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 .
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I-A (claims 1-12) in the reply filed on 02/25/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention I-B or II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/25/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 02/05/2025 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because non-patent literature document #1 does not include a date when it is described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public.
It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Para. [0094] of Instant Specification, as published in US 20250381776 A1, indicates the ink with the numeral 58. The numeral should be corrected to 48.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 11, and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 should be corrected to “the ink” (line 4).
Claim 11 should be corrected to “[[an]]the opened position” (line 2).
Claim 12 should be corrected to “to output the control signals to the voltage source to initiate the one or more jets of the ink to create a two-dimensional or a three dimensional print” (lines 1-3).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Examiner wishes to point out to applicant that claims are directed towards an apparatus and as such will be examined under such conditions.
The limitations which are directed to articles or products worked upon by the claimed apparatus are only given patentable weight to the extent which effects the structure of the claimed invention. Please see MPEP 2115 and In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) for further details.
The limitations which are directed to intended uses or capabilities of the claimed apparatus are only given patentable weight to the extent which effects the structure of the claimed invention. Please see MPEP 2114, Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) and Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) for further details.
Claims 1-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alleyne (US 20120105528 A1) in view of Price (US 20220414380 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Alleyne teaches an electrohydrodynamic printing system (abstract; [0149]: electrohydrodynamic jet (E-jet) printing device 10; figs. 1, 2A), comprising:
a nozzle including a nozzle opening, the nozzle is configured to contain ink and discharge the ink through the nozzle opening ([0148-0149]: nozzle 30 including a nozzle tip 90; figs. 1, 2A);
a discharge electrode configured to be in electrical communication with ink in the nozzle to apply voltage to the ink and create a jet of the ink discharged from the nozzle opening ([0065]: the first electrode is coated (e.g., inner surface that faces the printing fluid volume); [0149, 0152]: a metal-coated nozzle tip 90; figs. 1, 2A, 3);
a voltage source configured to apply the voltage to the discharge electrode ([0149, 0152]: power supply 50; figs. 1, 2A);
an imager configured to image the jet of the ink discharged ([0177]: a camera for nozzle alignment and jetting visualization; [0265-0266]: the visualization system includes a high-resolution camera and magnification lens mounted to a 180° rotary track, as well as a fiber optic light with adjustable arms fig. 31); and
a controller in communication with the voltage source and [the imager], and [wherein the controller is configured to analyze images from the imager of the jet of the discharged ink], configure control signals for the voltage source for controlling the voltage applied to the discharge electrode to initiate the jet of the ink discharged from the nozzle opening [based on the analysis of the images], and output the control signals to the voltage source ([0146]: monitoring and controlling the E-jet process via current sensing and input voltage modulation and optimization; [0150]: a control process by a series of input 200 of a process parameter, output 400, real-time feedback 650, a process map 700, feedforward control 750, controller 800 processing information from the map and the sensor, and controlling a parameter 900 as the input 200; [0007, 0030]: control systems, characterized as feedback and feedforward control, guide the selection of one or more process parameters and/or electrical parameters such as back pressure, voltage input, current input, and offset height; [0020-0021]; [0115]).
Alleyne does not specifically teach the bracketed limitation(s) as presented above, i.e., the printing process control is based on the image analysis from an imager. However, Price teaches the limitation(s) as follows:
Price teaches three-dimensional (3D) printing, characterizing the liquid reflective surface(s) of the meniscus of a liquid metal drop when the liquid metal drop is in a nozzle of the 3D printer. Price teaches that the 3D printer comprises an imager configured to image the jet of the ink discharged (fig. 2 and [0064-0065]: camera 140 directed at/toward at least a portion of the liquid printing material 120, i.e., a meniscus 125 and/or drop 124A; fig. 7 and [0074-0075]: the method 300 may also include determining when the drops 124A-124E are jetted through the nozzle 114; [0104]: the method 900 may also include capturing a plurality of images of the drops 124A-124E, as at 906, including capturing images of the meniscus 125 of each drop 124A-124E when the drop 124A-124E is positioned at least partially within the nozzle 114 and capturing images of the drops 124A-124E as the drops 124A-124E descend from the nozzle 114 toward the substrate 160) and a controller in communication with the voltage source and the imager, and [wherein the controller is configured to analyze images from the imager of the jet of the discharged ink, configure control signals for the voltage source for controlling the voltage applied to the discharge electrode to initiate the jet of the ink discharged from the nozzle opening based on the analysis of the images, and output the control signals to the voltage source (fig. 1 and [0010-0012, 0063]: the computing system 190 may also be configured to adjust one or more parameters of the 3D printer based at least partially upon the behavior of the meniscus; fig. 9 and [0148-0149]: the parameters may be adjusted based at least partially upon the image (from 906), the model (from 908), the simulation (from 910), the labeled simulated images (from 912), the inverse mapping (from 914), the metrics (from 916), or a combination thereof, and the parameters may be adjusted to control the behavior of the meniscus 125 of the liquid printing material 120 (e.g., the drop 124A) in the nozzle 114, which may improve the quality of the 3D object 126, and the parameters to be adjusted may be or include power (e.g., voltage, current, frequency, pulse width, voltage vs time waveform, etc.) provided to the coils 134 by the power source 132; fig. 3 and [0066-0088]: a flowchart of a method for printing a 3D object, including feedback/feedforward control of one or more parameters of 3D printing).
Both Alleyne and Price are directed to the same field of hydrodynamic printing (Alleyne: abstract; Price: [0002]). Although Alleyne discloses that process control based on image processing is rather disadvantageous as monitoring method since it is time-consuming and needs more computation power and advanced imaging processing algorithms ([0154]), Alleyne discloses that a camera is used to view the emission of the droplet from the nozzle onto the substrate and, at the same time, suggest that imaging processing be one of available monitoring/feedback-control methods of the 3D printing process ([0154], figs. 15, 31). Upon advancement of imaging process enabled over time, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the controller of the 3D printing system of Alleyne to be configured to analyze images of the jet of discharged ink and feedback to control one or more process parameters such as voltage provided to a dispensing nozzle as taught by Price in order to obtain known results of characterizing liquid surfaces of the meniscus of a liquid drop within a nozzle of 3D printer and discharged drops therefrom and adjusting one or more process parameters based on visual deviation, so as to achieve hydrodynamic printing with improved stability, precision, and automation.
Regarding claim 2, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to compare a profile of the jet of the ink discharged in the image to one or more thresholds and output the control signals to the voltage source based on the comparison of the profile of the jet of the ink discharged in the image to the one or more thresholds (Alleyne: [0016]: the controlling step is selected from the group consisting of: modulating the electric potential difference to provide real-time feedback control of print frequency or droplet size; Price: figs. 3, 8, 10 and [0087-0088]: the one or more parameters may be adjusted based at least partially upon the one or more metrics (e.g., the pulse periods (in graph 810), the pulse-averaged signal (in graph 830), the envelope amplitude (in graph 840), the meniscus carrier signal (in graph 850), the meniscus oscillation frequency (in graph 860), or a combination thereof), for example, in response to the meniscus oscillation frequency being greater than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 1.5 kHz), in response to a decay rate of the meniscus oscillation frequency being greater than or less than a predetermined rate; figs. 3, 8 and [0078-0080]: the “amplitude envelope” referring to the difference between local maxima and local minima over a sliding temporal window, and may yield information about the decay rate and time taken for the meniscus 125 to reach a “quiet” steady state; [0149]: in response to the meniscus amplitude relaxation time being greater than a threshold (e.g., 50% of the pulse period), the jetting rate of the drops 124A-124E may be reduced; [0150]: the metrics may include comparing predicted parameters to a reference threshold).
Regarding claim 3, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 1, wherein: the imager is configured to image each of a plurality of jets of the ink discharged over a period of time (Price: [0064-0065, 0074-0075, 0104]; fig. 7 and [0075]), and the controller is configured to compare a period of the jets of the ink discharged over the period of time in the images to one or more thresholds and output the control signals to the voltage source based on the comparison of the frequency of the images of the jet of the ink discharged over the period of time to the one or more thresholds (Alleyne: [0016]: the controlling step is selected from the group consisting of: modulating the electric potential difference to provide real-time feedback control of print frequency or droplet size; Price: figs. 6, 7 and [0075]: the meniscus 125 of the drop 124A reaches a predetermined (e.g., low) steady state level (i.e., a desirable level) before the next drop is jetted, and the predetermined steady state level is less than about 30%, less than about 20%, or less than about 10% of the maximum STV within the pulse period; fig. 3, 8 and [0076-0088]: in determining (e.g., characterizing) a behavior of the meniscus 125, as at 324, the behavior may be determined/ characterized based at least partially upon the metrics (e.g., the characteristics of the pulse STV waveform), more particularly, at least partially upon the pulse periods (in graph 810), the pulse-averaged signal (in graph 830), the envelope amplitude (in graph 840), the meniscus carrier signal (in graph 850), the meniscus oscillation frequency (in graph 860), or a combination thereof, and the method 300 may also include adjusting one or more parameters of the 3D printer 100, as at 330, at least partially upon the one or more metrics (e.g., the pulse periods (in graph 810), the pulse-averaged signal (in graph 830), the envelope amplitude (in graph 840), the meniscus carrier signal (in graph 850), the meniscus oscillation frequency (in graph 860), or a combination thereof), for example, the one or more parameters may be adjusted in response to the meniscus oscillation frequency being greater than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 1.5 kHz) or may be adjusted in response to a decay rate of the meniscus oscillation frequency).
Regarding claim 4, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising: a pressure regulator in communication with the controller and configured to control a pressure applied to the ink in the nozzle (Alleyne: fig. 1 and [0149]: pressure regulator 60, comprising a pressure gauge 62 and pneumatic regulator 64, and air line 80), and wherein the controller is configured to output control signals to the pressure regulator for controlling the pressure applied to the ink in the nozzle based on the analysis of the images (Alleyne: [0016]: the controlling step is selected from the group consisting of: modulating the fluid pressure to provide real-time feedback control of print frequency or droplet size; fig. 31 and [0177]: a camera for nozzle alignment and jetting visualization, to validate the feasibility of controlling the E-jet printing process; Price: figs. 3, 9 and [0010-0012, 0063, 0066-0088, 0148-0149]: image processing of the jet of the ink for adjusting one or more parameters).
Regarding claim 5, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising: an illumination source, wherein the illumination source is configured to illuminate a target area for the imager and the target area includes the jet of the ink discharged from the nozzle (Alleyne: [0177]: a camera for nozzle alignment and jetting visualization; fig. 31 and [0265-0266]: the visualization system includes a high-resolution camera and magnification lens mounted to a 180° rotary track, as well as a fiber optic light with adjustable arms; Price: fig. 2 and [0063]: light source 150; [0104]: capturing a plurality of images of the drops 124A-124E).
Regarding claim 6, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising: a groundless stage configured to receive a substrate having a surface to which the ink discharged from the nozzle is to be applied (Alleyne: [0052]: the support may be electrically conductive, and the voltage source provided in electrical contact with the support, so that a uniform and highly-confined electric field is established between the nozzle and the substrate surface, and in an aspect, the electric potential provided to the support is less than the electric potential of the printing fluid; of note, here, “less than the electric potential of the printing fluid” does not necessarily mean the potential on the support is grounded).
Regarding claim 7, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 6, wherein the groundless stage is adjustable in three dimensions (Alleyne: [0055]: the support connected to a movable sage, moving at least in X-, Y- dimensions; fig. 31 and [0266]: positioning system, moving in X-, Y-, Z- and rotary axis; Price: [0059]: the substrate control motor 164 may be configured to move the substrate 160 in three dimensions (e.g., along the X axis, the Y axis, and a Z axis)).
Regarding claim 8, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising: a nozzle adjustment system, wherein the nozzle adjustment system is configured to adjust a position of the nozzle in three dimensions (Alleyne: [0055]: the nozzle, moving at least in X-, Y- dimensions; fig. 31 and [0266]: positioning system, moving in X-, Y-, Z- and rotary axis; Price: [0059]: the nozzle 114 may be also or instead be configured to move in three dimensions).
Regarding claim 9, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising: a ground electrode configured to create an electric field with the discharge electrode (Alleyne: [0065]: various counter electrode, e.g., a counter-electrode as a single electrode, having a ring configuration through which printing fluid is ejected; [0115]: the electric potential difference may be generated by providing a bias or electric potential to one electrode compared to a counter electrode, and the resultant electric field results in controllable printing on a substrate surface; OR, [0052]: in an aspect, the substrate support is electrically grounded; [0115]: the electric potential difference refers to the voltage supply generated potential difference between the printing fluid within the nozzle (e.g., the fluid in the vicinity of the ejection orifice) and the substrate surface, and can provide an electric charge to the printable fluid contained in the nozzle).
Regarding claim 12, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to output control signals to the voltage source to initiate one or more jets of ink to create a two-dimensional or three-dimension print (Alleyne: figs. 19-20, 25 and [0030, 0146, 0150]: controlling one or more parameter such as voltage; Price: [0001]: a 3D printer; figs. 3, 9 and [0066-0088, 0148-0149]). Although modified Alleyne does not specifically teach that the controller is configured to control the 2D or 3D printing in a micro-gravity or less environment, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention, through routine optimization and experimentation, the controller would be configured to perform the 2D, or 3D printing in a micro-gravity or less environment in use of the same feedback/ feedforward-based control system as taught by modified Alleyne.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alleyne (US 20120105528 A1) and Price (US 20220414380 A1) as applied to claim 9, and further in view of Wang (CN 110962344 A).
Regarding claim 10, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 9, but does not specifically teach the system further comprising: a switch having a closed position in which the electric field is created between the discharge electrode and the ground electrode and an opened position in which the electric field between the discharge electrode and the ground electrode is interrupted.
Wang teaches an array-type microdroplet generating device based on a hybrid drive of pneumatic and electrohydrodynamics ([002]). Wang teaches that a switch having a closed position in which the electric field is created between the discharge electrode and the ground electrode and an opened position in which the electric field between the discharge electrode and the ground electrode is interrupted ([0013]: each nozzle is connected to a switch control unit; when S1 is on (i.e., closed), the nozzle is connected to a high voltage and the liquid squeezed out from the tip of each high-voltage nozzle will be rapidly deformed under action of electric field force to form a Taylor cone, the end of the Tylor cone breaks to form microdroplets; when S1 is off (i.e., open), the nozzle is connected to zero voltage without spraying out any droplets; figs. 1-3).
In the same field of endeavor of electrodynamic printing (Alleyne: abstract; Wang: [0002]), both modified Alleyne and Wang disclose that the substrate support are grounded and form an electric field as high-voltage is applied to nozzle (Alleyne: [0052, 0115]; Wang: fig. 1 and [0012]: the collecting electrode 7 is placed below the nozzle array 6 and connected to the ground wire of the high-voltage power supply 8; [0013]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify the nozzle (i.e., one having “the discharge electrode” as recited) of modified Alleyne to be further connected with a switch control unit that interchanges the electric field between the nozzle and the ground electrode in ON or OFF state as taught by Wang in order to obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of facilitating stable and on-demand spaying of liquid droplets (Wang: derived from [0006-0009]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Alleyne teaches the system of claim 10, wherein the switch is in communication with the controller (Alleyne: [0150]: controller 800; Wang: [0009]: the opening and closing of each nozzle in the array can be controlled by adjusting the switch control unit connected to each nozzle, so that micro-droplets can be ejected from any set nozzle) and the controller is configured to adjust the switch to an opened position when a standoff distance between the nozzle and a surface to which the ink is to be applied is less than a threshold value and to adjust the switch to the closed position when the standoff distance is equal to or greater than the threshold value (Alleyne: [0120]: "Feed-forward control" refers to control of a process parameter, such as voltage, current, stand-off distance to compensate for systemic variations in the system, thereby maintaining good printing characteristics including high-resolution, high-precision, high-speed, and/or high-fidelity; [0121]: "Feedback control" refers to control of a process parameter to compensate for unforeseen variations that cannot be predicted a priori (in contrast to the systemic variations addressed by feed-forward control). Feedback control can be based on real-time sensor-feedback information of output current during printing to rapidly provide corrective control to a process parameter, such as an electrical parameter that affects the electric potential difference, including voltage, current, and/or stand-off distance, thereby maintaining desired printing condition. In an aspect, the control systems ensure that the desired printing condition deviates by less than 10%, less than 5% or less than 1% from the desired value, throughout printing; claim 13; fig. 15). Here, the stand-off distance, as one of process parameter, is controlled via feedback/feed-forward control to be maintained in a desired printing condition. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller to be configured to turn “ON” the switch when the desired printing condition of the stand-off distance is satisfied (i.e., within a desirable range having a lower threshold and/or an upper threshold), and to turn “OFF” it when the desired condition is not satisfied (i.e., lower than a lower threshold and/or higher than a higher threshold).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Byun (US 20210260876 A1) teaches induced electrohydrodynamic jet printing apparatus including auxiliary electrode (abstract, figs. 1-4).
Rogers (US 20150290938 A1) teaches high resolution electrohydrodynamic jet printing for manufacturing systems, e.g., E-jet printing with a nonintegrated electrode nozzle (fig. 33B) and E-jet printing with an integrated-electrode nozzle (fig. 33C).
Tsuchiya (US 6,575,564 B1) teaches ink jet recording method using high viscous substance (abstract, figs. 10-24).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to INJA SONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1605. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 8 AM - 5 PM.
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.
/INJA SONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights