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
Claims 8-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/05/2026. The traversal is on the ground(s) that it would not be unduly burdensome to simultaneously examine all the claims in this application. This is not found persuasive because the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classifications and the inventions require different fields of search.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Double Patenting
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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-3, 5, and 7 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 6, and 7 of copending Application No. 18/428526 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Regarding claim 1, copending Application No. 18/428526 (amendments dated 9/18/2026) claims an automated de-powdering system, comprising: a separation station comprising: a support structure configured to support a build box containing an additive manufacturing build, (separation station configured to receive the build box, claim 1, lines 7-10) wherein the additive manufacturing build includes one or more objects disposed within a powder build material; an actuator actuatable to move at least a first portion of the additive manufacturing build out of the build box and into a sleeve; (actuator, claim 1 , lines 8-10) and a separation mechanism actuatable to separate the first portion of the additive manufacturing build within the sleeve from a remaining portion of the additive manufacturing build; and a de-powdering station comprising: a conveyor configured to convey the first portion of the additive manufacturing build away from the separation station; and an agitation mechanism (agitation mechanism claim 1, lines 21-22) actuatable to separate at least a portion of the powder build material from the one or more objects while the first portion of the additive manufacturing build is being conveyed by the conveyor.
Regarding claim 2, copending Application No. 18/428526 claims automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the separation mechanism comprises a cutting blade. (cutting knife, claim 7)
Regarding claim 3, copending Application No. 18/428526 claims automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the separation mechanism comprises a divider placed within the additive manufacturing build. (separation mechanism insertable, claim 6)
Regarding claim 5, copending Application No. 18/428526 claims automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the agitation mechanism comprises at least one of a vibration mechanism,(mechanism…to induce vibration, claim 1) a fluidization mechanism, or an agitation media.
Regarding claim 7, copending Application No. 18/428526 automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the conveyor comprises a sieve conveyor. (a conveyor, the at least one mechanism being automatically actuatable to separate at least the portion of the powder build material from the one or more objects while the additive manufacturing build is positioned on the conveyor, claim 1)
Claim 16-18 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 20 of copending Application No. 18/428526 (reference application) in view of Fulop et al. (US 2018/0297284 A1, hereinafter Fulop). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding claim 16, copending Application No. 18/428526 (amendments dated 9/18/2026) claims an additive manufacturing system, comprising: a build box comprising a plurality of sidewalls and a build plate, (claim 20, lines 1-3) the build box defining a build chamber for an additive manufacturing build; (claim 20, line 2-5) an actuator configured to move the build plate to position at least a first portion of the additive manufacturing build into a sleeve; (actuator, claim 20, lines 12-13) a separation mechanism configured to separate the first portion of the additive manufacturing build from a remaining portion of the additive manufacturing build; (separation station, claims 20, lines 7-10) a conveyor configured to convey the first portion of the additive manufacturing build away from the remaining portion of the additive manufacturing build; (conveyor, claim 20, lines 14-15) and an agitation mechanism configured to separate unbound powder build material from the one or more objects while the first portion of the additive manufacturing build is being conveyed by the conveyor. (conveyor, claim 20, lines 16-18).
Copending Application No. 18/428526 does not claim a powder source configured to deposit one or more layers of a powder build material onto a build surface within the build box; a print system configured to transform at least a portion of the one or more layers of the powder build material to form one or more objects of the additive manufacturing build.
Fulop teaches a powder source configured to deposit one or more layers of a powder build material onto a build surface within the build box; (powder supply 202, Fig. 2) a print system configured to transform at least a portion of the one or more layers of the powder build material to form one or more objects of the additive manufacturing build. (the controller 210 may actuate the print head 208 to deliver the binder material 214, [0043])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the powder supply and print head of Fulop with the additive manufacturing system of the present application because it yields the predictable result of creating a two-dimensional pattern, to the layer of the powder spread across the print bed, to form a layer of at least one three-dimensional object, see Fulop [0043].
Regarding claim 17, copending Application No. 18/428526 claims additive manufacturing system of claim 16, wherein the separation mechanism configured to separate the first portion of the additive manufacturing build while at least one of the powder source is depositing the one or more layers of the powder build material or the print system is forming the one or more objects from the one or more layers of the powder build material. (the at least one actuator being automatically actuatable to separate at least the portion of the powder build material from the one or more objects while the additive manufacturing build is positioned on the conveyor; claim 20)
Regarding claim 18, copending Application No. 18/428526 claims the additive manufacturing system of claim 16, wherein the conveyor comprises a sieve conveyor. (the at least one actuator being automatically actuatable to separate at least the portion of the powder build material from the one or more objects while the additive manufacturing build is positioned on the conveyor; claim 20).
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim recites “manufacturing build at at least” and the second “at” should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-7, 16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fulop et al. (US 2018/0297284 A1, hereinafter Fulop) in view of Murciego Rodriguez et al. (US 2022/0072621 A1, hereinafter Murciego).
Regarding claim 1, Fulop meets the claimed automated de-powdering system, comprising: a separation station comprising: (de-powdering subsystem 104 may include a system 300 for separating the objects 216, [0045], Fig. 1-5B) a support structure configured to support a build box (build box 108 and build box floor 304, Fig. 2) containing an additive manufacturing build, (objects 216) wherein the additive manufacturing build includes one or more objects disposed within a powder build material; (powder bed 206) and a separation mechanism actuatable to separate the first portion of the additive manufacturing build within the sleeve from a remaining portion of the additive manufacturing build; (separating blade 312 may be configured to be inserted, by a blade actuator 314, through the elongated aperture 306 and into the powder print bed 206, [0048]) and a de-powdering station comprising: a conveyor configured to convey the first portion of the additive manufacturing build away from the separation station; ([0062] a ramp 502 associated with the build box 108, [0062], Fig. 5A) and an agitation mechanism actuatable to separate at least a portion of the powder build material from the one or more objects while the first portion of the additive manufacturing build is being conveyed by the conveyor. (associated with the ramp may be a mechanical vibration generator 504, controlled by a ramp vibration controller 506, configured to convey mechanical vibrations to the ramp 502, [0062]).
Fulop does not teach an actuator actuatable to move at least a first portion of the additive manufacturing build out of the build box and into a sleeve.
Murciego teaches an actuator actuatable to move at least a first portion of the additive manufacturing build out of the build box and into a sleeve. (the controller (5) may control a container (120, and the container may be moved or dragged across the build material (18) in order to separate a first volume (21) of build material (18) from a remaining volume (22) of build material, [0043], Fig. 2. Examiner notes the container 12 of Murciego meets the claimed sleeve.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the container of Murciego with the de-powder subsystem of Fulop because it may help prevent damage to an article during post-processing procedures such as decaking, and also enables the decaking process to be more easily automated for certain kinds of article, such as metallic articles or delicate article, see Murciego [0014].
Regarding claim 2, Fulop as modified meets the claimed automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the separation mechanism comprises a cutting blade. (separating blade 312 may be configured to be inserted, by a blade actuator 314, [0048]).
Regarding claim 3, Fulop as modified meets the claimed automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the separation mechanism comprises a divider placed within the additive manufacturing build. (Fulop teaches blade 312 to serve as a divider, see Fig. 4C).
Regarding claim 4, Fulop as modified meets the claimed automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the additive manufacturing build comprises one or more build layers containing the one or more objects disposed within the powder build material, (powder print bed 206 may comprise nested layers 206a, 206b, 206c, shown delineated by a dashed line. Each of the nested layers may comprise one or more objects 216, [0043]) and wherein the additive manufacturing build comprises one or more foundation layers including the powder build material devoid of any of the one or more objects, (Fulop teaches layer 206c may contain objects 216 and thus meets the claim where no objects are present. Moreover, the presence of objects is considered the intended use of the claimed apparatus, see MPEP 2114. The apparatus of Fulop of capable of treating each layer separately, see [0056]) and wherein the separation mechanism is configured to separate the first portion of the manufacturing build from the remaining portion of the manufacturing build at least one of the one or more foundation layers. (Fulop teaches removing objects from top-most layer 206a while isolating lower layers, see [0048], Fig. 4-5A).
Regarding claim 5, Fulop as modified meets the claimed automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the agitation mechanism comprises at least one of a vibration mechanism, a fluidization mechanism, or an agitation media. (Associated with the ramp may be a mechanical vibration generator 504, controlled by a ramp vibration controller 506, configured to convey mechanical vibrations to the ramp 502, [0062]).
Regarding claim 6, Fulop as modified meets the claimed automated de-powdering system of claim 1, further comprising a hopper disposed below the conveyor to collect the powder build material separated from the one or more objects. (one or more guiding components 524 (such as panels, channels, baffles, conduits, etc.) configured to guide the unbound powder to one or more collection reservoirs 526, [0063], Fig. 5B).
Regarding claim 7, Fulop as modified meets the claimed automated de-powdering system of claim 1, wherein the conveyor comprises a sieve conveyor. (Fulop teaches amp 502 may be perforated by apertures configured to allow loose powder to fall through the ramp 502 as the object progresses along the ramp 502, [0062]).
Regarding claim 16, Fulop meets the claimed, additive manufacturing system, comprising: a build box comprising a plurality of sidewalls and a build plate, (build box 108 and build box floor 304, Fig. 2) the build box defining a build chamber for an additive manufacturing build; (Fig. 2) a powder source configured to deposit one or more layers of a powder build material onto a build surface within the build box; (powder supply 202, Fig. 2) a print system configured to transform at least a portion of the one or more layers of the powder build material to form one or more objects of the additive manufacturing build; (the controller 210 may actuate the print head 208 to deliver the binder material 214, [0043]) a separation mechanism configured to separate the first portion of the additive manufacturing build from a remaining portion of the additive manufacturing build; (de-powdering subsystem 104 may include a system 300 for separating the objects 216, [0045], Fig. 1-5B) a conveyor configured to convey the first portion of the additive manufacturing build away from the remaining portion of the additive manufacturing build; ([0062] a ramp 502 associated with the build box 108, [0062], Fig. 5A)and an agitation mechanism configured to separate unbound powder build material from the one or more objects while the first portion of the additive manufacturing build is being conveyed by the conveyor. (associated with the ramp may be a mechanical vibration generator 504, controlled by a ramp vibration controller 506, configured to convey mechanical vibrations to the ramp 502, [0062]).
Fulop does not teach an actuator configured to move the build plate to position at least a first portion of the additive manufacturing build into a sleeve.
Murciego teaches an actuator configured to move the build plate to position at least a first portion of the additive manufacturing build into a sleeve. ( ejection apparatus (24) which can function to eject or present a portion of the build material (18) from the build chamber (11), [0018], the controller (5) may control a container (120, and the container may be moved or dragged across the build material (18) in order to separate a first volume (21) of build material (18) from a remaining volume (22) of build material, [0043], Fig. 2. Examiner notes the container 12 of Murciego meets the claimed sleeve.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the container of Murciego with the de-powder subsystem of Fulop because it may help prevent damage to an article during post-processing procedures such as decaking, and also enables the decaking process to be more easily automated for certain kinds of article, such as metallic articles or delicate article, see Murciego [0014].
Regarding claim 18, Fulop meets the claimed additive manufacturing system of claim 16, wherein the conveyor comprises a sieve conveyor. (Fulop teaches amp 502 may be perforated by apertures configured to allow loose powder to fall through the ramp 502 as the object progresses along the ramp 502, [0062]).
Regarding claim 19, Fulop meets the claimed additive manufacturing system of claim 16, wherein the agitation mechanism comprises at least one of a vibration mechanism, a fluidization mechanism, or an agitation media. (Associated with the ramp may be a mechanical vibration generator 504, controlled by a ramp vibration controller 506, configured to convey mechanical vibrations to the ramp 502, [0062]).
Regarding claim 20, Fulop meets the claimed additive manufacturing system of claim 16, wherein the separation mechanism comprises at least one of a cutting blade or a divider placed within the additive manufacturing build. (Fulop teaches blade 312 to serve as a divider, see Fig. 4C).
Claim 17 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fulop et al. (US 2018/0297284 A1, hereinafter Fulop) in view of Murciego Rodriguez et al. (US 2022/0072621 A1, hereinafter Murciego), in view of Kubo et al. (US 2001/0045678 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Fulop meets the claimed, additive manufacturing system of claim 16, wherein the separation mechanism configured to separate the first portion of the additive manufacturing build while at least one of the powder source is depositing the one or more layers of the powder build material or the print system is forming the one or more objects from the one or more layers of the powder build material.
Kubo teaches a three-dimensional modeling apparatus with powder material reservoir 30, Fig. 9, as shown in FIG. 13A-C, the modeling mechanism 60 can continuously start next fabrication of a 3D object without waiting for the completion of the processing in the powder removal section 70 by removing mesh tray 9a while placing mesh tray 9b, see [0134].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the removal mechanism and second mesh tray of Kubo with the additive manufacturing system of Fulop because post-processing and additive manufacturing can be performed simultaneously to increase throughput, see [0134].
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yoo et al. (US 10,118,335 B2) Col. 3, lines 23-30, teaches a manufacturing system and equipment assembly useful for the preparation of articles by three-dimensional printing. The system and assembly can be used for high through-put continuous, semi-continuous, or batch manufacture with minimal product loss, high efficiency, and high product reproducibility in the context of flexible article design.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL M. ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0467. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM.
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, Sam Zhao can be reached at (571)270-5343. 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.
/MICHAEL M. ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights