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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending and the subject of this NON-FINAL Office Action. This is the first action on the merits.
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(s) 1-2, 5-9 and 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PRINZ (US5207371), KORTEN (US20180206952) and FEENSTRA (US6955776), in view of SACHS (US 5940674).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute familiar ultrasonic binder spray nozzles for the binder nozzles of PRINZ, KORTEN or FEENSTRA to achieve finer atomization results with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 1, PRINZ teaches a system for forming a three-dimensional object, comprising: a powder dispenser configured to deposit a powder material (layers 2 and complementary layer 6 formed on 3D printer bed 3/4/22; Figs. 1-7); a binding substance applicator 26 configured to apply a binding substance to bind the deposited powder material 6, wherein the binding substance applicator comprises a binder tank that holds the binding substance and mist generator system fluidically coupled to the binder tank to deliver the binding substance onto the deposited powder material when the binder tank is filled with the binding substance (spray gun 26, with tank shown above nozzle; Fig. 7); and a perimeter generator 14/16 or 14/15 configured to generate a perimeter by removing a portion of the powder material bound by the binding substance delivered by the mist generator system based on a model design of the three-dimensional object, thereby generating the three-dimensional object (Figs. 4& 6; “the mill head 14 having tools 15 or 16 is used to shape the periphery of each layer 2”).
As to claim 17, PRINZ teaches methods to use this system in which depositing, by a powder dispenser, a layer of a powder material (Fig. 1-3); applying, by a binding substance applicator, a binding substance to the layer of the powder material, wherein the binding substance applicator comprises a binder tank that holds the binding substance and an mist generator system fluidically coupled to the binder tank to deliver the binding substance onto the deposited powder material when the binder tank is filled with the binding substance (Fig. 7); and generating, by a perimeter generator, a perimeter corresponding to the three-dimensional object by removing, based on a model design of the three-dimensional object, a portion of the layer including the powder material bound by the binding substance (Figs. 4 & 6).
As to claim 1, KORTEN teaches a system for forming a three-dimensional object, comprising: a powder dispenser 106/107 configured to deposit a powder material 104 (Figs. 1 & 3); a binding substance applicator 112 configured to apply a binding substance to bind the deposited powder material 104, wherein the binding substance applicator comprises a binder tank 110 that holds the binding substance and an mist generator system fluidically coupled to the binder tank to deliver the binding substance onto the deposited powder material when the binder tank is filled with the binding substance (Figs. 2 & 4); and a perimeter generator configured to generate a perimeter by removing a portion of the powder material bound by the binding substance delivered by the mist generator system based on a model design of the three-dimensional object, thereby generating the three-dimensional object (para. 0056- “The so formed coherent powder batch may form a precursor of the dental article, for example a dental blank from which a dental restoration precursor may be machined” & “Such a dental article may be a dental blank which is sintered to its final density and from which the dental restoration may be machined”).
As to claim 17, KORTEN teaches methods to use this system in which depositing, by a powder dispenser, a layer of a powder material (Figs. 1 & 3); applying, by a binding substance applicator, a binding substance to the layer of the powder material, wherein the binding substance applicator comprises a binder tank that holds the binding substance and an mist generator system fluidically coupled to the binder tank to deliver the binding substance onto the deposited powder material when the binder tank is filled with the binding substance (Figs. 2 & 4); and generating, by a perimeter generator, a perimeter corresponding to the three-dimensional object by removing, based on a model design of the three-dimensional object, a portion of the layer including the powder material bound by the binding substance (para. 0056).
As to claim 1, FEENSTRA teaches a system for forming a three-dimensional object, comprising: a powder dispenser configured to deposit a powder material (claim 1- “A method for fabricating a functional dental element using a three-dimensional printing technique comprising: applying successive layers of powder onto each other to form the dental element”); a binding substance applicator configured to apply a binding substance to bind the deposited powder material, wherein the binding substance applicator comprises a binder tank that holds the binding substance and an mist generator system fluidically coupled to the binder tank to deliver the binding substance onto the deposited powder material when the binder tank is filled with the binding substance (“bonding the layers by means of a binder wherein each layer is bonded at desired positions to a preceding layer thereby allowing removal of excess non-adhering material”); and a perimeter generator configured to generate a perimeter by removing a portion of the powder material bound by the binding substance delivered by the mist generator system based on a model design of the three-dimensional object, thereby generating the three-dimensional object (claim 20- “wherein the dental element is further shaped by grinding, filing, polishing, sanding, blasting or treatment with a ball bed.”).
As to claim 17, FEENSTRA teaches methods to use this system in which depositing, by a powder dispenser, a layer of a powder material; applying, by a binding substance applicator, a binding substance to the layer of the powder material, wherein the binding substance applicator comprises a binder tank that holds the binding substance and an mist generator system fluidically coupled to the binder tank to deliver the binding substance onto the deposited powder material when the binder tank is filled with the binding substance; and generating, by a perimeter generator, a perimeter corresponding to the three-dimensional object by removing, based on a model design of the three-dimensional object, a portion of the layer including the powder material bound by the binding substance (claim 1- “A method for fabricating a functional dental element using a three-dimensional printing technique comprising . . . “).
As to claim 5, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach the powder material comprises at least one of a metal, a polymer, a metal alloy, a ceramic, or a cermet (PRINZ, Abstract; KORTEN, para. 0019-23; FEENSTRA, claim 8).
As to claim 6, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach the binding substance comprises a solvent, a liquid, a gel, a viscous solution, a sugar, a glue, a polymer, or a resin (PRINZ, “The powdered layer is selectively joined where the part is be formed by ink jet printing of a binder material”; KORTEN, para. 0027; FEENSTRA, claim 7).
As to claim 7, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach the perimeter generator comprises a contact cutter (PRINZ, Fig. 4 & 6; KORTEN, para. 0056; FEENSTRA, claim 20).
As to claim 8, PRINZ teach the contact cutter is a multi-axis machine tool or a computer numeric control (CNC) unit 20 (Figs. 1-7).
As to claim 11, KORTEN teach further comprising an energy source that is configured to direct an energy beam to a portion of the powder material (paras. 0021-22).
As to claim 12, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach further comprising a smoother configured to smooth a top surface of the powder material (PRINZ, Fig. 6; KORTEN, para. 0015; FEENSTRA, “a doctor blade (slurry) or counter rotating roller (dry powder) is used” & claim 13).
As to claim 13, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach the powder material is a first powder material, the powder dispenser is a first powder dispenser, and the system further comprises a second powder dispenser configured to deposit a second powder material to form part of the three-dimensional object, the second powder material being different from the first powder material (PRINZ, Figs. 1-7; KORTEN, Figs. 7-8 & paras. 0013 & 0057; FEENSTRA, claims 13-5).
As to claim 14, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach further comprising one or more computer processors individually or collectively programmed to perform operations including: causing the powder dispenser to deposit a layer of the powder material; causing the binding substance applicator to apply the binding substance to the layer of the powder material; and causing the perimeter generator to generate, based on the model design of the three-dimensional object, a perimeter corresponding to the three-dimensional object by removing a portion of the layer including the powder material bound by the binding substance (PRINZ, CNC control; KORTEN, paras. 0002, 0014, 0038 & 0054; FEENSTRA, claim 16).
As to claim 15, PRINZ teach subsequent to generating the perimeter, causing the powder dispenser to deposit an additional layer of the powder material on the layer; causing the binding substance applicator to apply the binding substance to the additional layer of the powder material; and causing the perimeter generator to generate an additional perimeter corresponding to the three-dimensional object in the additional layer by removing a portion of the powder material bound by the binding substance, wherein the additional perimeter is based on the model design of the three-dimensional object (Figs. 1-7).
As to claim 15, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach further comprising a furnace configured to heat the three- dimensional object (PRINZ, claim 18; KORTEN, para. 0026; FEENSTRA- “The infiltration can be ed out, for instance, in an oven, whereby the infiltration material is laid against the dental element” & “Instead thereof, or supplemental thereto, preferably a thermal compaction is accomplished. To that end, the dental element is heated to a temperature of at least 250° C., preferably at least 400° C. and more preferably at least 500° C.”).
As to claim 18, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach removing unbound powder material from the bound powder material (PRINZ- “Following a heat treatment the unbonded powder is removed leaving the fabricated part” & “Then squeegee 12 is drawn across the layer to remove excess material”; KORTEN, paras. 0016; FEENSTRA, claim 1 & “When the last layer has been applied, excess powder which has not been bound is removed . . . Residues can be removed by blowing”).
As to claim 19, FEENSTRA teach the unbound powder material is removed by a vacuum, suction, or dusting (id.)
As to claim 20, PRINZ, KORTEN and FEENSTRA teach the powder material is a first powder material, the binding substance applicator is a first binding substance applicator, and the method further comprises depositing, by a second powder dispenser, a second powder material in the layer, the second powder material being different from the first powder material (see claims 13-15).
None of PRINZ, KORTEN or FEENSTRA teach an ultrasonic mist generator nozzle/applicator.
However, ultrasonic atomizers/sprayers were very familiar in the binder-jet 3D print art. For example, SACHS teaches applying binder to deposited powder using an ultrasonic atomizing nozzle (Abstract; col. 4, ll. 25-31; col. 12, ll. 25-33; col. 12, ll. 42-64). “Generally, droplets emitted by an ultrasonic device travel at a relatively low speed, and without much direction. This can be advantageous, as it minimizes disturbance of the powder bed” (col. 12, ll. 56-59). Thus, the prior art demonstrates that a skilled artisan would have been motivated to substitute an ultrasonic binder sprayer for the binder sprayer of the prior art in order to achieve minimized disturbance of the powder bed with a reasonable expectation of success.
In sum, the claims are obvious because the prior art as whole clearly demonstrates that ultrasonic binder sprayers were routinely used to achieve known powder bed printing results with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PRINZ (US5207371), KORTEN (US20180206952) and FEENSTRA (US6955776), in view of SACHS (US 5940674), in further view of ABELS (US20160157963).
None of PRINZ, KORTEN, FEENSTRA or SACHS teach the perimeter generator comprises a non-contact cutter laser.
However, laser cutters were very familiar in the binder-jet 3D print art. For example, ABELS teaches to shape green articles formed by binder-powder 3D prints using “a stream of matter and/or a stream of energy, such as with a laser, water-jet, or electron beam” (para. 0040). Thus, ABEL demonstrates that a skilled artisan would have been motivated to substitute non-contact shaping using laser for example to achieve the same shaping as in PRINZ, KORTEN or FEENSTRA.
In sum, the claims are obvious because the prior art as whole clearly demonstrates that non-contact shaping such as lasers were routinely used to achieve known shaping results with success.
Double Patenting- Obvious Type
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Instant claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over conflicting claims 1-19 of US12138857.
The instant claims are obvious over the conflicting claims because the conflicting claims anticipate the instant by teaching
1. A system for forming a three-dimensional object, comprising:
a surface configured to hold said three-dimensional object;
one or more print heads configured to deposit one or more materials on said surface;
a binding substance applicator configured to contain a binding substance, wherein the binding substance applicator comprises a spray module with vacuum assisted spray, the spray module being coupled to a binder tank that holds the binding substance and a vacuum configured to control spray of the binding substance;
at least one perimeter generator configured to generate perimeters corresponding to said three-dimensional object in said one or more materials; and
one or more computer processors operatively coupled to said one or more print heads, the binding substance applicator, and said at least one perimeter generator, wherein said one or more computer processors are individually or collectively programmed to (a) direct said one or more print heads to deposit a layer of said one or more materials on said surface: (b) direct the binding substance applicator to apply said binding substance to said layer of said one or more materials on said surface; and (c) direct said at least one perimeter generator to generate a perimeter corresponding to said three-dimensional object in said layer generated in (b) bv removing a portion of the one or more materials bound bv the binding substance, wherein said perimeter is in accordance with a model design of said three-dimensional object.
8. The system of claim 1, wherein said at least one perimeter generator comprises a non-contact cutter.
9. The system of claim 8, wherein said non-contact cutter is a laser.
18. The system of claim 12, further comprising:
an ultrasonic mist generator system positioned such that at least a portion of the ultrasonic mist generator system is submerged in the binding substance when the binder tank is filled with the binding substance.
As is clear from conflicting claims, they teach the same ultrasonic binder sprayer as the instant claims.
Instant claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over conflicting claims 1-30 of US9987682.
The instant claims are obvious over the conflicting claims because the conflicting claims anticipate the instant by teaching
1. A method for forming a three-dimensional object, comprising:
(a) providing a powder bed comprising powder material;
(b) applying a first binding substance to a first area of a first layer of powder material of said powder bed;
(c) subsequent to applying said first binding substance to said first area, using a first perimeter generator to generate one or more perimeters in said first area of said first layer, wherein said one or more perimeters of said first layer is in accordance to a model design of said three-dimensional object in computer memory;
(d) applying a second binding substance to a second area of a second layer of powder material of said powder bed, which second layer is adjacent to said first layer; and
(e) subsequent to applying said second binding substance to said second area, using a second perimeter generator to generate one or more perimeters in said second area of said second layer of powder material, wherein said one or more perimeters of said second layer is in accordance to said model design of said three-dimensional object, thereby generating at least a portion of said three-dimensional object.
10. The method of claim 8, wherein said first or second cutter is a non-contact cutter that does not contact said powder bed upon generating said one or more perimeters of said first layer or second layer, respectively.
11. The method of claim 10, wherein said non-contact cutter includes at least one laser.
12. The method of claim 1, wherein said first binding substance and/or said second binding substance is applied via an inkjet head, an atomizing sprayer, an ultrasonic sprayer, or a nebulizer.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein in (b), said inkjet head, atomizing sprayer, ultrasonic sprayer, or nebulizer is tilted at an angle greater than 0° with respective to an axis perpendicular to said first layer.
17. The system of claim 12, wherein the binding substance applicator comprises a honeycomb structure path through which the binding substance flows.
As is clear from conflicting claims, they teach the same ultrasonic binder sprayer as the instant claims.
Instant claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over conflicting claims 1-17 of US10737323.
The instant claims are obvious over the conflicting claims because the conflicting claims anticipate the instant by teaching
1. A method for forming a three-dimensional object, comprising:
(a) providing a powder bed comprising powder material;
(b) applying a first binding substance to a first area of a first layer of powder material of said powder bed;
(c) depositing a second layer of powder material adjacent to said first layer;
(d) applying a second binding substance to a second area of a second layer of powder material of said powder bed; and
(e) using at least one perimeter generator to generate one or more perimeters in said first layer and said second layer of powder material, wherein said one or more perimeters of said first layer and said second layer is in accordance with a model design of said three-dimensional object in computer memory, thereby generating at least a portion of said three-dimensional object.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein said first binding substance and/or said second binding substance is applied via an inkjet head, an atomizing sprayer, an ultrasonic sprayer, or a nebulizer.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein in (b), said inkjet head, atomizing sprayer, ultrasonic sprayer, or nebulizer is tilted at an angle greater than 0° with respective to an axis perpendicular to said first layer.
15. The method of claim 1, wherein said at least one perimeter generator includes a non-contact cutter, and wherein (e) comprises using said non-contact cutter to generate said one or more perimeters in said first layer and said second layer of powder material.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein said non-contact cutter provides an energy beam that is used to generate said one or more perimeters.
17. The method of claim 1, wherein said at least one perimeter generator includes a contact cutter, and wherein (e) comprises using said contact cutter to generate said one or more perimeters in at said first layer and second layer of powder material.
As is clear from conflicting claims, they teach the same ultrasonic binder sprayer as the instant claims.
Instant claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over conflicting claims 1-17 of US10737323, in view of SACHS (US 5940674).
The instant claims are obvious over the conflicting claims because the conflicting claims anticipate the instant by teaching
1. A method for forming a three-dimensional (3D) object, comprising:
(a) providing a layer comprising powder material having a binding substance applied thereto; and
(b) using a plurality of perimeter generators to generate one or more perimeters in at least said layer, to yield an object comprising said powder material in a bound state, wherein said one or more perimeters correspond to at least a portion of said 3D object.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein (b) comprises using said plurality of perimeter generators to generate a plurality of perimeters corresponding to said at least said portion of said 3D object.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein said one or more perimeters is generated in a single pass of said plurality of perimeter generators.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein said plurality of perimeter generators includes a contact cutter, and wherein (b) comprises using said contact cutter to generate said one or more perimeters in at least said layer.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein said plurality of perimeter generators includes a non-contact cutter, and wherein (b) comprises using said non-contact cutter to generate said one or more perimeters in at least said layer.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein said non-contact cutter provides an energy beam that is used to generate said one or more perimeters.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein said plurality of perimeter generators includes at least one energy source that does not contact said layer, and wherein (b) comprises using said at least one energy source to generate said one or more perimeters in at least said layer.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein said binding substance is applied in a manner such that there is (i) substantially no pooling of said binding substance in said layer or (ii) substantially no physical disturbance of particles of said powder material in said layer.
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising, subsequent to (b), heating said layer.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein (a) further comprises providing a powder bed comprising said layer.
11. The method of claim 1, further comprising, subsequent to (a), depositing a second layer over said layer, which second layer comprises powder material.
12. The method of claim 1, further comprising, applying a binding substance to said powder material of said second layer.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein said plurality of perimeter generators is a multi-axis machine tool.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein (b) comprises using said plurality of perimeter generators to remove powder material from at least said layer to generate said one or more perimeters in at least said layer.
15. The method of claim 1, wherein (b) comprises using said plurality of perimeter generators to cut at least said layer to generate said one or more perimeters in at least said layer.
16. A method for forming a three-dimensional (3D) object, comprising:
(a) providing a first layer and a second layer adjacent to said first layer, wherein said first layer and said second layer comprise powder material in a bound state; and
(b) using one or more perimeter generators to generate one or more perimeters in at least said first layer and said second layer, to yield an object comprising said powder material in a bound state, wherein said one or more perimeters correspond to said 3D object.
17. The method of claim 16, wherein (a) comprises providing said first layer comprising said powder material and applying a binding substance to said first layer to provide said first layer comprising said powder material in said bound state.
18. The method of claim 17, further comprising, providing said second layer comprising said powder material and applying a binding substance to said second layer to provide said second layer comprising said powder material in said bound state.
19. The method of claim 16, wherein said one or more perimeter generators includes a contact cutter, and wherein (b) comprises using said contact cutter to generate said one or more perimeters in at least said first layer and said second layer.
20. The method of claim 16, wherein said one or more perimeter generators includes a non-contact cutter, and wherein (b) comprises using said non-contact cutter to generate said one or more perimeters in at least said first layer and said second layer.
21. The method of claim 16, wherein (b) comprises using said plurality of perimeter generators to remove powder material from at least said first layer and said second layer to generate said one or more perimeters in at least said first layer and said second layer.
The conflicting claims do not teach an ultrasonic binder sprayer to apply the binding substance. However, as explained above, SACHS demonstrates that applying binder using ultrasonic sprayers was well-known to achieve minimized disturbance of the powder bed. For example, SACHS teaches applying binder to deposited powder using an ultrasonic atomizing nozzle (Abstract; col. 4, ll. 25-31; col. 12, ll. 25-33; col. 12, ll. 42-64). “Generally, droplets emitted by an ultrasonic device travel at a relatively low speed, and without much direction. This can be advantageous, as it minimizes disturbance of the powder bed” (col. 12, ll. 56-59). Thus, the prior art demonstrates that a skilled artisan would have been motivated to substitute an ultrasonic binder sprayer for the binder sprayer of the conflicting claims in order to achieve minimized disturbance of the powder bed with a reasonable expectation of success.
In sum, the instant claims are obvious because the prior art as whole clearly demonstrates that ultrasonic binder sprayers were routinely used to achieve known powder bed printing results with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELODY TSUI whose telephone number is (571)272-1846. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/YUNG-SHENG M TSUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743