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 .
1.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, 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by either of Takada et al 2021/0038481 (see paragraphs 0006, 0007, 0035 and 0037) or Lee 2018/0049954 (see paragraphs 0002, 0016, 0044 and 0057).
Takada et al and Lee both disclose the instant three dimensional printing composition comprising a polymerizable monomer, a photopolymerization initiator and inorganic particles which have been surface treated with 8-methacryloyloxyoctyltrimethoxysilane, the composition being used to print dental products in a three dimensional printing method that would inherently involve a laminating of the composition as the product is built up. See the above-noted paragraphs for each reference. At least the aforementioned silane is known to have the structure set forth in instant Formula 1.
2.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.
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over either of Takada et al 2021/0038481 (see paragraph 0032) or Lee 2018/0049954 (see paragraphs 0016 and 0017).
Takada et al and Lee disclose the basic claimed three dimensional printing composition as set forth in paragraph 1, supra, the references essentially lacking an exact teaching of the instant volume median particle diameter and viscosity. However, Takada et al discloses a median diameter of I nm to 10 microns, which is .001 to 10 microns, while instant claim 2 sets forth .1 to 2.0 microns. Since the claimed range lies within the range of Takada et al, it is prima facie obvious in that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to readily pick and choose the instant diameter. It is further submitted that the instant viscosity would have been obvious over Takada et al to facilitate printing fluid flow, an aspect conventional in the art. Lee discloses a particle diameter of less than .2 microns and a viscosity of 1,000-5,200 cps—ie, mPa-sec—and these ranges constitute overlapping ranges with the instant. It is conventional practice to find overlapping ranges as prima facie obvious since one of ordinary skill in the art would have been readily able to pick and choose suitable values certainly within the overlap if desired.
3.The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kitada et al 2021/0205181 (see paragraph 0052) teaches surface treating a filler with trimethoxysilanes as taught in the instant specification. Kajikawa et al 12,465,559 (see col. 11, line 36 through col. 12) discloses the instantly claimed and disclosed surface treatment compound applied to fillers used in a dental composition that is not three dimensionally printed. Okada et al 5,192,815 is cited for the same reason—see the entire document for the silane treating agents.
4.Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATHIEU D VARGOT whose telephone number is (571)272-1211. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 9 to 6.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christina A Johnson, can be reached at telephone number 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/MATHIEU D VARGOT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights