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/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 14-20 in the reply filed on 09/04/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09/04/2026.
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Examiner is treating claim 4 as requiring “wherein the polyhydroxy compound is selected from sugar alcohols and their condensation products, alkanolamines and their condensation products, carbohydrates, pentaerythritol, trimethylolpropane and a mixture thereof” as claimed.
Examiner suggests amending the claim to either: i) remove the additional preferential limitation; ii) amend the claim so as to incorporate the narrower preferential limitation as desired; or iii) some other clarifying amendment so as to remove the ambiguity as set forth above.
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)(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 1-5, 7-8 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Feichtenschlager et al. (US WO 2020/244981 A1) (“Feichtenschlager” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Feichtenschlager teaches a multi-component composition (see Feichtenschlager at page 3 lines 1-9 teaching the term “additive kit” as used herein refers to a combination of additives that is used in connection with 3D printing of the construction material composition… the terms “kit” and “combination” are not intended to refer to a mixture of the two additives… instead, the two additives will typically used separately at different times… component A of the additive will typically be mixed with the construction material composition and water before the extrusion with the 3D printer, while component B will be added to said mixture only during the application of the mixture, see Feichtenschlager at page 22 lines 24-28 teaching the additive kit according to the disclosure… is used in… a construction material composition… component A of the additive kit… component B of the additive kit). Construction material composition is taken to meet the claimed “multi-component composition” based on the structure as outlined below, comprising
a mortar base component A comprising mixture (see Feichtenschlager at page 3 lines 6-7 teaching component A of the additive will typically be mixed with the construction material composition), of
a1) Portland cement as a hydraulic binder (see Feichtenschlager at page 22 lines 31-34 teaching the construction material composition comprises at least one inorganic binder… inorganic binder may be… a hydraulic binder, see Feichtenschlager at page 37-38 teaching at least one inorganic binder is a hydraulic binder… selected from… Portland cement);
a2) an amine-glyoxylic acid condensate selected from the group consisting of a… melamine-glyoxylic acid condensate (see Feichtenschlager at page 3 lines 19-20 teaching component A of the additive kit… comprises at least one hardening retarder selected from glyoxylic acid… condensation… products of glyoxylic acid, see Feichtenschlager at page 4 lines 19-20 teaching the hardening retarder is a compound A3 selected from the group consisting of… a melamine-glyoxylic acid condensate);
a3) at least one polyhydroxy… ester thereof (see Feichtenschlager at page 6 lines 9-10 teaching component A of the additive kit… further comprises at least one carbonate source, see Feichtenschlager at page 21-24 teaching the carbonate source is selected from organic carbonates… “organic carbonate” denotes an ester of carbonic acid… the organic carbonate is selected from… glycerol carbonate). Glycerol carbonate is taken to meet the claimed “at least one polyhydroxy ester thereof”;
a4) water (see Feichtenschlager at page 3 lines 6-7 teaching component A of the additive will typically be mixed with the construction material composition and water); and
an accelerator component B (see Feichtenschlager at page 3 lines 8-9 teaching component B will be added to said mixture only during the application of the mixture) comprising
an alkali metal aluminate (see Feichtenschlager at page 19 lines 30-35 teaching component B of the additive kit… comprises at least one hardening accelerator selected from… aluminium salts such as… sodium aluminate). Sodium aluminate is taken to meet the claimed “alkali metal aluminate”.
Regarding claim 2, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager teaches further comprising a thickener component C (see Feichtenschlager at pages 27-28 teaching Table 1 column 1 row 9… mortar compositions… thickener).
Regarding claim 3, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager teaches further comprising… one… of calcium aluminate cement (see Feichtenschlager at page 23 lines 23-26 teaching the inorganic binder is a hydraulic binder, which is selected from Portland cement, calcium aluminate cement… and mixtures thereof… the inorganic binder comprises a mixture of Portland cement and aluminate cement).
Regarding claim 4, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager further teaches wherein the polyhydroxy compound is selected from… sugar alcohols (see Feichtenschlager at page 21-24 teaching the carbonate source is selected from organic carbonates… “organic carbonate” denotes an ester of carbonic acid… the organic carbonate is selected from… glycerol carbonate). Glycerol is taken to meet the claimed sugar alcohols based on specification at page 9 lines 5 disclosing sugar alcohols include… glycerol.
Regarding claim 5, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager further teaches wherein the component A further comprises at least one granular filler (see Feichtenschlager at page 26 lines 8-21 teaching the construction material composition can be for example… concrete, mortar… the term “mortar” or “grout” denotes a cement paste to which are added fine granulates… the term “concrete” denotes a mortar to which are added coarse granulates… the aggregate… can be for example… sand… the aggregates are often also called fillers),
in an amount of 30-90 % by weight of the combined weight of the non-aqueous constituents in the mortar base component A (see Feichtenschlager at pages 27-28 Table 1 column 3 teaching the mortar compositions… Ref. 2… OPC CEM I 42.5 (Karlstadt) 335g… Limestone powder 30g… Micro silica 15g… Fly ash 30g… Dispersant 0.5g… Defoamer 0.5g… Internal water storage additive 2g… Thickener 0.1g… Quartz Sand (0.6-1.2mm) 267g… Quartz Sand (0.2-0.6mm) 120g… Quartz Sand (0.09-0.4mm) 200g… Component A 6g). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the total amount of non-aqueous component of Ref 2 mortar is 1006.1g, and the combined amount of sand (or granular filler) is 58% (or ((267 + 120 + 200) ÷ 1006.1) x 100), which meets the claimed “in an amount of 30-90 % by weight of the combined weight of the non-aqueous constituents in the mortar base component A”.
Regarding claim 7, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager further teaches wherein accelerator in the accelerator component B is selected from… sodium… aluminate (see Feichtenschlager at page 19 lines 30-35 teaching component B of the additive kit… comprises at least one hardening accelerator selected from… aluminium salts such as… sodium aluminate).
Regarding claim 8, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager further teaches wherein the component B further comprises a soluble sulfate as constituent of component B (see Feichtenschlager at page 19 lines 30-35 teaching component B… comprises at least one hardening accelerator selected from… aluminium salts such as… sodium aluminate… aluminum sulfate and combinations thereof). Aluminum sulfate is taken to meet the claimed “soluble sulfate” based on the specification at page 11 lines 26-27 disclosing soluble sulfate source, preferably in the form of aluminium sulfate.
Regarding claim 10, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager teaches further comprising… one… additive selected from… a dispersing agent (see Feichtenschlager at page 7 lines 5-6 teaching component A of the additive kit… further comprises at least one dispersant).
Regarding claim 11, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager further teaches… which has a water cement ratio in the range of from 0.2 to 1.0 (see Feichtenschlager at pages 27-28 teaching Table 1 rows 2 and 13… mortar compositions… OPM CEM I 42.5 (Karlstadt)… 335g… water… 240g). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the water cement ratio is 0.7 (or 335:240), which meets the claimed “which has a water cement ratio in the range of from 0.2 to 1.0”.
Regarding claim 12, Feichtenschlager teaches a cementitious composition obtained or obtainable by mixing all components of the multi-component composition in claim 1 (see Feichtenschlager at page 3 lines 1-9 teaching the term “additive kit” as used herein refers to a combination of additives that is used in connection with 3D printing of the construction material composition… the terms “kit” and “combination” are not intended to refer to a mixture of the two additives… instead, the two additives will typically use separately at different times… component A of the additive will typically be mixed with the construction material composition and water before the extrusion with the 3D printer, while component B will be added to said mixture only during the application of the mixture, see Feichtenschlager at page 22 lines 24-28 teaching the additive kit according to the disclosure… is used in… a construction material composition… component A of the additive kit… component B of the additive kit, see Feichtenschlager at page 26 lines 8-9 teaching the construction material composition can be for example… cement paste, and see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 13, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and Feichtenschlager further teaches which 2h after mixing has a compressive strength of at least 1 N/mm2 (since the construction material composition as taught by Feichtenschlager and the claimed multi-component composition employ substantially similar materials and process, it is reasonable to believe that the claimed properties (i.e., 2h after mixing has a compressive strength of at least 1 N/mm2) would have naturally flowed following the teaching of Feichtenschlager (see MPEP 2112.01),
optionally 28 days after mixing has a compressive strength of at least 40 N/mm2 (this limitation is “optional” and broadly interpretated as not positively required by the claim recitation).
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.
Claims 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feichtenschlager.
Regarding claim 6, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and Feichtenschlager teaches further wherein the component A further comprises calcium sulfate (see Feichtenschlager at page 23 lines 29-31 teaching where the construction chemical composition contains an aluminate-containing cement, the compositions may additionally contain at least one sulfate source, preferably calcium sulfate source),
in an amount of equal to or less than 5 wt% of the combined weight of the non-aqueous constituents in the mortar base component A (see Feichtenschlager at page 23 lines 33-35 teaching in general, general calcium sulfate is comprised in an amount of about 1 to about 20 weight%, based on the weight of the aluminate-containing cement) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 9, Feichtenschlager teaches the limitations as applied to claims 1-2 above, and Feichtenschlager further teaches wherein the non-aqueous constituents of… the accelerator component B accounts for 1 to 5 wt.-% of the composition (see Feichtenschlager at page 22 lines 27-29 teaching the dosage of component B of the additive kit in dry form relative to the construction material in weight % of the construction material composition is preferably from 0.05 to 10%) (see MPEP 2144.05(I)),
the mortar base component A account for 99 to 90 wt.-% of the composition (see Feichtenschlager at page 22 lines 25-27 teaching the dosage of component A of the additive kit in dry form relative to the construction material in weight % of the construction material composition is preferably from 0.1 to 5%, see Feichtenschlager at pages 27-28 Table 1 column 3 teaching the mortar compositions… Ref. 2… OPC CEM I 42.5 (Karlstadt) 335g… Limestone powder 30g… Micro silica 15g… Fly ash 30g… Dispersant 0.5g… Defoamer 0.5g… Internal water storage additive 2g… Thickener 0.1g… Quartz Sand (0.6-1.2mm) 267g… Quartz Sand (0.2-0.6mm) 120g… Quartz Sand (0.09-0.4mm) 200g… Component A 6g, see Feichtenschlager at page 3 lines 1-9 teaching the term “additive kit” as used herein refers to a combination of additives that is used in connection with 3D printing of the construction material composition… the terms “kit” and “combination” are not intended to refer to a mixture of the two additives… instead, the two additives will typically use separately at different times… component A of the additive will typically be mixed with the construction material composition and water before the extrusion with the 3D printer, while component B will be added to said mixture only during the application of the mixture). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the Component A in Ref 2 mortar is 6g (or 0.6%). Additionally, since Feichtenschlager teaches that the component A of the additive will typically be mixed with the construction material composition while component B will be added to said mixture only during the application of the mixture; it would be within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art, absent new and unexpected results, to meet the claimed ”the mortar base component A account for 99 to 90 wt.-% of the composition”.
Additionally, MPEP states that "[w]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation", and “the normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages” (see MPEP § 2144.05.II.A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected amounts the claimed “”the mortar base component A account for 99 to 90 wt.-% of the composition” because “the dosage of component B of the additive kit in dry form relative to the construction material in weight % of the construction material composition is preferably from 0.05 to 10%” as taught by Feichtenschlager; and
the optional thickener component C accounts for 0.5 to 5 wt.-% of the composition, each on dry basis (this limitation is “optional” and broadly interpretated as not positively required by the claim recitation).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARITES A GUINO-O UZZLE whose telephone number is (571)272-1039. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm 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, Amber R Orlando can be reached at (571)270-3149. 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.
/MARITES A GUINO-O UZZLE/Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Prosecution Insights