Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/904,662

APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR SUPPORTING AND EXTRACTING A BUILD PART FORMED IN AN ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING PROCESS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 02, 2024
Examiner
MELENDEZ, ARMAND
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Xerox Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
163 granted / 350 resolved
-18.4% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+42.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
394
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
53.4%
+13.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 350 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 with traverse of group 1, species of claim 6, and species of Fig 7 in the reply filed on 2/23/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that that the hole and pin shapes do not constitute a significant search burden (species A, B, C), no other arguments are provided to the rest of the restriction and election of species. The examiner finds this persuasive and has withdrawn the election of species between claims 5-7. As no arguments were presented to the rest of the requirement/election of species, the examiner presumes applicant agrees with their propriety and has maintained the restriction requirement. Furthermore, the second species election contain mutually exclusive subject matter it is unlikely the same references would read on both claims requiring search of additional classes and use of different search queries, thus prolonging examination and prosecution. The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; the inventions require searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries; and the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention. The remaining requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 8-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 2/23/26. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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, 4, 6, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bradway (US 2018/0281464). As to claim 1, Bradway teaches an apparatus for supporting a build part produced in an additive manufacturing process, the apparatus comprising: a pin array including (100) [Fig 1-6B]; at least one support plate defining a plurality of parallel holes therethrough (plate supported by 131); and a like plurality of rigid elongated pins (132), each slidably extending through a corresponding one of said plurality of parallel holes and each including a tip at one end configured to contact a surface of the build part (120) and an opposite end adjacent a surface of the support plate [Fig 6A], each of the pins movable relative to said support plate by a force (compression spring 170) acting on the tip, as the pin array is moved toward the build part, to move the opposite end in a vertical direction away from said surface of the support plate; and a locking component configured to frictionally engage each of the plurality of elongated pins to frictionally resist movement in the vertical direction, said locking component including; a movable plate (140) defining a like plurality of parallel holes configured to receive the plurality of pins of the pin array therethrough, said movable plate supported for movement relative to said support plate in a direction transverse to the vertical direction of movement of the plurality of pin [0022]; and a translation mechanism operable to move said movable plate in the transverse direction to a clamping position so that the pins contact the walls of respective holes in the movable plate and in the support plate so that friction therebetween restricts movement of the pin in the vertical direction [0022, Fig 6B]. As to claim 4, Bradway teaches each pin of said pin array includes a biasing spring (224) configured to bias the opposite end of the pins toward the surface of the support plate [0020, 0022, 0023]. As to claim 6, Bradway teaches each pin has a circular cross- section and each hole has a non-circular shape and sized for friction-free movement of a corresponding pin therethrough [Fig 6B]. As to claim 19, Bradway teaches the translation mechanism includes a lever (138) pivotably mounted to a fulcrum and connected to said movable plate so that pivoting movement of said lever moves said movable plate in the transverse direction [Fig 6A, 0020]. 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. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bradway (US 2018/0281464) in view of Hertz (US 6726195). As to claim 2, Bradway does not explicitly state a biasing element operable to resist movement of said movable plate in the transverse direction by said translation mechanism. Hertz teaches a pin array for holding workpieces level [Abstract] wherein a movable sheet biased against movement in the transverse direction by a spring (922) in order to return the sheet to its original position and maintain the position of the pins [col 9 line 45-col 10 line 42, Fig 12]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Bradway and including a biasing element operable to resist movement of said movable plate in the transverse direction by said translation mechanism, as suggested by Hertz, Claim(s) 3, 5, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bradway (US 2018/0281464) in view of Gordon (US 5897108). As to claims 3 and 20, Bradway teaches 3 support plates all with parallel holes and the movable plate disposed in between the top and bottom plate, but does not explicitly state a u shaped plate configuration and the translation mechanism is a lead screw. Gordon teaches a pin work holder [Abstract] wherein a u-shaped plate with 2 prongs (formed by top plate 44, bottom plate 36 and frame 34) with a movable plate in disposed between for relative movement via screw (52) [Fig 3, col 5 line 29-56]. Gordon refers to this configuration as a “sandwich” and notes it allows for easy unlocking and provides strong, consistent, and level support [col 2 line 4-15, col 2 line 16-24]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Bradway and utilized this sandwich configuration (ie U shaped plate) with the middle movable plate displaced by a screw, as suggested by Gordon, as this configuration had proven successful at providing a strong, consistent, and level support. While the sandwich structure of Gordon is not an integral plate, making integral or separable is generally regarded to be obvious, see MPEP 2144.04 V. As to claim 5, Bradway depicts the pins as having a circular cross section [Fig 6B] but does not explicitly state that the pin and holes are both circular in gross section. Gordon teaches a pin work holder [Abstract] wherein a u-shaped plate with 2 prongs (formed by top plate 44, bottom plate 36 and frame 34) with a movable plate in disposed between for relative movement via screw (52) [Fig 3, col 5 line 29-56]. Gordon refers to this configuration as a “sandwich” and notes it allows for easy unlocking and provides strong, consistent, and level support [col 2 line 4-15, col 2 line 16-24]. Bradway teaches the holes and pins are circular [col 5 line 5-17, Fig 1-4]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have altered the invention of Bradway and utilized circular holes and pins, as suggested by Gordon, as this configuration had proven successful at providing a strong, consistent, and level support Claim(s) 5, 7, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bradway (US 2018/0281464) in view of Van Espen (US 2018/0086004). As to claims 5, 7, 15-18, Bradway teaches the pins are circular and the holes have a non circular shape but does not teach that the pins and holes have a circular or diamond shape. Van Espen teaches an apparatus for supporting articles during 3D printing [Abstract] wherein in pins [0054] are raised through matching holes [0050, 0054, Fig 1, 7A] and can have either a circular or polygonal (which would be inclusive of diamond) shape [0059, 0060, 0065, 0067-0070, 0013, Claim 12]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have made the holes and pins have a circular or diamond shaped, as suggested by Van Espen, as this had proven successful at providing support to objects during 3D printing. Furthermore, this would just be combining prior art elements according to known method to yield predictable results, see MPEP 2143 A. Further still, this feature amounts to a mere change in size or shape, which is generally regarded as obvious, see MPEP 2144.04 IV. When the polygonal shape of Van Espen is imparted to the holes and pins of Bradway, the matching apertures and pins would result in 2 contacting surfaces when then displacement taught by Bradway is executed. Claim(s) 5, 7, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bradway (US 2018/0281464) in view of Bidram (US 2019/0283973). As to claims 5, 7 15-18, Bradway teaches the pins are circular and the holes have a non circular shape but does not teach that the pins and holes have a circular or diamond shape. Bidram teaches an apparatus for supporting articles during transport wherein in pins (202) are raised through matching holes (210) [Abstract, Fig 2] and can have either a circular or polygonal (which would be inclusive of diamond) shape [0067, 0013, Claim 12]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have made the holes and pins have a circular or diamond shaped, as suggested by Bidram, as this had proven successful at providing support to objects during transportation [Abstract, 0004]. Furthermore, this would just be combining prior art elements according to known method to yield predictable results, see MPEP 2143 A. Further still, this feature amounts to a mere change in size or shape, which is generally regarded as obvious, see MPEP 2144.04 IV. When the polygonal shape of Bidram is imparted to the holes and pins of Bradway, the matching apertures and pins would result in 2 contacting surfaces when then displacement taught by Bradway is executed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARMAND MELENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0342. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 6 PM Monday-Friday. 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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. /ARMAND MELENDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 02, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600067
INJECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594711
RECIPROCATING INJECTION UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594702
MACHINE AND METHOD FOR INJECTION MOLDING MULTILAYER ARTICLES HAVING A HIGH PROPORTION OF INTERNAL LAYER MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12533836
INJECTION MOLDING UNIT FOR AN INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE FOR PROCESSING PLASTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12528238
DRIVE MECHANISM, INJECTION APPARATUS, AND INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+42.7%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 350 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