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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by ERICKSON (WO 2019/005048).
Regarding claim 1, ERICKSON discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a printing system (10) input from a
computing device [0019]-[0020], [0032],
dispensing, by a build material distributor (18) (binder jetting printer), powder
[0020],
pre-wetting, by inkjet applicator (24) (a mechanism of the binder jetting printer
system that is separate from the binder printer), the powder with a
liquid [0020], [0026], [0035], [0048],
receiving, by the printing system 10 (binder jetting printer system), sensor input [0031], [0100] based on pre-wetting the powder such as steel metal powder printing with a binder such as binder 20 including nickel nanoparticles [0037], [0044], and
receiving, by the printing system 10 (binder jetting printer system), sensor input based on printing with the fluid or binder 20 [0031], [0087], [0090], and [0100].
Regarding claims 2-3, ERICKSON discloses the moisture delivery unit is a Piezoelectric printhead [0025].
Regarding claims 4-5, ERICKSON discloses the liquid used in the pre-wetting of the powder is a humectant such as triethylene glycol [0053]-[0054].
Regarding claims 6-11, ERICKSON discloses the sensor input is a camera such as high speed thermal imaging or infrared camera [0089], [0096], [0100].
Regarding claims 12 and 16, ERICKSON discloses performing adjustments [0031].
Regarding claim 13, ERICKSON discloses adjusting output of liquid dispensed onto the powder (fluid loading) [0018].
Regarding claim 14, ERICKSON discloses adjustments also include decreasing the time between pre-wetting and printing [0018], [0020], [0033], claim 13.
Regarding claim 15, ERICKSON discloses the time may be increased [0043], [0078], [0080], [0082], [0109].
Regarding claims 17-18, ERICKSON discloses adjusting fluid loading (decreasing or increasing the spacing) to minimize fluid splashing [0066]-[0071].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the liquid application mechanism in Erickson is not separate
from the binder printer.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, Erickson discloses dispensing, by a build material distributor (18) (binder jetting printer), powder
[0020] and
pre-wetting, by inkjet applicator (24) (a mechanism of the binder jetting printer
system that is separate from the binder printer), the powder with a
liquid [0020], [0026], [0035], [0048].
Applicant argues Erickson does not disclose applying any separate, non-binder liquid to the powder prior to, or independent of, the single fluid-application step.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Erickson discloses the fluid (20) is selectively deposited at a fluid loading that wets the portion 46 of the layer 30 through the predetermined height H without saturating the portion 46. The fluid at least partially penetrates the voids between the build material particles 16 throughout the entire height [0064]. Furthermore, Erickson discloses the selective application of the fluid is separated into multiple events (e.g., with delay time between the applications/events) and that multiple applications may be used [0069].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 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
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) KLEIN et al. (WO 2016/040453) discloses a method for three-dimensional printing progress verification.
b) BUMGARDNER (US 2015/0273583) discloses layer scanning inspection system for use in conjunction with an additive workpiece fabrication system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STELLA KIM YI whose telephone number is (571)270-5123. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 EST.
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 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.
STELLA YI
Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/STELLA K YI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights