EFS-Web
`USSN 13/314,337
`
`Remarks
`
`PATENTS
`MBOT-0002-P01
`
`Claim 1 is amended. Claims 1—26 are presented for examination, where claim 1 is
`
`Status ofthe Claims
`
`independent.
`
`The amendmentfinds support in at least {| [0063] and [0069] of the as-filed
`
`Specification.
`
`No new matter is added.
`
`Claim Rejections — 35 U.S.C. § 103
`
`Independent claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over U.S. Pat.
`
`Pub. No. 2006/0095152 to Loughran (“Loughran’’) in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2006/0127153
`
`to Menchik, et al. (‘Menchik’). This rejection is traversed for at least the following reasons.
`
`The applicant has devised a methodthat utilizes a three-dimensionalprinter as an
`
`independent network resource that can receive and processprint jobs sent by a requester.
`
`Specifically, the three-dimensional printer receives a request for a print job, evaluates its own
`
`availability, and then transmits information about this availability so that the requester can
`
`independently evaluate whether to use the three-dimensional printer and then confirm the print
`
`request as desired by the requester. The claims have been amendedto clarify this inventive
`
`concept, and to emphasize the configuration of the printer to provide sufficient availability
`
`information to a requester for the requester to independently determine whetherto select the
`
`printer as a resource for fabrication. Noneofthe art of record describes or fairly suggests a three-
`
`dimensionalprinter or similar device configured for use as a network resource in this manner.
`
`In general, Loughran is directed to a methodofsolid freeform fabrication (SFF) over a
`
`network, wherea first SFF system (“‘a general-purpose computing device” 1.e., “a client”’)
`provides SFF jobs to a second SFF system (a fabricator).' To be sure, Loughran contemplates a
`
`certain amount of information exchangeso that “administrators, technicians, or other personnel
`
`of the provider [of printing services] do not need to manually inspect the job 110 to manually
`
`" Loughran, 4 [0014].
`
`Page 7 of 10
`
`

`

`EFS-Web
`USSN 13/314,337
`
`PATENTS
`MBOT-0002-P01
`
`improveloading of the job 110 for fabrication .
`
`. ..”” Howeverthere is no express or implied
`
`suggestion in Loughran of the information exchange claimed by the applicanthere.
`
`Moreparticularly, Loughran contemplates an explicit “request to the second SFF system
`
`104” (i.e., a 3D printeror the like) for a “system description file (SDF)” that provides
`
`information about “capabilities, materials, and different network addresses of the second SFF
`system 104." “The second SFF system 104, in responseto the querey, sends the SDF 206 back
`to the [requester]. . ..”" Loughran proceedsto disclose a system where multiple network
`
`addresses are used to implicitly specify a user selection of priority or other characteristics:
`
`If the SFF fabrication job 110 is received by the second SFF
`system 104 at the network address 302A,then the second SFF
`system 104 assigns the job 110 with a high priority. Therefore, the
`second SFF system 104 inserts the job 110 into the SFF job queue
`402 at the top 404 of the queue 402. By comparison,if the SFF
`fabrication job 110 is received by the second SFF system 104 at
`the network address 302C, then the second SFF system 104 assigns
`the job 110 with normalpriority. Therefore, the second SFF system
`104 inserts the job 110 into the SFF job queue 402 at the bottom
`406 of the queue 402, so that it is processed in the order in whichit
`wasreceived relative to other normalpriority fabrication jobs.
`There can be more,or less, than two levels of priority assignable to
`SFF fabrication jobs. For instance, different addresses may be used
`so that jobs sent to one address are held for manual review by a
`supervisor for defect correction before fabrication, and jobs sent to
`another address are automatically queued for fabrication.’
`
`The balance of Loughranrelates to ancillary matters such as tracking costs/charges,°
`securing digital content,’ and other aspects of a system notrelevantto the present claim
`
`language. There is no suggest or other disclosure leading directly or indirectly to a system that
`
`respondsto a print request with availability information as contemplated by the present claims.
`
`Menchik doesnotfill the void left by Loughran. Menchikis directed to “controlling
`modeling material supply in a three-dimensional object-printing system,”* using “one or more
`
`cartridges” of modeling material and “[s]ensors (185) associated with the cartridges (180)” to
`
`* Loughran, § [0026].
`> Loughran, § [0026].
`* Loughran, § [0028].
`> Loughran, § [0036].
`® See, e.g., Loughran, § [0038].
`’ See, e.g., Loughran, § [0025].
`* Menchik, Abstract.
`
`Page 8 of 10
`
`

`

`EFS-Web
`USSN 13/314,337
`
`PATENTS
`MBOT-0002-P01
`
`monitor status of material within the cartridges. While this may generally suggest the use of
`
`sensors to monitor remaining material for fabrication, there is no suggestion here, express or
`
`otherwise, to configure a networkedprinter to respond to a print request with sensor-based
`
`availability information, and then to further configure the networkedprinter to await
`
`confirmation to proceed with print after transmitting the availability information.
`
`The applicant has conceived of a very specific and useful configuration of a networked
`
`three-dimensionalprinter, and has drafted claims explicitly focused on this novel configuration.
`
`Becausethe prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the claimed configuration, the art cannot
`
`anticipate the invention of claim 1, or render this invention obviouseither alone or in
`
`combination.
`
`For the foregoing reasons, independent claim 1 is believed to be patentable overthe art of
`
`record. The remaining claims depend from an allowable base claim andare likewise in condition
`
`for allowance. The applicant requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the outstanding claim
`
`rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
`
`Page 9 of 10
`
`

`

`EFS-Web
`USSN 13/314,337
`
`PATENTS
`MBOT-0002-P01
`
`Conclusion
`
`In view of the foregoing, the applicant believes that the currently pending claimsare in
`
`condition for allowance and respectfully requests a corresponding Notice of Allowance.
`
`The applicant believes that all of the pending claims have been addressed. However, the
`
`absence ofa reply to a specific rejection, issue or commentdoesnot signify agreement with or
`
`concession ofthat rejection, issue or comment. In addition, because the arguments made above
`
`may not be exhaustive, there may be reasons for patentability of any or all pending claims (or
`
`other claims) that have not been expressed.
`
`Nothing in this paper should be construed as intent to concede any issue with regard to
`
`any claim, except as specifically stated in this paper. The amendmentof any claim does not
`
`necessarily signify concession of unpatentability of the claim prior to its amendment.
`
`The Director is hereby authorized to charge any fees or to credit any overpayments
`
`associated with this filing to Deposit Account No. 50-4262. If the Examinerbelieves a telephone
`
`conference would expedite prosecution of this application, please telephone the undersignedat
`
`(617) 916-2658.
`
`Respectfully submitted
`
`STRATEGIC PATENTS, P.C.
`
`/Robert Mazzarese/
`Robert A. Mazzarese
`Reg. No. 42,852
`Tel.: (617)-916-2658
`
`November3, 2014
`
`Page 10 of 10
`
`