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 .
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.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,496,777. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of ‘777 teaches all the limitations of the independent claims including a system for additive manufacturing comprising a carrier configured to move in a plurality of directions, a plurality of segments connected to a plurality of motors, the motors configured to displace the segments relative to one another, an extruder connected to the carrier, the extruder comprising a screw, a pump having an inlet downstream of the extruder and an outlet upstream of the nozzle, a pump (with an inlet and outlet) configured to pump material, and a controller configured to control operation of the extruder and motors.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,083,743. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of ‘743 teaches a system for additive manufacturing comprising a carrier configured to move in a plurality of directions, a plurality of segments connected to a plurality of motors, the motors configured to displace the segments relative to one another, an extruder connected to the carrier, the extruder comprising a screw, a pump having an inlet downstream of the extruder and an outlet upstream of the nozzle, a pump (with an inlet and outlet) configured to pump material, and a controller configured to control operation of the extruder and motors. Claim 5 of ‘743 further teaches a pressure sensor which would decrease or increase speed based on signal received (claims 9-10).
Relevant Prior Art
Batchelder WO 2015/050958 in view of Duro Royo et al US 2016/0075089 is considered the closest prior art of record. Batchelder teaches an additive manufacturing system comprising a nozzle (64) (with a carrier) along a first, second, and third axis (x, y, z) [0051] (platen may be considered a first segment while the head carriage may be considered a second segment), an extruder connected to the carrier [0041], flowable material led to a pump [0061], and a controller configured to adjust feed rates (speed) of the pump [0013] and compensate for pressure variations due to flow [0064]. It would also have been obvious to control the carrier (movement) and extruder operation (flow rate) with a controller with a reasonable expectation for success and predictable results in order to efficiently control the system. Batchelder teaches a pressure sensor [0062]-[0064] configured to sense a pressure of the inlet of the pump and outlet of the extruder. It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to send the pressure measurement to a controller (since this is the purpose of a sensor) with a reasonable expectation for success and predictable results. Batchelder is silent regarding a screw disposed within a barrel. Duro Royo teaches an additive manufacturing device wherein the device comprises an extruder (abstract) including a screw disposed within a barrel [0043], [0093], [0097]. Duro Royo further teaches a software program connected to the multi-barrel or single-barrel extruder so as to operate said extruder [0093]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have utilized an extruder with a screw disposed within the barrel to generate heat (since this is the purpose of extrusion) and operate said barrel with a controller, with a reasonable expectation for success and predictable results because Duro Royo teaches that such extruders are used and controlled as described in additive manufacturing. Batchelder teaches a viscosity pump, which is considered a PDP. Batchelder teaches tracks [0056] and a moveable head and platen gantry [0050], [0045]. However, Batchelder and Duro Royo do not teach or suggest a nozzle that is translatable along a track aligned with the axis or a track along the segments where a nozzle is displaceable during operation. Also, see reasons for allowance for parent application 18/795789.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN T. LEONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-6:00pm.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached on 571-272-5166. 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.
/NATHAN T LEONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1715
Prosecution Insights