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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character 108 has been used to designate both the bed and the motherboard in Figure 1. The motherboard is designated by reference character 180 in the specification and in other figures (see [0044], Figure 2, and Figure 4, for example). Reference character 180 should be used to designate the motherboard in Figure 1.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 230 (see Figure 2). Reference character 230 appears to designate the second support, which is designated by reference character 232 elsewhere (see [0046], [0050], Figure 1, and Figure 4, for example). Reference character 230 should be replaced with “232” in Figure 2.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In [0003], “the base assembly is base assembly is substantially co-planar to the extruder” should be replaced with “the base assembly is substantially co-planar to the extruder”.
In [0035], “the first ends 121a and 121b” should be replaced with “the first ends 121a and 122a”, as the first end of the second slot 120b is designated 122a.
In [0037], “the tab 125a” should be replaced with “the tab 125b”, as reference character 125a designates the body of the slide lock and 125b designates the tab.
In [0038], “the first ends 121a, 121b” should be replaced with “the first ends 121a, 122a”.
In [0044], both occurrences of “the bed support 112” should be replaced with “the bed frame 112” for consistency, as reference character 112 designates the bed frame.
In [0051], “the first stops 121a, 121b” should be replaced with “the first stops 121a, 122a”.
In [0051], the passage beginning “in the folded configuration the projections 208 of the extruder assembly 200 are disposed in the pin slots 120” and ending “to create printed parts on the bed 108” describes the extruding configuration rather than the folded configuration. The language “in the folded configuration” should be replaced with “in the extruding configuration”.
In [0051], “from the extruding configuration to the folded configuration” should be replaced with “from the folded configuration to the extruding configuration”, as the steps recited in [0052] conclude with the 3D printer 100 in the extruding configuration.
In [0052], “the first stop 121a and the first stop 121b” should be replaced with “the first stop 121a and the first stop 122a”.
In [0054], “the electronics box 308 includes openings 312” should be replaced with “the electronics box 304 includes openings 312”, as reference character 304 designates the electronics box and 308 designates the motherboard.
In [0054], “the motherboard 308 is a 3D-printed part and manufactured of PLA” should be replaced with “the electronics box 304 is a 3D-printed part and manufactured of PLA”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the extruded configuration” should be replaced with “the extruding configuration” for consistency with claim 1, which recites “an extruding configuration”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a removable locking mechanism, wherein when the locking mechanism is coupled to the base assembly, the locking mechanism prevents movement of the extruder assembly out of the slot frame” in claims 8 and 18.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The corresponding structure for the “removable locking mechanism” is the slide lock 124, comprising a body 125a and a tab 125b that is removably disposed in the T-shaped opening 117 of the slot frame 116 to cap the pin slots 120 and to secure the projections 208 within the slots 120, as well as equivalents thereof. See [0037] and Figure 20.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 12 and 16 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 12 recites the limitation “the slot frame” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 12 depends from claim 1, which does not recite a slot frame. A slot frame is first introduced in claim 2. For purposes of examination, claim 12 is being interpreted as depending from claim 2 to provide antecedent basis for “the slot frame”.
Claim 16 recites that “the base assembly comprises a plurality of projections movably disposed in the plurality of slots”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite. Claim 16 depends from claim 13, which recites that the extruder housing of the extruder assembly, and not the base assembly, comprises the one or more projections that are movably disposed in the one or more slots. It is therefore unclear whether the “plurality of projections” recited in claim 16 refers to the projections of the extruder housing recited in claim 13 or to an additional, different set of projections carried by the base assembly. For purposes of examination, claim 16 is being interpreted as reciting that “the extruder housing comprises a plurality of projections movably disposed in the plurality of slots”, consistent with claim 13 and the specification (see [0045] and Figure 15).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0206074 (“Lee”) (related to US 11,358,333, cited in an IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a 3D printer configured to be foldable and portable (a foldable 3D printer having high portability; [0009]-[0010]), comprising:
a base assembly (main body 100, including housing 110 and stage support 130, together with stage 200; [0035]-[0037]; Figures 1 and 5); and
an extruder assembly coupled to the base assembly, the extruder assembly comprising an extruder (the bridge assembly, including the bridge 300 and its swing bars 310 and support bar 320, the nozzle unit 500 having nozzle 530, and the extruder unit 600 having extruder 610; [0035], [0053], [0066]-[0067], [0075]; Figures 1, 2, 8, and 10);
wherein the 3D printer is reconfigurable between a folded configuration, in which the base assembly is substantially co-planar to the extruder (the bridge assembly, including the structure attached thereto, is positioned parallel to, and in the same plane as, the main body 100 when not in use; [0011], [0041], [0062]; Figure 3), and an extruding configuration, in which the extruder is disposed above the base assembly and configured to print parts on the base assembly (the bridge assembly, including the structure attached thereto, is positioned perpendicular to the main body 100 such that the nozzle 530 prints on the stage 200; [0040], [0061], [0074]; Figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses that the base assembly comprises a slot frame (the portion of the housing 110 having the swing bar coupling grooves 111; [0038]; Figure 5) that receives the extruder assembly to secure the extruder assembly to the base assembly such that the 3D printer is movable from the folded configuration to the extruding configuration (the bridge is coupled to the housing 110 by the swing bar coupling grooves 111 and is rotatable about the Y-axis between the folded and extruding positions; [0038], [0057]).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses that the slot frame comprises a slot that facilitates the reconfiguration between the folded configuration and the extruding configuration (the swing bar coupling groove 111, in which the swing bar coupling protrusion is received and about which the bridge rotates; [0038], [0057]).
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses that the slot extends along the length of the base assembly (the swing bar coupling groove 111 is formed in the housing 110 and extends in the lengthwise direction of the main body 100; [0038]; Figures 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses that the slot is recessed within the base assembly (the swing bar coupling groove 111 is a groove recessed in the housing 110; [0038]; Figures 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses that the slot frame comprises a plurality of slots (a swing bar coupling groove 111 is formed at each of the two lateral sides of the housing 110; [0038]) and wherein the extruder assembly comprises a plurality of projections movably disposed in the plurality of slots, respectively, to move the 3D printer between the folded configuration and the extruded configuration (each of the swing bars 310 has a swing bar coupling protrusion movably inserted into a respective coupling groove 111; [0054], [0057]).
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses that the base assembly comprises a bed for supporting the printed parts (stage 200; [0046], [0074]; Figures 1 and 7), wherein the bed lies in a plane defined by a first axis and a second axis (the stage 200 lies in the horizontal X-Y plane; Figures 1 and 2), and wherein when the 3D printer is in the extruding configuration, the extruder is movable along a third axis perpendicular to the plane (the nozzle 530 is movable in the Z-axis direction via the nozzle transfer bar 400 and the nozzle transfer bar guide 311; [0055]-[0056], [0065]; Figures 1, 2, 4, and 8).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses that the extruder assembly further comprises an extruder support for supporting the extruder, wherein the extruder moves along the second axis when the 3D printer is in the extruding configuration (the nozzle transfer bar 400 supports the nozzle unit 500, which moves in the Y-axis direction along the nozzle transfer bar 400; [0065], [0074]; Figures 1-4).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses a first motor that produces motion of the extruder along the third axis and a second motor that produces motion of the extruder along the second axis (a first roller motor 731 and a second roller motor 732 drive the nozzle transfer belt 710 to move the nozzle unit 500 in the Z-axis and Y-axis directions; [0084]-[0085]; Figures 1, 9, and 12).
Regarding claim 11, Lee discloses that the extruder assembly comprises a first support for the extruder, wherein the length of the first support extends along the third axis when the extruder assembly is in the extruding configuration (the swing bar 310, whose longitudinal direction defines the Z-axis when the bridge assembly is positioned perpendicular to the main body; [0033], [0055]; Figure 1).
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses that the slot frame comprises a plurality of first openings and a plurality of second openings (the second swing bar securing grooves 113 and the first swing bar securing grooves 112, respectively, formed at the lateral sides of the housing 110; [0039], [0058]; Figure 6), wherein the extruder assembly further comprises an extruder housing coupled to the extruder and comprising a plurality of slot extrusions (the swing bars 310 carrying swing bar securing protrusions 312; [0058]; Figure 8), wherein the slot extrusions are disposed in the first openings, respectively, to secure the extruder assembly to the base assembly when the 3D printer is in the extruding configuration (the securing protrusions 312 are inserted into the second securing grooves 113 to hold the bridge perpendicular; [0040]), and wherein the slot extrusions are disposed in the second openings, respectively, to secure the extruder assembly to the base assembly when the 3D printer is in the folded configuration (the securing protrusions 312 are inserted into the first securing grooves 112 to hold the bridge parallel; [0041]).
Regarding claim 13, Lee discloses a 3D printer configured to be foldable and portable (a foldable 3D printer having high portability; [0009]-[0010]), comprising:
a base assembly comprising:
a bed (stage 200; [0046]; Figures 1 and 7);
a bed support for the bed (stage support 130; [0036], [0045]; Figure 5); and
a slot frame coupled to the bed support, the slot frame comprising one or more slots (the portion of the housing 110 having the swing bar coupling grooves 111; [0036]-[0038]; Figure 5); and
an extruder assembly coupled to the base assembly and comprising:
an extruder (nozzle unit 500 having nozzle 530, supplied by extruder unit 600 having extruder 610; [0066]-[0067], [0075]; Figures 1, 2, and 10); and
an extruder housing coupled to the extruder and comprising one or more projections movably disposed in the one or more slots, respectively (the bridge assembly, including the bridge 300 and its swing bars 310 and support bar 320, the swing bars 310 each having a swing bar coupling protrusion movably inserted into one of the swing bar coupling grooves 111; [0053]-[0054], [0057]; Figures 1, 3, and 8);
wherein the 3D printer is reconfigurable between a folded configuration, in which the base assembly is co-planar to the extruder assembly (the bridge assembly, including the structure attached thereto, is positioned parallel to, and in the same plane as, the main body 100 when not in use; [0011], [0041], [0062]; Figure 3), and an extruding configuration, in which the extruder assembly is disposed above the base assembly and configured to print parts on the bed (the bridge assembly, including the structure attached thereto, is positioned perpendicular to the main body 100 such that the nozzle 530 prints on the stage 200; [0040], [0061], [0074]; Figure 1), via movement of the one or more projections in the one or more slots (rotation of the swing bar coupling protrusions within the swing bar coupling grooves 111; [0038], [0057]).
Regarding claim 14, Lee discloses that the slot frame extends along the length of the base assembly (the portion of the housing 110 having the swing bar coupling grooves 111 extends in the lengthwise direction of the main body 100; Figures 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 15, Lee discloses that the one or more slots are recessed within the base assembly (the swing bar coupling grooves 111 are grooves recessed in the housing 110; [0038]; Figures 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses that the slot frame comprises a plurality of slots (a swing bar coupling groove 111 is formed at each of the two lateral sides of the housing 110; [0038]) and the extruder housing comprises a plurality of projections movably disposed in the plurality of slots (each of the swing bars 310 has a swing bar coupling protrusion movably inserted into a respective coupling groove 111; [0054], [0057]; see the corresponding § 112(b) rejection).
Regarding claim 17, Lee discloses that the bed lies in a plane defined by a first axis and a second axis (the stage 200 lies in the horizontal X-Y plane; Figures 1 and 2), and wherein when the 3D printer is in the extruding configuration, the extruder is movable along a third axis perpendicular to the plane (the nozzle 530 is movable in the Z-axis direction via the nozzle transfer bar 400 and the nozzle transfer bar guide 311; [0055]-[0056], [0065]; Figures 1, 2, 4, and 8).
Regarding claim 20, Lee discloses that the slot frame comprises a plurality of first openings and a plurality of second openings (the second swing bar securing grooves 113 and the first swing bar securing grooves 112, respectively, formed at the lateral sides of the housing 110; [0039], [0058]; Figure 6), wherein the extruder housing comprises a plurality of slot extrusions (the swing bar securing protrusions 312 of the swing bars 310; [0058]; Figure 8), wherein the slot extrusions are disposed in the first openings, respectively, to secure the extruder assembly to the base assembly when the 3D printer is in the extruding configuration (the securing protrusions 312 are inserted into the second securing grooves 113 to hold the bridge perpendicular; [0040]), and wherein the slot extrusions are disposed in the second openings, respectively, to secure the extruder assembly to the base assembly when the 3D printer is in the folded configuration (the securing protrusions 312 are inserted into the first securing grooves 112 to hold the bridge parallel; [0041]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee.
Regarding claim 19, Lee discloses that the base assembly comprises a bed motor configured to move the bed along the first axis when the 3D printer is in the extruding configuration (the stage transfer guide 120 transfers the stage 200 along the X-axis and may be provided as a screw that is rotatable to transfer the stage support 130 under the control of a controller; [0042]-[0045]; Figures 1 and 5).
A rotatable screw that transfers the stage 200 under controller control necessarily requires a motor to cause the rotation. The recited bed motor is therefore inherently present in Lee. To the extent applicant traverses the inherency of a motor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to drive the rotatable stage screw with a motor, as a motor is the conventional and predictable means for rotating such a screw under controller control.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 8 and 18 each require a removable locking mechanism, wherein when the locking mechanism is coupled to the base assembly, the locking mechanism prevents movement of the extruder assembly out of the slot frame. As set forth above under the heading “Claim Interpretation”, this limitation is interpreted under § 112(f), and the corresponding structure is the slide lock 124 (comprising a body 125a and a tab 125b) that is removably disposed in the T-shaped opening 117 of the slot frame so as to cap the open ends of the pin slots and thereby retain the projections within the slots, and equivalents thereof.
The closest prior art is Lee. As discussed above, Lee discloses a foldable 3D printer in which the extruder-carrying bridge is coupled to the base by a protrusion that is captured within, and pivots about, a groove. Lee does not disclose or suggest a slot frame having slots with open ends through which projections are laterally inserted into and removed from the slots, nor a removable locking mechanism that caps such an opening to retain the projections within the slots. Because Lee’s protrusions are captured within the grooves, there is no need for the claimed removable locking mechanism.
Although removable members for retaining a pin or projection within a slot are known in other contexts, the prior art does not teach or suggest combining such a retainer with a foldable 3D printer of the type disclosed by Lee.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Specifically, see the abstract and Figure 1 of CN 111730858 A, the abstract and Figures 1, 2, and 6-8 of CN 109605744 A, and the abstract and Figure 1 of CN 106564190 A.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John DeRusso whose telephone number is (571)270-1287. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00 AM-6:00 PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sam 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.
/John J DeRusso/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights