order to improve efficiency without compromising product quality.
Regarding claim 18, DeSimone et al do not teach a dual cure resin. Since dual curing stereolithography including the use of dual cure resins is well-known in the additive manufacturing art, as supported by the instant specification at para 0005, for its efficiency, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a dual cure resin in the process of DeSimone et al in order to improve product quality and cycle time without compromising product quality.
Regarding claim 19, such is taught by (DeSimone et al: para. 0010-0011 and 0148; claims 1-13).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references teach 3D printing composites comprising a filler covalently bonded to a resin: US 2022/0259387; WO2022/204197; USPN 6322728; and USP 20160322560.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDMUND H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1204. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-4PM.
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, Xiao (Sam) Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
EHL
/EDMUND H LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights