DETAILED ACTION
In Reply filing on 3/19/2025, Claims 1-6, 8, 10-12, 15, 17, 24-27, 30, and 32 are pending. Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8, 24, 27, 30, and 32 are amended, and claims 10-12, 15, and 17 are withdrawn. Claims 1-6, 8, 24-27, 30, and 32 are considered in the current Office 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 .
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites “the material ejector is configured to adjust a thickness of the colored region in a direction of the reverse normal vector by utilizing the reverse normal vector to obtain the constant thickness” in page 3, line 4. The limitation is interpreted as the intended use of a claimed apparatus. It’s noted that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP 2115.
Furthermore, claim 1 recites “wherein the building apparatus is configured to cause a color of a lower surface of the object be different from a color of a side surface of the object, wherein a boundary is positioned at which the lower surface intersects the side surface, and the thickness of the colored region in the normal direction is deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region of the boundary in which the lower surface intersects with the side surface; when a width of the colored region on a surface side is larger than a width on an inner side, characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized; when the width of the colored region on the surface side is smaller than the width on the inner side, the characters and the patterns are drawn such that an impression of spreading out is given” in page 3, line 13. The limitation is interpreted as the intended use of a claimed apparatus. It’s noted that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP 2115.
Moreover, claim 1 recites “when a width of the colored region on a surface side is larger than a width on an inner side, characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized; when the width of the colored region on the surface side is smaller than the width on the inner side, the characters and the patterns are drawn such that an impression of spreading out is given” in page 3, line 19. The limitation is interpreted as the intended use of a claimed apparatus. It’s noted that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP 2115.
Claim 24 also recites “when a width of the colored region on a surface side is larger than a width on an inner side, characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized; when the width of the colored region on the surface side is smaller than the width on the inner side, the characters and the patterns are drawn such that an impression of spreading out is given”. The limitation is interpreted as the intended use of a claimed apparatus. It’s noted that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP 2115.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4, 24, 25, 27, 30 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by US Pub. No. 20160129640 (“Yamazaki”), in view of US Pub. No. 20100195122 (“Kritchman”), further in view of US Pub. No. 20170006190 (“Perville”), US Pub. No. 20170329309 (“Valade”), and US Pub. No. 20170274586 (“Hakkaku et al.”).
Regarding claim 1, Yamazaki teaches a building apparatus that builds an object in three-dimensional ([0002], a three-dimensional object formation apparatus), the building apparatus comprising:
A material ejector ([0076] ink cartridges 48) that ejects a material ([0076], ink) used for building the object ([0076], The six ink cartridges 48 are provided… for forming the three-dimensional object); and a controller configured to control an operation of the material ejector ([0084], a control program for controlling apparatus 1 during formation process);
Wherein the material ejector ([0076] ink cartridges 48) ejects at least a material for coloring ([0076], colored formation inks) used for coloring the object during building the object that is colored ([0076], five colored formation inks for forming the three-dimensional object), during building the object that is colored, the material ejector forms at least a colored region (Fig. 12A, L1) that is a layer region along a surface shape of the object to be built (Fig. 12, S-XY) and is colored with the material for coloring ([0158], L1 is a layer is formed using the formation ink and is a layer for expressing the color of the three-dimensional object);
The controller ([0187] controller 6 controls the operation of each unit) is configured to cause the material ejector to form the colored region ([0158] expressing the color of the three-dimensional object on L1) so that the colored region in a normal direction of the object that is a direction perpendicular to a surface of the object has a constant thickness set in advance ([0165], the formation data generation unit 93 determines an area of three-dimensional object having the thickness ΔL1; Fig. 12A, a color region in a direction perpendicular to the surface of the object Obj having a predetermined constant thickness ΔL1);
And wherein the object is built by stacking slice units ([0009], the three-dimensional object includes multiple layers formed of dots), wherein the building apparatus further comprises a design data generator that generates data for each of the slice units ([0049], a formation data generation unit 93 generates the formation body data FD of each layer), the design data generator defines a portion of the colored region portion in each of the slice units ([0059], FD[Q] which determine the shape and the color of formation bodies), and converts data of the colored region into ejection data of the material for coloring ([0062], the formation body data FD designates that one or the plurality of dots are formed in each voxel Vx).
Yamazaki does not teach during building the object colored to include a character or a pattern drawn with the material for coloring having a different color from a surrounding color on a surface of the object.
Kritchman teaches during building the object colored ([0012] form a colored 3D object) to include a character or a pattern drawn with the material for coloring ([0013] apparent colored surface) having a different color from a surrounding color on a surface of the object ([0013], a white barrier outline formed adjacent to the colored outline of the layer using white building material).
Yamazaki and Kritchman are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additive manufacturing. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki to incorporate building the object colored to include a character or a pattern having a different color from a surrounding color as taught by Kritchman, in order to ensure perception of bright colors and a large color gamut (Kritchman, [0013]).
Yamazaki does not teach during building the object colored to include the character or the pattern, at each position in the normal direction in the colored region, the material ejector is configured to form the colored region so that the character or the pattern expands into an interior of the colored region in the normal direction. Yamazaki also does not teach the building apparatus is configured to cause a color of a lower surface of the object be different from a color of a side surface of the object, wherein a boundary is positioned at which the lower surface intersects the side surface.
Perville teaches the building apparatus is configured to cause a color of a lower surface of the object be different from a color of a side surface of the object ([0010], “a different perceived color for differently oriented dots relative to the apparent surface. In particular, the colors on the perpendicular surfaces tend to be very dark. This effect is compensated by depositing other, usually lighter, colorant dots in-between the colorant dots, affecting the path of light through the colorant dots”);
And a printing system for coloring a 3D object ([0002]), wherein during building the object colored to include the character or the pattern ([0009], different color for representing a color image on the surface), at each position in the normal direction in the colored region (Fig. 3B), the material ejector is configured to form the colored region so that the character or the pattern expands into an interior of the colored region in the normal direction (Fig. 3B, the colored region 8 has color 15 that forms the character or pattern expands into the interior of the colored region 8 in the normal direction).
Yamazaki and Perville are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additive manufacturing. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ejector in Yamazaki to incorporate forming the colored character or pattern expands into an interior of the colored region in the normal direction as taught by Perville, in order to prevent local thickening (Perville, [0005]).
Yamazaki does not teach wherein a reverse normal vector is obtained for each surface of an 3D model of the object, and the reverse normal vector is orthogonal to an outer peripheral surface at each position of the 3D model of the object, and the reverse normal vector heads toward an inside of the 3D model of the object, and the material ejector is configured to adjust a thickness of the colored region in a direction of the reverse normal vector by utilizing the reverse normal vector to obtain the constant thickness, and when a width of the colored region on a surface side is larger than a width on an inner side, characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized; when the width of the colored region on the surface side is smaller than the width on the inner side, the characters and the patterns are drawn such that an impression of spreading out is given.
Valade teaches a printing system for coloring a 3D object (Fig. 1), wherein a reverse normal vector is obtained for each surface of an 3D model of the object ([0012] a movement direction which has a negative inner product on voxel of the surface), and the reverse normal vector is orthogonal to an outer peripheral surface at each position of the 3D model of the object ([0012] for a voxel at an outer surface of the object, the movement direction has a negative inner product with the normal vector of the outer surface), and the reverse normal vector heads toward an inside of the 3D model of the object ([0012], having negative product with the normal vector heads towards inside of the surface);
The material ejector ([0010] print head) is configured to adjust a thickness of the colored region ([0046] determine a thickness value for the surface in voxels) in a direction of the reverse normal vector by utilizing the reverse normal vector to obtain the constant thickness ([0013], for each voxel, selecting a movement direction of the print head equal to the movement direction of the print head selected for the first voxel. The outer surface has a predetermined thickness of a number of voxels). In this case, Valade teaches that the thickness of the color region can be adjusted by setting it in print system setting. In Fig. 6, Valade demonstrates that the thickness of each layer of printed object can be adjusted in both x and y direction, which is the same as the reverse normal vector from the surface in the z direction. Therefore, the printing system taught by Valade is capable of adjust the thickness in a direction of the reverse normal vector to obtain constant thickness. As mentioned under claim interpretation, the limitation of “the material ejector is configured to adjust a thickness of the colored region in a direction of the reverse normal vector by utilizing the reverse normal vector to obtain the constant thickness” is interpreted as the intended use of a claimed apparatus. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP 2115;
and when a width of the colored region on a surface side is larger than a width on an inner side, characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized; when the width of the colored region on the surface side is smaller than the width on the inner side, the characters and the patterns are drawn such that an impression of spreading out is given (Fig. 6, the thickness of each layer of printed object can be adjusted in both x and y direction). As indicated under claim interpretation above, the limitation is interpreted as the intended use of a claimed apparatus. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP 2115. In this case, the printing system taught by Valade is capable of adjust the thickness in a direction of the reverse normal vector. Therefore, Valade teaches a printing system capable of adjusting the width of the colored region on a surface side so that the characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized or giving an impression of spreading out.
Yamazaki and Valade are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additive manufacturing. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the 3D model in Yamazaki to incorporate generating a normal vector with a negative product as the movement direction of the ejector and based on the movement direction, setting a predetermined thickness as taught by Valade, in order to optimize printing quality, especially for steep edges, faces, and sides of the object (Valade, [0010]).
Yamazaki does not teach a boundary is positioned at which the lower surface intersects the side surface, and the thickness of the colored region in the normal direction is deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region of the boundary in which the lower surface intersects with the side surface.
Hakkaku teaches a boundary is positioned at which the lower surface intersects the side surface, and the thickness of the colored region in the normal direction is deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region of the boundary in which the lower surface intersects with the side surface (Fig. 1B, the thickness of the colored region in the normal direction, such as indicated at 3 and 4, is different from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region of the boundary at the intersection between the lower surface with the side surface, such as indicated at 2).
Yamazaki and Hakkaku et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additive manufacturing. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki and Kritchman to incorporate a thickness of the colored region in the normal direction to be deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region in which a lower surface intersects with a side surface as taught by Hakkaku et al., in order to form a continuous colored region along the side surface of the object (Hakkaku et al., [0095]).
Regarding claim 2, Yamazaki teaches when building the object that is colored, the building apparatus builds the object including at least an inside region constituting an inside (Fig. 12A, “L2”) and the colored region surrounding an outer side of the inside region (Fig. 12A, L1 is a colored region surrounding L2), the material ejector includes:
A head for inside building as an ejection head that ejects a material for forming the inside region ([0010], a head unit which discharges liquid for forming components of 3D object; [0159], The inner layer L2 is a layer formed using the white ink);
And a head for coloring as an ejection head that ejects the material for coloring ([0010], a head unit discharges chromatic color material components);
And the controller is configured to causes at least the head for coloring to eject the material ([0024], controlling the head unit) for coloring to cause the material ejector to form the colored region ([0024], a first layer formed of a plurality of dots formed with the color material).
Regarding claim 3, Yamazaki teaches the head for inside building and the head for coloring are ink-jet heads that eject ink by inkjet ([0045] an ink jet discharges a curable ink for components of 3D object), and the material for forming the inside region and the material for coloring are each a UV curable ink ([0045] ultraviolet curable ink) that is cured by being irradiated with ultraviolet rays ([0074] uv ray).
Regarding claim 4, Yamazaki does not teach the building apparatus builds the object by overlapping the material used for building in a deposition direction set in advance.
Kritchman teaches a building apparatus ([0001], a deposition device), wherein the building apparatus builds the object by overlapping the material used for building in a deposition direction set in advance ([0018], small dots of each primary color may be printed in a pattern that combine different colors to form a single color during deposition).
Yamazaki and Kritchman are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additive manufacturing. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki to incorporate overlapping deposition material as taught by Kritchman, in order to increase the range of colors (Kritchman, [0018]).
Both Yamazaki and Kritchman do not teach a thickness of the colored region in the normal direction to be deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region in which a lower surface intersects with a side surface.
Hakkaku et al. teaches a building apparatus for building a 3D objection, wherein the object includes at least a lower surface as a surface on a lower side in the deposition direction (See annotated Fig. 1B, “Lower surface”) and a side surface intersecting with the lower surface (See annotated Fig. 1B, “Side surface”);
And a controller permits a thickness of the colored region ([0117], The colored layer 3 has a thickness) in the normal direction (Fig. 1B thickness is in normal direction) to be deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region in which the lower surface intersects with the side surface (See annotated Fig. 1B, Side surface has a smaller thickness compared to that of the intersection portion), and causes a material ejector (Fig. 2, inkjet heads to deposit color ink) to form a colored region ([0095] the colored layer 3) so that the colored region along the lower surface is continuous to the colored region along the side surface ([0095], parts 53 of the colored layer in the respective layers 5a are continuous along the outermost surface of the three-dimensional object 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
425
631
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki and Kritchman to incorporate a thickness of the colored region in the normal direction to be deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region in which a lower surface intersects with a side surface as taught by Hakkaku et al., in order to a continuous colored region along the side surface of the object (Hakkaku et al., [0095]).
Regarding claim 8, Yamazaki does not teach the controller is configured to cause the material ejector to form the colored region so that a difference between a thickness of the colored region in the normal direction of the object and a reference thickness set in advance falls within a permissible range set in advance.
Hakkaku et al. teaches a difference between a thickness of the colored region in the normal direction of the object ([0117], The colored layer 3 has a thickness) and a reference thickness set in advance ([0117] The colored layer 3 has a thickness set to be equal to the width of region 53) falls within a permissible range set in advance ([0016], the colored layer 3 has uniform thickness, which means the thickness of layer 3 necessarily falls within a specified range, such as specified in [0117]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the data generator in Yamazaki to incorporate the difference between the width of colored region 53 and a reference width to be within a predetermined range as taught by Hakkaku et al. as described above, in order to prevent mixing of the color ink and the ink for the light reflective layer (Hakkaku et al., [0107]).
Regarding claim 24, Yamazaki teaches a building apparatus for building an object, the building apparatus comprising:
A design data generator that generates a design data of the object including a color region ([0048], a host computer 9 which executes a data generation process of generating formation body data FD which determines color of the three-dimensional object) having a constant thickness in a normal direction of a surface, from the surface of the object to an inside of the object ([0165], Fig. 12A, a color region in a direction perpendicular to the surface of the object Obj having a predetermined constant thickness ΔL1);
A building processor that ejects and deposits a building material based on the design data to generate the object ([0076], ink cartridges 48 for forming the three-dimensional object based on formation body data FD), wherein a thickness in the normal direction of the color region is twice or more a resolution pitch ([0136], one unit structure is provided with respect to one voxel Vx. the dots are formed in one voxel Vx with a combination of three small dots);
Wherein the object is built by stacking slice units ([0009], the three-dimensional object is formed by multiple layers), wherein the building apparatus further comprises a design data generator that generates data for each of the slice units ([0049], a formation data generation unit 93 executes a data generation process of generating the formation body data FD based on the model data Dat), the design data generator defines a portion of the colored region portion in each of the slice units ([0059] formation body data items FD[1] to FD[Q] which determine the shape and the color of formation bodies LY[1] to LY[Q]), and converts data of the colored region into ejection data of the material for coloring ([0062], the formation body data FD designates that one or the plurality of dots are formed in each voxel Vx).
Yamazaki does not teach building the object colored to include a character or a pattern drawn with the material for coloring having a different color from a surrounding color on a surface of the object.
Kritchman teaches building the object colored to include a character or a pattern drawn with the material for coloring ([0013] apparent colored surface) having a different color from a surrounding color on a surface of the object ([0013], a white barrier outline formed adjacent to the colored outline of the layer using white building material).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki to incorporate building the object colored to include a character or a pattern having a different color from a surrounding color as taught by Kritchman, in order to ensure perception of bright colors and a large color gamut (Kritchman, [0013]).
Yamazaki does not teach during building the object colored to include the character or the pattern, at each position in the normal direction in the colored region, the material ejector is configured to form the colored region so that the character or the pattern expands into an interior of the colored region in the normal direction. Yamazaki also does not teach the building apparatus is configured to cause a color of a lower surface of the object be different from a color of a side surface of the object, wherein a boundary is positioned at which the lower surface intersects the side surface.
Perville teaches the building apparatus is configured to cause a color of a lower surface of the object be different from a color of a side surface of the object ([0010], “a different perceived color for differently oriented dots relative to the apparent surface. In particular, the colors on the perpendicular surfaces tend to be very dark. This effect is compensated by depositing other, usually lighter, colorant dots in-between the colorant dots, affecting the path of light through the colorant dots”);
And a printing system for coloring a 3D object ([0002]), wherein during building the object colored to include the character or the pattern ([0009], different color for representing a color image on the surface), at each position in the normal direction in the colored region (Fig. 3B), the material ejector is configured to form the colored region so that the character or the pattern expands into an interior of the colored region in the normal direction (Fig. 3B, the colored region 8 has color 15 that forms the character or pattern expands into the interior of the colored region 8 in the normal direction).
Yamazaki and Perville are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additive manufacturing. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the ejector in Yamazaki to incorporate forming the colored character or pattern expands into an interior of the colored region in the normal direction as taught by Perville, in order to prevent local thickening (Perville, [0005]).
Yamazaki does not teach wherein a reverse normal vector is obtained for each surface of an 3D model of the object, and the reverse normal vector is orthogonal to an outer peripheral surface at each position of the 3D model of the object, and the reverse normal vector heads toward an inside of the 3D model of the object, and the material ejector is configured to adjust a thickness of the colored region in a direction of the reverse normal vector by utilizing the reverse normal vector to obtain the constant thickness, and when a width of the colored region on a surface side is larger than a width on an inner side, characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized; when the width of the colored region on the surface side is smaller than the width on the inner side, the characters and the patterns are drawn such that an impression of spreading out is given.
Valade teaches a printing system for coloring a 3D object (Fig. 1), wherein a reverse normal vector is obtained for each surface of an 3D model of the object ([0012] a movement direction which has a negative inner product on voxel of the surface), and the reverse normal vector is orthogonal to an outer peripheral surface at each position of the 3D model of the object ([0012] for a voxel at an outer surface of the object, the movement direction has a negative inner product with the normal vector of the outer surface), and the reverse normal vector heads toward an inside of the 3D model of the object ([0012], having negative product with the normal vector heads towards inside of the surface);
The material ejector ([0010] print head) is configured to adjust a thickness of the colored region ([0046] determine a thickness value for the surface in voxels) in a direction of the reverse normal vector by utilizing the reverse normal vector to obtain the constant thickness ([0013], for each voxel, selecting a movement direction of the print head equal to the movement direction of the print head selected for the first voxel. The outer surface has a predetermined thickness of a number of voxels). In this case, Valade teaches that the thickness of the color region can be adjusted by setting it in print system setting. In Fig. 6, Valade demonstrates that the thickness of each layer of printed object can be adjusted in both x and y direction, which is the same as the reverse normal vector from the surface in the z direction. Therefore, the printing system taught by Valade is capable of adjust the thickness in a direction of the reverse normal vector to obtain constant thickness. As mentioned under claim interpretation, the limitation of “the material ejector is configured to adjust a thickness of the colored region in a direction of the reverse normal vector by utilizing the reverse normal vector to obtain the constant thickness” is interpreted as the intended use of a claimed apparatus. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP 2115;
and when a width of the colored region on a surface side is larger than a width on an inner side, characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized; when the width of the colored region on the surface side is smaller than the width on the inner side, the characters and the patterns are drawn such that an impression of spreading out is given (Fig. 6, the thickness of each layer of printed object can be adjusted in both x and y direction). As indicated under claim interpretation above, the limitation is interpreted as the intended use of a claimed apparatus. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP 2115. In this case, the printing system taught by Valade is capable of adjust the thickness in a direction of the reverse normal vector. Therefore, Valade teaches a printing system capable of adjusting the width of the colored region on a surface side so that the characters or patterns drawn in a state in which an end part of the characters and the patterns are emphasized or giving an impression of spreading out.
Regarding claim 25, Yamazaki teaches the design data generator generates the design data ([0048], a data generation process of generating formation body data FD) including a light-reflective region having a constant thickness that is arranged inside the object ([0165], Fig. 12A, a region in a direction perpendicular to the surface of the object Obj having a predetermined constant thickness) and reflects a light transmitted through the color region ([0159], The white layer L2 preventing the color on the inner portion of the three-dimensional object Obj with respect to the chromatic layer L1 from being visualized from the outside of the three-dimensional object Obj through the chromatic layer L1.).
Regarding claim 26, Yamazaki does not teach an isolation region having a constant thickness along the color region between the color region of the object and the light-reflective region.
Hakkaku et al. teaches generating the design data including an isolation region (Fig. 1B, the first transparent layer 2 or part 52) having a constant thickness along the color region between the color region of the object and the light-reflective region ([0016], The ink layer, being pressed by the pressing mechanism, may become flat and uniform in thickness; [0108], the width of part 52 is equal to the thickness of the first transparent layer 2, which has uniform thickness).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the data generator in Yamazaki to incorporate an isolation region having a constant thickness as taught by Hakkaku et al., in order to prevent mixing of the color ink and the ink for the light reflective layer (Hakkaku et al., [0107]).
Regarding claim 27, Yamazaki discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose a ratio between a dimension in a deposition direction and a dimension in a surface scanning direction of a voxel landing on a surface to be deposited. As the ratio between the width of a plurality of dots and thickness ΔZ is a variable that can be modified by adjusting a predetermined thickness ΔZ and a combination of a plurality of dots, with the thickness ΔZ set in advance by the formation body data in order to create cube or cuboid with predetermined size, as evidenced by Yamazaki ([0061] & [0136]), the ratio between the width of a plurality of dots and ΔZ would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the ratio between the width of a plurality of dots and ΔZ cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, a ratio between a dimension in a deposition direction and a dimension in a surface scanning direction of a voxel landing on a surface to be deposited of Yamazaki to obtain desired value (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding claim 30, Yamazaki does not teach the building apparatus is configured to cause the color region be expanded so that the color region becomes continuous at the boundary
Hakkaku teaches the building apparatus is configured to cause the color region be expanded so that the color region becomes continuous at the boundary (Fig. 1B, the color region is continuous at the boundary intersection between the lower surface with the side surface).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki and Kritchman to incorporate a continuous boundary as taught by Hakkaku et al. as described above, so that the printed object, when viewed from any of the three-dimensional directions, may obtain transparent layers, the colored layer, and the light reflective layer in a desirable order (Hakkaku et al., [0095]).
Regarding claim 32, Yamazaki does not teach the building apparatus is configured to cause the color region be expanded so that the color region becomes continuous at the boundary
Hakkaku teaches the building apparatus is configured to cause the color region be expanded so that the color region becomes continuous at the boundary (Fig. 1B, the color region is continuous at the boundary intersection between the lower surface with the side surface).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki and Kritchman to incorporate a continuous boundary as taught by Hakkaku et al. as described above, so that the printed object, when viewed from any of the three-dimensional directions, may obtain transparent layers, the colored layer, and the light reflective layer in a desirable order (Hakkaku et al., [0095]).
Claim 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20160129640 (“Yamazaki”) in view of US Pub. No. 20100195122 (“Kritchman”), US Pub. No. 20170006190 (“Perville”), US Pub. No. 20170329309 (“Valade”), and US Pub. No. 20170274586 (“Hakkaku et al.”), as applied in claim 1, further in view of US Pub. No. 20140309764 (“Socha-Leialoha et al.”).
Regarding claim 5, Yamazaki does not teach a width of each part of the character or the pattern in a direction parallel with the surface of the object becomes constant at each position in the normal direction in the colored region.
Socha-Leialoha et al. teaches a controller (104) for controlling a 3D object fabrication process (Abstract) using , wherein the controller is configured to cause the material ejector to form a colored region ([0028], melting, mixing, and extruding of color filaments) so that a width of each part of the character or the pattern in a direction parallel with the surface of the object becomes constant at each position in the normal direction in the colored region (Fig. 7, [0054], the width in the normal direction of the cross section x-y plane can be fixed or varied. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to have constant width along z-axis).
Yamazaki and Socha-Leialoha et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additive manufacturing. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki to incorporate a width of each part of the character or the pattern is constant along the normal direction in the colored region as taught by Socha-Leialoha et al., because modifying extrusion material width and/or height can produce texture on the curved surface geometry (Socha-Leialoha et al., [0034]).
Regarding claim 6, Yamazaki does not teach building the object colored to include a character or a pattern drawn with the material for coloring having a different color from a surrounding color on a surface of the object.
Kritchman teaches building the object colored to include a character or a pattern drawn with the material for coloring ([0013] apparent colored surface) having a different color from a surrounding color on a surface of the object ([0013], a white barrier outline formed adjacent to the colored outline of the layer using white building material).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki to incorporate building the object colored to include a character or a pattern having a different color from a surrounding color as taught by Kritchman, in order to ensure perception of bright colors and a large color gamut (Kritchman, [0013]).
Yamazaki and Kritchman do not teach regarding a width of each part of the character or the pattern in a direction parallel with the surface of the object, the width on an outermost side of the object is larger than the width on an innermost side of the object, or the width on an outermost side of the object is smaller than the width on an innermost side of the object.
Socha-Leialoha et al. teaches the controller is configured to cause the material ejector to form the colored region ([0028], melting, mixing, and extruding of color filaments) so that, regarding a width of each part of the character or the pattern in a direction parallel with the surface of the object, the width on an outermost side of the object is larger than the width on an innermost side of the object, or the width on an outermost side of the object is smaller than the width on an innermost side of the object (Fig. 7, [0054], a layering technique wherein the width in the normal direction of the cross section x-y plane can be increased from the outermost side of the object towards the innermost side of the object, and vice versa).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki and Kritchman to incorporate a width of each part of the character or the pattern is increasing or decreasing along the normal direction in the colored region as taught by Socha-Leialoha et al., because modifying extrusion material width and/or height can produce texture on the curved surface geometry (Socha-Leialoha et al., [0034]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Perville teaches away from the limitation that “a color of a lower surface of the object be different from a color of a side surface of the object” because it teaches compensation that is made to reduce color differences between the upper surface and the vertical surface (Remarks, pg. 17-20).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Perville teaches compensation by reducing the color difference that deviates from its intended surface color due to orientation of the dots ([0010]). However, Perville also teaches the technique in creating the surface causes the perceived difference in color ([0010]). Therefore, Perville teaches the limitation recited in claim 1 stating “the building apparatus is configured to cause a color of a lower surface of the object be different from a color of a side surface of the object.”
Regarding the limitation “a boundary is positioned at which the lower surface intersects the side surface, and the thickness of the colored region in the normal direction is deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region of the boundary in which the lower surface intersects with the side surface,” Hakkaku teaches a boundary is positioned at which the lower surface intersects the side surface, and the thickness of the colored region in the normal direction is deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region of the boundary in which the lower surface intersects with the side surface (Fig. 1B, the thickness of the colored region in the normal direction, such as indicated at 3 and 4, is different from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region of the boundary at the intersection between the lower surface with the side surface, such as indicated at 2).
Yamazaki and Hakkaku et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additive manufacturing. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the controller of building apparatus in Yamazaki and Kritchman to incorporate a thickness of the colored region in the normal direction to be deviated from the constant thickness in a vicinity of a region in which a lower surface intersects with a side surface as taught by Hakkaku et al., in order to form a continuous colored region along the side surface of the object (Hakkaku et al., [0095]).
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 TIFFANY YU HUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2643. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
TIFFANY YU. HUANG
Examiner
Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754