Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/844,529

CONTROL METHOD FOR 3D PRINTER FOR CONSTRUCTION

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Sep 06, 2024
Examiner
LEE, EDMUND H
Art Unit
1744
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Samsung E&A Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
790 granted / 1143 resolved
+4.1% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1184
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
73.4%
+33.4% vs TC avg
§102
6.2%
-33.8% vs TC avg
§112
13.7%
-26.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1143 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . 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. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Engel et al (USP20150061170). Engel et al teach the claimed process as evidenced at paragraphs 0005,0009,0013,0022,0031,0052, 0055-0056, and 0058-65; and figs 1-2. 1. A method of controlling a three-dimensional (3D) printer for construction through a configuration in which the 3D printer for construction linearly extrudes and prints a fluid printing matter [[20]], including concrete or mortar, from a nozzle [[11]] that moves (Engel et al: para. 0005; fig 1; fused deposition modeling, which by definition including extruding a melted printed matter), a controller [[10]] controls the 3D printer for construction (Engel et al: para. 0052; fig 1; control unit 30 including a controller 32), a scanner [[30]] detects surface information of a subject comprising spatial coordinates (Engel et al: para. 0013 and 0055-0056; fig 1; probe 24 scans the printed layer using 2D or 3D scanners for spatial or 3D coordinates), and a computer [[40]] is connected to the controller [[10]] to transmit command information [[19]] to the controller [[10]] and is connected to the scanner [[30]] to receive the surface information transmitted from the scanner [[30]] and process the received surface information (Engel et al: para. 0052; fig 1; CPUs/computers are used to receive the real layer definitions/characteristics from the probe), the method comprising: an actual measurement operation S10 of detecting, by the scanner [[30]] of which a position is specified in advance to generate the spatial coordinates, the actually measured surface information [[39]] of the printing matter [[20]] printed from the 3D printer for construction and transmitting the detected actually measured surface information [[39]] to the computer [[40]], wherein the actually measured surface information [[39]] comprises the spatial coordinates (Engel et al: para. 0009 and 0058-0065; fig 2; layer definitions including spatial/3D coordinates are determined from the probes and then feed to the CPUs/computers, which has the desired layer characteristics); a comparison operation S20 of comparing, by the computer [[40]], the transmitted actually measured surface information [[39]] of the printing matter [[20]] with planned surface information [[49]] of a planned structure to calculate a printing error (Engel et al: para. 0009 and 0058-0065; fig 2; real layer definitions including spatial/3D coordinates are compared to the desired layer characteristics to determine any deviation); a correction operation S31 of, when the printing error exceeds a tolerance, correcting, by the computer [[40]], the command information [[19]] such that the printing error is compensated for by one or more of the following options:, [[and]] (1) deflecting a movement path of the nozzle [[11]] in the command information, (2) decreasing a movement speed of the nozzle [[11]] in the command information, and (3) adjusting the mixing ratio of the fluid material supplied to the nozzle in the command information [[19]] (Engel et al: para. 0009 and 0058-0065; fig 2; if there is a deviation between the real layer definitions including spatial/3D coordinates and the desired layer characteristics, modifications to the printing are made, such as velocity or trajectory); and a command operation S32 of transmitting, by the computer [[40]], the corrected command information [[19]] to the controller [[10]] (Engel et al: para. 0009 and 0058-0065; fig 2; if there is a deviation between the real layer definitions including spatial/3D coordinates and the desired layer characteristics, modifications by computers to the printing are made, such as velocity or trajectory). Applicant's arguments filed 1/15/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Engel et al do no teach the claimed correction operation S31 step because the AM technology of Engel et al would not involve adjusting the “mixing ratio” of the claimed correction operation S31 step. This argument is misplaced since the claimed printing matter is not explicitly limited to only concrete or mortar; and the claimed correction operation S31 step does not explicitly require the adjustment of the ”mixing ratio.” The adjustment of the “mixing ratio” is one of three options recited in the claimed correction operation S31 step. Applicant argues Engel et al do not teach real-time correction of the quality of the current layer since Engel et al teach correcting subsequent layers based on the errors of the previous measured layer. This argument is misplaced since the instant claimed invention is not explicitly limited to “real-time correction.” The instant claimed invention is broad enough to include the measuring/correcting method of Engel et al. There is no mention in the instant claim of when the measurements and comparisons are made relative to the portion or fraction of the printed line/layer. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references teach 3D printing processes including a quality check during printing: USP2019/0054700; CN108381916; CN115256950; and DE 102012022435. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDMUND H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1204. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-4PM. 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. EHL /EDMUND H LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 06, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Jan 15, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §102
Apr 01, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 05, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594725
AUTONOMOUS FABRICATION OF MECHATRONIC SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589526
GOLF BALL MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589540
MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR MOLDED ARTICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583176
THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583153
OVERMOLDING SPECIALTY TOOLING AND METHODS OF MAKING FLEXIBLE SUBSTRATE COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+18.2%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1143 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month