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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendments filed 06/01/2026 responsive to the Office Action filed 03/03/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 16 have been amended. Claims 1-18 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Claims 1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 16 have been amended to address the informalities, thus the objection of claims has been withdrawn.
Claim 6 has been amended to address the indefiniteness, thus the rejection of claim under 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, filed 06/01/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 102 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-9, 13-15, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buller et al. (US 2017/0144254).
With respect to claim 1, Buller teaches a print engine of an additive manufacturing system (“a system for generating a three-dimensional object”, Pa [0044]-[0045]), comprising:
a print station with a print bed (“the powder bed”, Pa [0044]), powder spreader (“a leveling member”, Pa [0044]), a powder holding chamber (“a powder dispenser”, Pa [0045]), wherein the powder spreader comprises a perforated surface for microdosing the powder (“the leveling member comprises a roller (e.g., a cylinder). The roller may comprise one or more opening ports (i.e., powder exit ports) thorough which powder material can exit the roller. The exits may be located along the rectangular cross section of the roller (e.g., cylindrical roller)… The roller may comprise at least one opening port from which the powder enters the roller (i.e., the powder entrance port)… The rate of rotation of the roller (revolutions of the roller) may determine the amount of powder distributed by the roller.”, Pa [0283]);
a powder nozzle (“an exit opening”, Pa [0045]) connected to the powder holding chamber;
at least one vibratory element attached to the powder holding chamber (“one or mechanical members operatively coupled to the powder dispenser, wherein the one or more mechanical members subject the powder dispenser to vibration”, Pa [0045]).
Buller further teaches that the powder dispensing mechanism may comprise an array of powder delivery components (e.g., array of powder dispensers) (Pa [0262]). Thus, one would have found it obvious to provide an array of powder dispensers including exit openings respectively in order to dispense the powder materials to form a 3D object therefrom.
With respect to claim 2, Buller as applied to claim 1 above further teaches that the vibratory element comprises an ultrasonic agitated blade (“The ultrasonic and/or vibratory powder dispensing mechanism”, Pa [0300]; “The opening (e.g., port) of the powder dispenser can comprise a blade.”, Pa [0313]).
With respect to claim 3, Buller as applied to claim 1 above further teaches that the vibratory element comprises a vibrational head (“a vibrator 1507”, Pa [0301]).
With respect to claim 4, Buller as applied to claim 1 above further teaches a laser able to direct a two dimensional laser image against the print bed (“Energy from a first (or primary) energy source 304 can be provided to at least a portion of the first layer of powder 303. Energy from the first energy source 304 can be provided to the portion of the first layer of powder (e.g., using a vector scanning technique). In some cases, the primary energy source can be a laser.”, Pa [0365]).
With respect to claim 5, it is noted that the limitation “sizes of powder held in the respective first and second powder holding chambers are different” is an intended use since the powder dispensers of Buller are capable of containing different size of powders. The Courts have held that “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, “[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims.” See In re Young, 75 F.2d *>996<, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)) (see MPEP § 2115).
With respect to claim 6, Buller teaches a print engine of an additive manufacturing system (“a system for generating a three-dimensional object”, Pa [0044]-[0045]), comprising:
a print station with a print bed (“the powder bed”, Pa [0044]), powder roller (“a leveling member”, Pa [0044]; “the leveling member comprises a roller (e.g., a cylinder).”, Pa [0283]), and a powder holding chamber (“a powder dispenser”, Pa [0045]), wherein the powder roller comprises a perforated surface for microdosing the powder (“The roller may comprise one or more opening ports (i.e., powder exit ports) thorough which powder material can exit the roller. The exits may be located along the rectangular cross section of the roller (e.g., cylindrical roller)… The roller may comprise at least one opening port from which the powder enters the roller (i.e., the powder entrance port)… The rate of rotation of the roller (revolutions of the roller) may determine the amount of powder distributed by the roller.”, Pa [0283]);
a powder nozzle (“an exit opening”, Pa [0045]) connected to the powder holding chamber;
at least one vibratory element attached to the powder holding chamber (“one or mechanical members operatively coupled to the powder dispenser, wherein the one or more mechanical members subject the powder dispenser to vibration”, Pa [0045]).
Buller further teaches that the powder dispensing mechanism may comprise an array of powder delivery components (e.g., array of powder dispensers) (Pa [0262]). Thus, one would have found it obvious to provide an array of powder dispensers including exit openings respectively in order to dispense the powder materials to form a 3D object therefrom.
With respect to claim 7, Buller as applied to claim 6 above further teaches that the powder roller includes a structured or patterned surface (“The powder exit ports may be situated randomly or in a pattern along the rectangular cross section of the roller.”, Pa [0283]; “The roller may comprise … a rough surface, an indentation, a depression, or a cavity.”, Pa [0284]).
With respect to claim 8, Buller as applied to claim 6 above further teaches a laser able to direct a two dimensional laser image against the print bed (“Energy from a first (or primary) energy source 304 can be provided to at least a portion of the first layer of powder 303. Energy from the first energy source 304 can be provided to the portion of the first layer of powder (e.g., using a vector scanning technique). In some cases, the primary energy source can be a laser.”, Pa [0365]).
With respect to claim 9, it is noted that the limitation “sizes of powder held in the respective first and second powder holding chambers are different” is an intended use since the powder dispensers of Buller are capable of containing different size of powders. The Courts have held that “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, “[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims.” See In re Young, 75 F.2d *>996<, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)) (see MPEP § 2115).
With respect to claim 13, Buller teaches a method of operating a print engine of an additive manufacturing system (“a method for generating a three dimensional object”, Pa [0042]), comprising:
providing a print station with a print bed (“the powder bed”, Pa [0044]), at least one of a powder spreader and a powder roller (“a leveling member”, Pa [0044]; “the leveling member comprises a roller (e.g., a cylinder).”, Pa [0283]), and a powder holding chamber (“a powder dispenser”, Pa [0045]), with a powder nozzle (“an exit opening”, Pa [0045]) connected to the powder holding chamber, wherein the powder roller comprises a perforated surface for microdosing the powder (“The roller may comprise one or more opening ports (i.e., powder exit ports) thorough which powder material can exit the roller. The exits may be located along the rectangular cross section of the roller (e.g., cylindrical roller)… The roller may comprise at least one opening port from which the powder enters the roller (i.e., the powder entrance port)… The rate of rotation of the roller (revolutions of the roller) may determine the amount of powder distributed by the roller.”, Pa [0283]);
activating at least one vibratory element attached to the powder holding chamber (“one or mechanical members operatively coupled to the powder dispenser, wherein the one or more mechanical members subject the powder dispenser to vibration”, Pa [0045]; “The dispensing can comprise vibrating at least part of the powder material in the powder dispensing mechanism.”, Pa [0155]).
Buller further teaches that the powder dispensing mechanism may comprise an array of powder delivery components (e.g., array of powder dispensers) (Pa [0262]). Thus, one would have found it obvious to provide an array of powder dispensers including exit openings respectively in order to dispense the powder materials to form a 3D object therefrom.
With respect to claim 14, Buller as applied to claim 13 above further teaches that the powder roller includes a structured or patterned surface (“The powder exit ports may be situated randomly or in a pattern along the rectangular cross section of the roller.”, Pa [0283]; “The roller may comprise … a rough surface, an indentation, a depression, or a cavity.”, Pa [0284]).
With respect to claim 15, Buller as applied to claim 13 above further teaches a laser able to direct a two dimensional laser image against the print bed (“Energy from a first (or primary) energy source 304 can be provided to at least a portion of the first layer of powder 303. Energy from the first energy source 304 can be provided to the portion of the first layer of powder (e.g., using a vector scanning technique). In some cases, the primary energy source can be a laser.”, Pa [0365]).
With respect to claim 17, Buller as applied to claim 13 above further teaches that the vibratory element comprises an ultrasonic agitated blade (“The ultrasonic and/or vibratory powder dispensing mechanism”, Pa [0300]; “The opening (e.g., port) of the powder dispenser can comprise a blade.”, Pa [0313]).
With respect to claim 18, Buller as applied to claim 13 above further teaches that the vibratory element comprises a vibrational head (“a vibrator 1507”, Pa [0301]).
Claims 10-12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buller et al. (US 2017/0144254) in view of Vatani et al. (US 2023/0016497-of record).
With respect to claim 10, Buller teaches a print engine of an additive manufacturing system (“a system for generating a three-dimensional object”, Pa [0044]-[0045]), comprising:
a print station with a print bed (“the powder bed”, Pa [0044]), powder spreader (“a leveling member”, Pa [0044]), a powder holding chamber (“a powder dispenser”, Pa [0045]), wherein the powder spreader comprises a perforated surface for microdosing the powder (“the leveling member comprises a roller (e.g., a cylinder). The roller may comprise one or more opening ports (i.e., powder exit ports) thorough which powder material can exit the roller. The exits may be located along the rectangular cross section of the roller (e.g., cylindrical roller)… The roller may comprise at least one opening port from which the powder enters the roller (i.e., the powder entrance port)… The rate of rotation of the roller (revolutions of the roller) may determine the amount of powder distributed by the roller.”, Pa [0283]);
a powder nozzle (“an exit opening”, Pa [0045]) connected to the powder holding chamber.
Buller further teaches that the powder dispensing mechanism may comprise an array of powder delivery components (e.g., array of powder dispensers) (Pa [0262]). Thus, one would have found it obvious to provide an array of powder dispensers including exit openings respectively in order to dispense the powder materials to form a 3D object therefrom.
Buller further teaches one or mechanical members operatively coupled to the powder dispenser, wherein the one or more mechanical members subject the powder dispenser to vibration (Pa [0045]), but is silent to the powder spreader with ultrasonic agitation.
In the same field of endeavor, a three-dimensional (“3D”) printing apparatus, Vatani teaches that the print station 400 a includes roller 440 and a vibrating device 410 a, the vibrating device 410 a is functionally connected, e.g., integrally connected, to the roller 440, and may be configured to vibrate at a rapid frequency in order to make the roller 440 vibrate at the rapid frequency, and as a result of the roller 440 vibrating at a rapid frequency, e.g., at an ultrasonic frequency, the powder that is in contact with the roller 440 during the counter-rotation of the roller 440 may be better distributed, and agglomeration of the powder at the point of contact with the roller 440, or in the vicinity of the point of contact with the roller 440, may be reduced, significantly reduced, or eliminated (Pa [0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of invention to modify Buller with the teachings of Vatani and provide the vibrating device with the roller in order to allow the powder to be better distributed, and to reduce or eliminate agglomeration of the powder at the point of contact with the roller or in the vicinity of the point of contact with the roller.
With respect to claim 11, Buller as applied to claim 10 above further teaches a laser able to direct a two dimensional laser image against the print bed (“Energy from a first (or primary) energy source 304 can be provided to at least a portion of the first layer of powder 303. Energy from the first energy source 304 can be provided to the portion of the first layer of powder (e.g., using a vector scanning technique). In some cases, the primary energy source can be a laser.”, Pa [0365]).
With respect to claim 12, it is noted that the limitation “sizes of powder held in the respective first and second powder holding chambers are different” is an intended use since the powder dispensers of Buller are capable of containing different size of powders. The Courts have held that “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, “[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims.” See In re Young, 75 F.2d *>996<, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)) (see MPEP § 2115).
With respect to claim 16, Buller as applied to claim 13 above further teaches that the powder layer can comprise particles of homogeneous or heterogeneous size and/or shape (Pa [0363]), but does not explicitly teach that sizes of powder held in the respective first and second powder holding chambers are different.
In the same field of endeavor, a three-dimensional (“3D”) printing apparatus, Vatani teaches that the powder feeders 650, 655 may contain different powder materials (Pa [0071]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of invention to modify Buller with the teachings of Vatani and provide the different powder materials in size with the respective powder dispensers in order to form a 3D object from the powder materials of heterogeneous size.
Conclusion
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 YUNJU KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1146. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00-4:00 EST M-Th; Flexing Fri.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached on 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YUNJU KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights