Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-28 are pending and the subject of this FINAL Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 - Maintained
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) A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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; or
(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11 and 13-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by GABRIEL (US20200230876).
As to claim 1, GABRIEL teaches a powder for the production of mouldings in a layer-by-layer process in which areas of a powdered layer are selectively melted, sintered, fused, or solidified,
wherein the powder consists of the following components (e.g. claim 1, where the powder only contains (A) at least one semicrystalline polyamide, (B) at least one amorphous polyamide, and (C) at least one mineral flame retardant):
a) 60-99% by weight of a thermoplastic polymer selected as at least one polyamide with a melting temperature smaller than 175° C (A + B = 35-95% in claim 5; component A is PA6/12 in claim 6; “Component (A) of the invention typically has a melting temperature (TM(A)). Preferably, the melting temperature (TM(A)) of component (A) is in the range from 170 to 280° C”, para. 0129; also, Spec., pg. 14 states that PA6/12 is Tm<160°C);
b) 1-40% by weight of a mineral inorganic flame retardant (“20% to 60% by weight of component (C),” claim 5);
c) 0-25% by weight of additives, different from a) and b) (B can be considered an additive or part of A, regardless B is 5-25% and “the sinter powder (SP) additionally comprises in the range from 0.1% to 10% by weight of at least one additive selected from the group consisting of antinucleating agents, stabilizers, end group functionalizers, dyes and color pigments, based on the total weight of the sinter powder (SP),” claim 8);
wherein the components a)-c) add up to 100% by weight of the total material of the powder.
As to claim 2, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic polymer has a crystallinity below 35% (this is inherent in the same powders as disclosed in the Specification examples; see also, paras. 0212-17).
As to claim 3, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic polymer is a semi-crystalline polyamide (id.),
and/or wherein the thermoplastic polymer is a semi-crystalline polyamide and the polyamide is a copolyamide which comprises caprolactam building blocks (para. 0133-41), and
and/or wherein the thermoplastic polymer is a semi-crystalline polyamide and the polyamide is selected from the group consisting of: PA6/6I, PA 6/66, PA 6/66/6I, PA 6/106/12, PA 6/610, PA 6/610/12, PA 6/612/12, PA 6/1010/12, PA 6/1012/12, PA6/12, PA6/106, PA6/1010, PA6/1012, PA6/69 or a mixture thereof (claim 6; para. 0142-43).
As to claim 4, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic polymer is selected as polyamide PA 6/12 or a copolymer thereof, with a laurolactam molar proportion of at least 20%, wherein the laurolactam molar proportion is with respect to the total of the lactams used (paras. 0132-42).
As to claim 5, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic polymer has a melting point, measured in accordance with ISO 11357, of below 170° C. (paras. 0124-26, 0129, 0148-52),
and/or is a ground or precipitated polyamide powder (claim 11),
and/or has a relative viscosity, measured in m-cresol at a temperature of 20° C. and a concentration of 0.5 wt.-% according to ISO 307, in the range of 1.5-2.1 (para. 0127, 0151),
and/or has a melt enthalpy, measured in accordance with ISO 11357, below 25 (paras. 0124-26, 0129, 0148-52). In addition, the same compounds as disclosed in the specification have the same characteristics; thus, the prior art compounds with the same components have these same characteristics.
As to claim 6, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the proportion of component a) of the thermoplastic polymer is in the range of 65-95% by weight, with respect to the total material of the powder (see claim 1, above).
As to claim 7, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the inorganic flame retardant is activating and/or decomposing starting at a temperature of at most 260° C (GABRIEL teaches the same mineral flame retardants as here, yielding the same characteristics; paras. 0060, 0169-73, claim 1).
As to claim 7, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the inorganic flame retardant is a nitride, and/or a metal hydroxide, or a combination thereof (id.).
As to claim 9, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the proportion of component b) of the inorganic flame retardant is in the range of 5-30%, 15-25%, in with respect to the total material of the powder (see claim 1, above).
As to claim 10, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the additives of component c) are different from component b) and selected from the group consisting of fillers; flow agents; flame retardant systems different from component b), flame retardant synergist compounds (see claim 1, above).
As to claim 11, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the powder has an average particle size D50, measured according to ISO 13322-2, in the range of 50-80 μm (paras. 0064, 0068, claim 10),
and/or wherein the thermoplastic, ground polyamide powder has an MFR value, measured according to ISO 1133, in the range of 6-17 g/10 min.
As to claim 11, GABRIEL teaches a method of printing a three-dimensional article comprising the steps:
providing a powder according to claim 1 (claim 1); and
selectively solidifying layers of the powder to form the article (Abstract, claim 1, paras. 0001-02, 0009-14).
As to claim 14, GABRIEL teaches a flame-retardant article prepared using a method as defined in claim 13 (id.; para. 0015, claim 15).
As to claim 15, GABRIEL teaches a method of using a powder according to claim 1 for the production of mouldings in a in a layer-by-layer process in which areas of the powdered layer are selectively melted, sintered, fused, or solidified, including by focused or non-focused input of electromagnetic energy (Abstract, claims 1 and 4, paras. 0001-02, 0009-14, 0017).
As to claim 16, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic polymer has a crystallinity below 30% (this is inherent in the same powders as disclosed in the Specification examples; see also, paras. 0212-17).
As to claim 17, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic polymer is a semi-crystalline polyamide, based on aromatic and/or aliphatic dicarboxylic acid and/or aromatic and/or aliphatic, including cycloaliphatic, diamine and/or aromatic and/or aliphatic lactam/amino carboxylic acid building blocks (PA6/12; claim 6),
and/or wherein the thermoplastic polymer is a semi-crystalline polyamide and the polyamide is a copolyamide which comprises caprolactam building blocks, with further building blocks based on linear aliphatic lactams/aminocarboxylic acids and/or linear aliphatic dicarboxylic acids and linear aliphatic diamines, at last one of can have at least 9 carbon atoms (paras. 0132-42), and
and/or wherein the thermoplastic polymer is a semi-crystalline polyamide and the polyamide is selected from the group consisting of: PA6/6I, PA 6/66, PA 6/66/6I, PA 6/106/12, PA 6/610, PA 6/610/12, PA 6/612/12, PA 6/1010/12, PA 6/1012/12, PA6/12, PA6/106, PA6/1010, PA6/1012, PA6/69 or a mixture thereof, wherein the caprolactam molar proportion is at most 70%, or at most 60%, or in the range of 30-70%, wherein the caprolactam molar proportion is with respect to the total of the lactams used in case of PA6/12 and with respect to the total of the lactams and diamine-dicarboxylic acid blocks used in the other cases (paras. 0132-42, claim 6).
As to claim 18, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic polymer is selected as polyamide PA 6/12 or a copolymer thereof, with a laurolactam molar proportion of at least 25%, or in the range of 30-70%, wherein the laurolactam molar proportion is with respect to the total of the lactams used (paras. 0132-42, claim 6).
As to claim 19, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic polymer
has a melting point, measured in accordance with ISO 11357, of below 160° C. or below 150° C. or below 140° C., or in the range of 100-155° C. or 120-140° C.,
and/or is a ground polyamide powder, and wherein it is prepared by a cryogrinding process,
and/or has a relative viscosity, measured in m-cresol at a temperature of 20° C. and a concentration of 0.5 wt.-% according to ISO 307, in the range of 1.6-2.0 (para. 0127, 0151),
and/or has a melt enthalpy, measured in accordance with ISO 11357, below 20 J/g, or below 10 J/g (paras. 0149-50).
As to claim 20, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the proportion of component a) of the thermoplastic polymer is in the range of 70-90% by weight or 70-80% by weight, in each case with respect to the total material of the powder (see claim 1, above).
As to claim 21, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the inorganic flame retardant is activating and/or decomposing starting at a temperature of at most 200° C., or at most 190° C., or wherein the inorganic flame retardant is activating and/or decomposing in a temperature range of 170-350° C. or 170-260° C., or in the range of 180-340° C. or 180-240° C (GABRIEL teaches the same mineral oxide flame retardants, e.g. Al(OH)3, used in the examples here that have the same characteristics; paras. 0060, 0169-73, claim 1).
As to claim 22, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the inorganic flame retardant is a nitride, selected from the group consisting of BN, ZnB or a mixture thereof and/or a metal hydroxide, selected from the group consisting of aluminium trihydroxide (Al(OH)3), basic magnesium carbonate (MgCO3·Mg(OH)2), magnesium dihydroxide (Mg(OH)2), or a combination thereof (id.).
As to claim 23, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the inorganic flame retardant is selected as aluminium trihydroxide (id.).
As to claim 24, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the proportion of component b) of the inorganic flame retardant is in the range of 10-25%, or in the range of 15-25%, in each case with respect to the total material of the powder (See claim 1, above).
As to claim 25, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the additives of component c) are different from component b) and selected from the group consisting of fillers, selected from the group of talc, aluminium oxide-based fillers, glass fillers, including glass fibres and/or glass beads, calcium carbonate; flow agents, selected from the group of fumed or precipitated silica, metal salts of long-chain fatty acids, including metal stearates, titanium dioxide, group 1 salts, aluminium oxide; flame retardant systems different from component b), flame retardant synergist compounds, containing nitrogen and/or phosphorous, including melem, melam, melon or other melamine or derivatives thereof (para. 0053-54).
As to claim 26, GABRIEL teaches powder according to claim 1, wherein the powder has an average particle size D50, measured according to ISO 13322-2, in the range of 50-65 μm, or in the range of 50-60 μm (paras. 0064, 0068, 0072, claim 10, Table 5).
As to claim 27, GABRIEL teaches method according to claim 12, wherein, the particle size filtering process is for the generation of a particle size distribution such that the average particle size D50, measured according to ISO 13322-2, is in the range of 50-80 μm, or in the range of 50-65 μm, or in the range of 50-60 μm (id.).
As to claim 28, GABRIEL teaches method according to claim 13, wherein for selectively solidifying layers of the powder to form the article, focused or non-focused input of electromagnetic energy is used and the powder is provided in a layer-by-layer process (see claim 15, above),
and/or wherein the powder has a particle diameter D50 measured according to ISO 13322-2 of 50-80 μm, or 50-65 μm, or 50-60 μm (see claim 27, above).
Response to Arguments
The rejections are maintained because the claimed powder is indistinguishable from that of GABRIEL. Applicants are reminded that a composition is defined by its components. If the prior art teaches the same components as the claim, then it meets the claim. Any characteristics of that composition or components are possessed by prior art composition or components. That is, until Applicants prove otherwise. See MPEP § 2112.
Applicants have not done so. Applicants argue that the Examiner picks and chooses sections of GABRIEL that teach component percentages. This is inaccurate. The Examiner made clear that GABRIEL teaches “a sinter powder (SP) comprising the following components: (A) at least one semicrystalline polyamide, (B) at least one amorphous polyamide, (C) at least one mineral flame retardant” (claim 1; see also para. 0010, for example). This basic composition defines the outline or generic composition of the GABRIEL reference. Any skilled artisan would recognize that the other disclosures in GABRIEL fill in this outline or generic composition with details or species. To this end, the Examiner pointed to other sections of GABRIEL that teach specific percentages of components that fall within the claimed ranges. Applicants’ arguments fail here.
Last, Applicants argue that GABRIEL fails to teach a polyamide with a melting temperature smaller than 170°C. However, Applicants should consider their claims. For example, claim 1 fails to recite anything other than a generic “polyamide.” GABRIEL clearly teaches this. Next, claims 2-3 indicate that a “semicrystalline polyamide” such as PA 6/12 suffices. Again, taught by GABRIEL. In fact, caprolactam is taught, along with numerous options found within the claims here. In other words, same components, same characteristics. Even more, GABRIEL teaches tht “The sinter powder (SP) typically has a melting temperature (TM) in the range from 160 to 280° C” (para. 0076). Until Applicants amend their claims with specific components and amounts, the generic claims remain rejected. Thus, Applicants’ arguments fail here.
What would be convincing, however, is if Applicants amend the claims to recite specific components (individually or in combination), different from the prior art, that achieve their claimed results. Applicants seem to recognize this requirement by pointing to specific examples B1-B7, but these are not claimed. B1-B7 require the following components, which are not required by the claims:
PNG
media_image1.png
218
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Without this, Applicants’ arguments based on these limited examples fails to differentiate the claimed generic composition from the prior art. Thus, the claims remain too generic to differentiate from the prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 - Maintained
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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GABRIEL (US20200230876), in view of GRAMLICH (US20200010627).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply familiar polyamide powder filtration to the polyamide powder production method of GABRIEL to achieve purer powder production results with a reasonable expectation of success.
GABREL teach to produce the polyamide powders therein by melt-mixing components in an extruder (para. 0112), followed by liquid nitrogen grinding (paras. 0087 & 0259).
GABRIEL does not explicitly teach the thermoplastic material is subsequently subjected to a particle size filtering process.
However, filtering is a common process to achieve desired purity. For example, GRAMLICH teaches an additional step of filtration in polyamide powder production to separate polyamide powder from suspensions of other components used in the production of the polyamide powder (paras. 0178-79). A skilled artisan would have recognized the utility of such a filtration step to achieve polyamide powder purity without contaminating solvents, etc.
In sum, the claims are obvious because the prior art as whole clearly demonstrates that filtration of polyamide powder was routinely used to achieve known filtering/purity results.
Response to Arguments
The rejections are maintained for the reason given above.
Prior Art
Other prior art teaches SLS/SLM powders with PA6/12 or PA6/106 with mineral oxide flame retardants: US20210268726; US 20240010812 (specifically teaches powder compositions with components that fall within claimed ranges, phosphate flame retardant synergist); US20240359399; US 20180009982; US20200339751; US20190322805; US 20210403711; US20210388176; US20190248965; US 20220332922; WO 2021111481; US20240240033; WO2024099664.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELODY TSUI whose telephone number is (571)272-1846. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm.
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, Heather Calamita can be reached at 571-272-2876. 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.
/YUNG-SHENG M TSUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1684
Prosecution Insights