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 I (claims 18-23) in the reply filed on 06/15/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 24-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/15/2026.
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.
Claims 18-23 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 18 recites the limitation “a cured base layer … of the polymer comprising the thermally curable mixture” in lines 5-6. The preamble of claim 1 sets forth that “a thermally curable mixture comprising a polymer and a thermal curing agent” in lines 2-3. It is unclear when “the polymer” is defined as a component of “the thermally curable mixture” (in lines 2-3), how the same “thermally curable mixture” can be a component of “the polymer” as well (in lines 5-6). Also, it is unclear whether the limitation means that a cured base layer “the polymer” should include at least some portion of the thermally curable (i.e., not fully cured) mixture, or not. For the purpose of examination, the limitation would be interpreted as “a cured based layer … of the polymer
Claim 18 recites the limitation “repeating steps B to C” in line 14. It is unclear as the step B and the step C are not defined in the claim. For the purpose of examination, step B and step C would be interpreted as the limitations of claim 1 in lines 7-8 and lines 9-13, respectively.
Claims 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being dependent from claim 18.
Appropriate correction or clarification 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.
Claims 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riahi (Riahi M, Karimi F, Ghaffari A (2019), "Fabrication of 3D microfluidic structure with direct selective laser baking of PDMS". Rapid Prototyping Journal, Vol. 25 No. 4 pp. 775–780. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-01-2018-0021; listed in IDS filed on 10/04/2024) in view of Behrens (Behrens, A.; Stieghorst, J.; Doll, T.; Froriep, U.P. Laser-Facilitated Additive Manufacturing Enables Fabrication of Biocompatible Neural Devices. Sensors 2020, 20, 6614. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20226614).
Regarding claim 18, Riahi teaches a method of additively manufacturing a multilayered heat cured article from a thermally curable mixture comprising a polymer (PDMS) and a thermal curing agent (hardener) (abstract; pg. 776-777, section 2; figs. 2, 5);
the method comprising;
creating a cured base layer with a thickness of at least 50 micrometers of the polymer comprising the thermally curable mixture (fig. 5 and pg. 777, section 2.4: additive printing of PDMS material with a layer thickness between 200 to 400 micrometers; here, the layer thickness also applies to a base layer (i.e., the very first layer on the print platform; here, the disclosed thickness anticipates the recited range of the thickness of a respective layer);
forming a heat curable current layer (LN) comprising the thermally curable mixture having a heat curable current layer thickness (TN) on a preceding layer (L(N−1)) (fig. 5 and pg. 777, section 2.4: a recoater coats a new layer of PDMS on the previous layer);
curing at least a portion of the heat curable current layer by selectively applying an incident electromagnetic radiation energy to heat at least a portion of the heat curable current layer and optionally leaving an uncured portion of the heat curable current layer (fig. 5 and pg. 777, section 2.4: additive printing of PDMS material with a layer thickness between 200 to 400 micrometers via the irradiation of CO2 laser on the surface of a respective layer of PDMS bakes until the whole model is fabricated; figs. 5-8: as shown in figures, the additive printing implies to optionally have an uncured portion based on a desired model), [wherein less than 50% of the incident electromagnetic radiation energy is transmittable through 1 micron of the thermally curable mixture];
repeating steps B to C until the multilayered heat cured article is built (fig. 5 and pg. 777, section 2.4); and
removing the uncured portions from inside and around the multilayered heat cured article (fig. 8a and pg. 779, section 3.3: after the 3D printing was finished, the 3D printed part was removed from a vat and washed with acetone).
Riahi does not specifically teach the bracketed limitation(s) as presented above, i.e., “wherein less than 50% of the incident electromagnetic radiation energy is transmittable through 1 micron of the thermally curable mixture”, but Behrens teaches the limitation(s) as follows:
Behrens teaches a method of additive manufacturing with thermal crosslinking polymers using an infrared (IR) laser for accelerated curing (abstract, fig. 1). The thermal crosslinking polymers comprise a platinum-catalyzed addition-curing silicone rubber Silpuran 2430 (RTV-2, Wacker Chemie AG, Burghausen, Germany) (pg. 5 section 2.2), and the IR-laser (ULR-25, 9.3 µm, cw, 5 kHz Universal Laser Systems Inc., Vienna, Austria) is used for curing (pg. 4 section 2.1). Behrens also teaches that the highest absorption bands for silicone rubbers is in the wavelength range of 9.3 µm, and using a suitable laser with the desired wavelength thus allows for accelerated curing of the silicone rubber (pg. 12 section 4.1). Although Behrens is silent that “less than 50% of the incident electromagnetic radiation energy is transmittable through 1 micron of the thermally curable mixture,” the irradiation wavelength of 9.3 micrometers of the IR laser and the silicone (i.e., PDMS-based) rubbers of the thermally curable mixture are the same as ones as disclosed (Instant Specification: fig. 9, [0036-0038]: PDMS based thermally curable material; [0017]: incident radiation energy having wavelength in the range of 9.2 to 9.4 micrometers; [0047-0048]: a relative transmittance of PDMS upon the wavelength of incident radiation). Thus, the recited property (i.e., relative transmittance) is implied.
In the same field of endeavor of 3D printing from a silicone-based thermal curing material upon IR laser irradiation (Riahi: abstract; Behrens: abstract, pg. 4 section 2.1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing invention to modify/substitute the incident radiation wavelength of IR laser of Riahi to have about 9.3 micrometers as taught by Behrens in order to obtain known results or a reasonable expectation of successful results of achieving the highest absorption of the radiation energy from the IR laser on the silicone-based curable material so as to allow accelerated curing of the silicone material, and shortened/improved scanning and printing speeds for additive manufacturing.
Regarding claim 20, modified Riahi teaches the method of claim 18, wherein the polymer is polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) (Riahi: pg. 776 section 2.1: Sylgard 184 PDMS prepared by mixing with its hardening agent). Of note, the two-component system of Sylgard 184 is the same as the PDMS-based curable mixture as disclosed in Instant Specification (Instant Specification: [0036-0038], as published).
Regarding claim 22, modified Riahi teaches the method of claim 20, wherein the thermal curing agent contains methylhydrosiloxane and a platinum catalyst (Riahi: pg. 776 section 2.1: Sylgard 184 PDMS prepared by mixing with its hardening agent). Of note, the two-component system of Sylgard 184 is the same as the PDMS-based curable mixture as disclosed in Instant Specification (Instant Specification: [0036-0038], as published).
Regarding claims 19, 21, and 23, modified Riahi teaches that the incident electromagnetic radiation energy has a wavelength in a range of 9.2 to 9.4 micrometers (Behrens: pg. 4 section 2.1; pg. 12 section 4.1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Stieghorst (US 20170203509 A1) teaches a method for manufacturing a component using a long-wave IR range based on the selective absorption behavior of PDMS (abstract, [0065]).
Oishi (US 20220033552 A1) teaches that a method of applying a composition to a substrate includes a contact transfer type coating apparatus such as a roll coater, a reverse coater, a bar coater, and a slit coater, or a non-contact type coating apparatus such as a spinner (Rotary coating apparatus) and a curtain flow coater ([0077]).
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/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights