DETAILED ACTION
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 18/325,801, filed on May 30, 2023, which is a divisional of U.S. application Ser. No. 17/100,576, filed on Nov. 20, 2020, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 11,702,312 on Jul. 18, 2023, which is a divisional of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/831,396, filed on Aug. 20, 2015, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 10,870,268 on Dec. 22, 2020, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/147,393, filed on Apr. 14, 2015, and claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/040,045, filed on Aug. 21, 2014.
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 07/06/2026 responsive to the Office Action filed 05/08/2026 has been entered. Claims 122, 123 and 133 have been amended. Claims 129-131, 139, 140 and 142 have been canceled. New claims 143-147 have been added. Claims 122-128, 132-138, 141 and 143-147 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Claim 133 has been amended to address the indefiniteness, thus the rejection of claim 133 under 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, filed 07/06/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 122 under 103 have been considered and are addressed in the revised rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 122, 125-127, 132, 134 and 136 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Boyer et al. (US 2014/0034214-of record).
With respect to claim 122, Boyer teaches a method of automating a process of swapping feedstock on a 3D printer for continuous production (“three-dimensional printing may be augmented to accommodate multi-material builds.”, Pa [0024]), the method comprising:
printing a first part on a 3D printer using a first feedstock (“build a three-dimensional object by depositing lines of build material in successive layers—two-dimensional patterns derived from the cross-sections of the three-dimensional object.”, Pa [0024]); and
automatically swapping the first feedstock on the 3D printer with a second feedstock (“the filament changer 208 may be configured in any suitable fashion to receive a first filament (such as the first build material 214) and a second filament (such as the second build material 216) and to selectively deliver one of these filaments as a build material to the extruder 200. The filament changer 208 may be configured to switch between these supplies of material without interrupting the supply of material to the extruder 200”, Pa [0026]; “a processor (not shown) may be configured to control a selection of the first filament or the second filament by the filament changer 208”, Pa [0028]), wherein the swapping the first feedstock on the 3D printer with the second feedstock includes passing the first feedstock and the second feedstock through a merger (“the filament changer 208” and the body of “the extruder 200”) such that the second feedstock is in line with a length of the first feedstock, the merger comprising a guide channel extending between at least two input ports and an exit port, the first feedstock and the second feedstock passing through the guide channel (“the filament changer 208 may be configured to receive and select among any number of additional build materials (in filaments or other form) for feeding to the extruder 200”, Pa [0027]) (See the annotated Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
681
1019
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2
With respect to claim 125, Boyer as applied to claim 122 further teaches that the swapping the first feedstock on the 3D printer with the second feedstock includes retracting the first feedstock from an extruder of the 3D printer (“one of the build materials 214, 216 that is being moved away from the feed 204 of the extruder 200”, Pa [0026]) and advancing the second feedstock into the extruder of the 3D printer (“while moving the other one of the build materials 214, 216 into the feed 204 of the extruder 200.”, Pa [0026]) (See the annotated Fig. 2 above).
With respect to claim 126, Boyer as applied to claim 122 further teaches that the swapping the first feedstock on the 3D printer with the second feedstock includes creating multi-component feedstock (“for multiple build materials”, Pa [0025]).
With respect to claim 127, Boyer as applied to claim 126 further teaches that the multi-component feedstock is created using a multi-component feedstock source (“for multiple build materials”, Pa [0025]).
With respect to claim 132, Boyer as applied to claim 122 further teaches that the swapping the first feedstock on the 3D printer with the second feedstock includes cutting the first feedstock and/or the second feedstock with a cutter (“The filament changer 208 may, for example slide horizontally over a blade or other cutting edge to cut one of the build materials 214, 216”, Pa [0026]).
With respect to claim 134, Boyer as applied to claim 122 further teaches that the first feedstock is different from the second feedstock (“the processor may control the filament changer 208 to change between two different build materials”, Pa [0028]).
With respect to claim 136, Boyer as applied to claim 122 further teaches that the first feedstock and the second feedstock are spooled feedstock in the form of filament (“The length of build material 604 may be formed into a filament… The material may, for example, be wound on a spool”, Pa [0049]).
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 123 and 124 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyer et al. (US 2014/0034214) as applied to claim 122 above, and further in view of Burris et al. (US 2014/0271328) (All of record).
With respect to claim 123 and 124, Boyer as applied to claim 122 further teaches removing the first part from the 3D printer (“the object 112 is removed from the build platform 102 prior to beginning a new build on the working surface 116”, Pa [0022]), but silent to automatically removing the first part from the 3D printer using robotic automation.
In the same field of endeavor, additive manufacturing, Burris teaches that once construction of a part is completed within the build chamber 110, the door 114 can be opened for removal of the part, such as manually by a user or automatically by a robotic conveyor (Pa [0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Boyer with the teachings of Burris to provide a robotic conveyor in order to remove the part.
Claims 128, 137 and 138 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyer et al. (US 2014/0034214- of record) as applied to claim 122 above.
With respect to claim 128, Boyer as applied to claim 127 does not explicitly teach that the multi-component feedstock source is coupled to but spaced from a print head of the 3D printer by a feedstock feed path.
In another embodiment (Fig. 3), Boyer further teaches that while multi-material builds may be effectively realized using a filament switcher or the like to change build materials during fabrication, similar material changes may be achieved by pre-fabricating a filament 300 of several different materials coupled together in order to extrude at predetermined locations along a tool path, for example, a first build material 302 may be spliced to a second build material 304 to form a multi-material length of supply to a three-dimensional printer, e.g., to an extruder 306, and for multi-colored builds, this may include splicing a number of lengths of materials having different colors to form a pre-colored filament before fabricating an object (Pa [0030]).
Thus, one would have found it obvious to combine the embodiments of Figs. 2 and 3 such that the multi-material build is performed by the structures of Fig. 2 in order to pre-fabricate a filament of several different materials coupled together and then extrusion is performed by the structures of Fig. 3 in order to extrude at predetermined locations along a tool path.
With respect to claim 137, Boyer as applied to claim 122 further teaches that the object 112 is removed from the build platform 102 prior to beginning a new build on the working surface 116 (Pa [0022]) and the filament changer 208 may be configured to receive and select among any number of additional build materials (in filaments or other form) for feeding to the extruder 200, and to controllably select one of the build materials for extrusion under control of a processor or other control signal source (Pa [0027]). Thus, one would have found it obvious to remove the first part from the 3D printer before the first feedstock is swapped with the second feedstock in order to begin a new build on the working surface with the first feedstock.
With respect to claim 138, Boyer as applied to claim 137 teaches that the filament changer 208 may be configured to receive and select among any number of additional build materials (in filaments or other form) for feeding to the extruder 200, and to controllably select one of the build materials for extrusion under control of a processor or other control signal source (Pa [0027]). Thus, one would have found it obvious to perform printing a second part on the 3D printer with the second feedstock in order to form the part of the second feedstock.
Claim 133 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyer et al. (US 2014/0034214) as applied to claim 122, and further in view of Mark et al. (US 2014/0328963) (All of record).
With respect to claim 133, Boyer as applied to claim 122 does not explicitly teach that the swapping the first feedstock on the 3D printer with the second feedstock includes feeding the first feedstock or the second feedstock through a buffer to a print head of the 3D printer.
In the same filed of endeavor, three dimensional printing, Mark teaches that the filament 2 is drawn into the feed rollers 40, 42 under tension, and to facilitate guiding and maintaining alignment of the filament 2 with the rollers 40, 42, the filament 2 passes through a guide tube 74 upstream of the rollers 40, 42, the continuous core filament 2 passes through a close-fitting guide tube 72 positioned downstream of the rollers 40, 42 and upstream of the conduit nozzle 68m, the guide tube 72 both guides the filament 2 and prevents buckling of the continuous core filament 2 (Pa [0156]) and the guide tube 74, the close fitting tube 72, and the receiving tube 64 are capillary tubes in combination with a flexible tube made of Teflon/PTFE Bowden tube (Pa [0160]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the Boyer with the teachings of Mark so that the one would incorporate the guide tube 74, the close fitting tube 72, the receiving tube 64 and the feed rollers 40, 42 in order to guide the filament to the print head and prevent buckling of the continuous core filament.
Claims 135 and 141 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyer et al. (US 2014/0034214) as applied to claim 122, and further in view of Zinniel et al. (US 2010/0327479) (All of record).
With respect to claims 135 and 141, Boyer as applied to claim 122 does not explicitly teach that the first feedstock and the second feedstock are identical, or the first feedstock is exhausted before it is swapped with the second feedstock.
In the same field of endeavor, a compounding system for additive manufacturing, Zinniel teaches that compounder 12 may include two bays for each stock material, thereby allowing supplies of a given stock material (e.g., cassettes 42 a) to be interchangeably used to allow the continuous process to be maintained when a given cassette runs out of stock material (Pa [0041]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Boyer with the teachings of Zinniel so that the one would provide additional build material being identical to the first feedstock in order to allow the continuous process to be maintained when the first feedstock runs out of stock material.
Claims 144-146 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyer et al. (US 2014/0034214) in view of Koop et al. (US 2014/0159273) and Zinniel et al. (US 2010/0327479) (All of record).
With respect to claims 144-146, Boyer teaches a method of automatically swapping feedstock on a 3D printer (“three-dimensional printing may be augmented to accommodate multi-material builds.”, Pa [0024]), the method comprising:
printing with a first feedstock (“a first filament”) that is advanced by a first drive (“feed drive motor”) through a merger (“the filament changer 208” and the body of “the extruder 200”) to a print head (the end part of “the extruder 200”) of the 3D printer (“build a three-dimensional object by depositing lines of build material in successive layers—two-dimensional patterns derived from the cross-sections of the three-dimensional object.”, Pa [0024]; “each of the feeds 210, 212 of the filament changer 208 may have an independent feed drive motor so that the new filament can be fed into a drive motor of the extruder 200 in a controlled manner as a loose end of the old filament is driven into the extruder 200….the filament changer 208 may be configured in any suitable fashion to receive a first filament (such as the first build material 214) and a second filament (such as the second build material 216) and to selectively deliver one of these filaments as a build material to the extruder 200”, Pa [0026]); and
advancing a second feedstock (“a second filament”) with a second drive (“feed drive motor”) through the merger toward the print head such that a leading edge of the second feedstock is brought into abutment with a proximal end of the first feedstock, the second feedstock in line with the first feedstock (“the filament changer 208 may be configured in any suitable fashion to receive a first filament (such as the first build material 214) and a second filament (such as the second build material 216) and to selectively deliver one of these filaments as a build material to the extruder 200. The filament changer 208 may be configured to switch between these supplies of material without interrupting the supply of material to the extruder 200”, Pa [0026]; “a processor (not shown) may be configured to control a selection of the first filament or the second filament by the filament changer 208”, Pa [0028]), wherein the merger comprises a guide channel extending between at least two input ports and an exit port, the first feedstock and the second feedstock passing through the guide channel (“the filament changer 208 may be configured to receive and select among any number of additional build materials (in filaments or other form) for feeding to the extruder 200”, Pa [0027]) (See the annotated Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
681
1019
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2
Boyer is silent to detecting, with a sensor, that the first feedstock is exhausted; and in response to detecting that the first feedstock is exhausted, advancing a second feedstock.
In the same field of endeavor, a filament drive mechanism for use with an additive manufacturing system, Koop teaches that the system 10 includes container portion 14, guide tube 16, and print head 18, container portion 14 may retain a spool or coil of a consumable filament, and guide tube 16 interconnects container portion 14 and print head 18 (Pa [0034]), and controller 46, which is one or more control circuits configured to monitor and operate the components of system 10, and controller 46 may communicate over communication line 48 with print heads 18, head carriage 36, motors 40 and 42 (Pa [0045]). Koop further teaches sensor assemblies 44 located adjacent to bays 28 configured to receive and retain guide tubes 16, while also providing sufficient ranges of movement for guide tubes 16 and print heads 18, also configured to read encoded markings from successive segments of the consumable filaments moving through guide tubes 16 (Pa [0044] and Fig. 2), and controller 46 may communicate over communication line 48 with sensor assemblies 44, and various sensors, various components of system 10 (Pa [0045]-[0046]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Boyer with the teachings of Koop so that the one would incorporate sensor assemblies 44 mounted adjacent to a feedstock pathway to read encoded markings from successive segments of the consumable filaments moving through the feed pathway, and connect the sensor assemblies to the processor such that the controller would receive the data from the sensor assemblies in order to control the selection of build materials of the multicomponent feed stock and the rate of delivery of build material from the extruder.
In the same field of endeavor, a compounding system for additive manufacturing, Zinniel teaches that compounder 12 may include two bays for each stock material, thereby allowing supplies of a given stock material (e.g., cassettes 42 a) to be interchangeably used to allow the continuous process to be maintained when a given cassette runs out of stock material (Pa [0041]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Boyer with the teachings of Mannella so that the one would provide additional build material being identical to the first feedstock in order to allow the continuous process to be maintained when the first feedstock runs out of stock material.
Furthermore, in this modification, one would have found it obvious to use the sensor assemblies to detect the status / presence of the first feedstock and connect the sensor assemblies to the processor such that the controller would receive the data from the sensor assemblies in order to allow the continuous process to be maintained when the first feedstock runs out of stock material.
Claim 147 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyer et al. (US 2014/0034214) in view of Koop et al. (US 2014/0159273) and Zinniel et al. (US 2010/0327479) as applied to claim 144, and further in view of Pax (US 2014/0070461) (All of record).
With respect to claim 147, the combination as applied to claim 144 above does not explicitly teach that the guide channel is a tapered guide channel.
In the same field of endeavor, a three-dimensional printer for mitigating transition artifacts and permits faster, more complete changes from one build material to another (Pa [0003]), Pax teaches that the extruder 400 may include two or more input ports 408 (e.g., a first input port and a second input port) and an extrusion port 410 which seems to be in a tapered shape (Pa [0082] and Fig. 4), and as the controller 420 controls the feeding of each build material 414, one continuous build material including inherently two colors being aligned in series with mitigated color mixing would be extruded though the extrusion port 410 (Pa [0086]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Boyer with the teachings of Pax so that the skilled artisan would design the guide channel in a tapered shape in the merger for the purpose of forming completely one continuous filament by several feedstock sources.
Reasons for Allowance
Claim 143 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 143, the prior art (Boyer et al., US 2014/0034214), which is cited in the rejection, teaches that the swapping the first feedstock on the 3D printer with the second feedstock includes: advancing the first feedstock (“a first build material 214”) past a minimum retract line (the contact line between “a first feed 210 and a second feed 212” and “a filament changer 208” when the second feed 212 is aligned along with a feed 204 of the extruder 202) and through the merger; cutting the first feedstock with a cutter to provide the length of the first feedstock having a proximal end (“The filament changer 208 may, for example slide horizontally over a blade or other cutting edge to cut one of the build materials 214, 216”, Pa [0026]); and advancing the second feedstock (“a second build material 216”) past the minimum retract line and through the merger toward the proximal end of the length of the first feedstock (“the new filament can be fed into a drive motor of the extruder 200 in a controlled manner as a loose end of the old filament is driven into the extruder 200… The filament changer 208 may be configured to switch between these supplies of material without interrupting the supply of material to the extruder 200”, Pa [0026]), but fails to teach or suggest after cutting the first feedstock, retracting the first feedstock to the minimum retract line. None of the prior art does remedy the deficiencies of Boyer.
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 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 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.
/YUNJU KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights