DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-19 are pending. Of the pending claims, claims 1-13 and 16-19 are presented for examination on the merits, and claims 14 and 15 are withdrawn from examination.
Claim 1 is currently amended. Claims 17-19 are new.
Status of Previous Claim Rejections Under 35 USC § 112
The previous rejections of claims 1-13 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) are withdrawn in view of the amendment to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 18, the claim contains new matter because the specification does not disclose a frame mounted for movement over a build area. The specification further does not disclose a frame as including an induction heating coil device, the frame defining a frame boundary. The specification refers to a heating device (90) movable relative to the layer (12) (instant specification as originally filed at para. [0051], [0052]; Fig. 11). The drawings depict the heating device (90) as being one or more induction coil(s) (92a, 92b) (para. [0054]; Figs. 3, 5, & 8-10). There is no disclosure of a mounted frame or a frame boundary. Thus, the specification does not support the newly claimed subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 3-10, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2014/0263209 (A1) to Burris et al. (“Burris”).
Regarding claim 1, Burris teaches a method of additively manufacturing or additively constructing a part by selectively fusing regions of deposited layers of powdered material (method for additive production of at least one component layer of an object that is being constructed in a layerwise fabrication). Para. [0018], [0020], [0072]. The method includes a step of depositing a layer of powdered material across a build platform, and the powdered material is to be fused over volumes throughout the layer (generating at least one layer from a powdery component material in the region of a structuring and joining zone). Para. [0072], [0073]; FIGS. 3A, 3B, and 7.
In one variation, a third energy beam (heating device) is projected to locally heat, i.e., preheat, areas (locally heating a first heating region in a first real sub-region of the layer) of the topmost layer of the powdered material prior to melting (locally solidifying the layer at least in a predetermined solidifying region) by a first energy beam (second device that is different than the heating device and that selectively irradiates by at least one energy beam of an energy source). Para. [0071], [0083], [0084], [0089]; FIGS. 8, 9, 10, and 11.
The method can further implement a temperature feedback system. Section 2.5 at p. 15; para. [0100]. In one implementation, a controller retrieves a specified melting temperature parameters for the particular type of powdered material being fused and a detected peak temperature at a laser sintering site on the layer of material. Para. [0101]. If the detected peak temperature is below the specified temperature parameter, then the power output is increased; if the detected peak temperature is above the specified temperature parameter, then the power output is decreased. Para. [0101].
The functionality of the aforementioned temperature feedback system can be similarly implemented to achieve a target preheat temperature (verifying if a temperature of the layer has a predetermined minimum temperature in at least a predetermined inspection region of temperature of the layer). Para. [0101]. The act of comparing a detected peak temperature (temperature of the layer) with a preset specified temperature (predetermined minimum temperature) and the act of adjusting the power of the laser source corresponds to verifying if a predetermined temperature has been met.
Preheating (local heating) is performed by the third energy beam (heating device) and precedes the first energy beam (second device), which carries out the melting/fusing (solidification). Para. [0083]. The energy beams are projected serially onto the particular area being treated and separated by fixed offset. Para. [0083], [0089], [0097]-[0099]; Block 110; FIGS. 8 and 10.
Because the temperature feedback system functions to achieve a target temperature (predetermined minimum temperature) via adjustments and because the preheating and fusing steps occur serially, i.e., in sequence or in order, the fusing occurs only after the target preheat temperature has been reached (approving solidifying of the first heating region of the layer occurs only if the inspection region associated with the first real sub-region has reached the predetermined minimum temperature, local solidification takes place if the layer in the first heating region has at least the predetermined minimum temperature in the inspection region and approval has been made).
The apparatus used to carry out the additive construction of the part can include an image sensor configured to output a digital image of the laser sintering site over the build platform. Para. [0069]. A processor can correlate a light intensity of pixels within the digital image (model data of the layer subdivided into virtual sub-regions by a control device) with a temperature at the laser sintering site and regulate a power output of the laser diode. Para. [0069]. A power output or other operating parameter of the laser diode yields a suitable temperature at a corresponding laser interaction zone such that the powdered material reaches a target temperature or a target temperature range (selecting at least one of the virtual sub-regions and locally heating a real sub-region corresponding to the virtual sub-region). Para. [0019], [0069].
Burris teaches that subsequent adjacent linear regions of the current topmost layer of powdered material over the build platform are subjected to the scanning, i.e., the build process as disclosed above, and these procedures are repeated for fused volumes in each subsequent layer of powdered material (carrying out claim steps (g), (h), and (i) for a next real sub-region and then repeating step (g) through step (i) for subsequent heating regions to complete a cross-section of the object in a respective layer). Para. [0051], [0072], [0078].
Regarding claim 3, Burris teaches that the same spot can be exposed to the preheat, fuse/consolidation, and annealing beams (sub-region, heating region, inspection region, and solidifying regions are at least substantially identically selected). FIGS. 8, 9, 10, and 11. The spots can be disjoint or overlapping areas, with exposure in a serial manner (procedurally consecutive intersecting or overlapping with each other). Para. [0091], [0097], [0098]; FIGS. 12A and 12B.
Regarding claim 4, Burris teaches that subsequent adjacent linear regions of the current topmost layer of powdered material over the build platform are subjected to the scanning, i.e., the build process as disclosed above (at least steps (c) to (f) are performed for two or more sub-regions of the layer to be solidified). Para. [0051], [0078].
Regarding claim 5, Burris teaches that multiple energy beams can be projected substantially simultaneously onto a topmost layer of powdered material to melt one or more discrete volumes of material at any given instant during a part build cycle. Para. [0081]. The multiple energy beams move forward such that at a second time following the first time, the first energy beam is projected onto a third area of the layer of powdered material to melt preheated material within the third area, the second energy beam is projected onto the first area of the layer of powdered material to anneal melted material within the first area, and the third energy beam is projected onto a fourth area of the layer of powdered material ahead of the third area to preheat material within the fourth area (performing at least one of steps (c) to (e) during step (f) for at least one further sub-region). Para. [0084].
Regarding claim 6, Burris teaches that energy beams can be set to serially preheat, melt, and anneal particular areas of the topmost layer of powdered material and that the energy beams move forward such that subsequent areas are preheated, melted, and annealed (layer is heated in the heating region of the at least one further sub-region such that heating of at least one further sub-region has at least the predetermined minimum temperature as soon as irradiation of a preceding sub-region is completed). Para. [0084], [0085], [0089], [0097], [0098]; FIGS. 9, 10, and 11.
Regarding claim 7, Burris teaches that regions are selected for melting and annealing before a subsequent layer is deposited and later subject to further consolidation (perform step (f) for the first time for the layer if at least a predetermined number of sub-regions of the layer has been selected). Para. [0019], [0060], [0077]. Because the temperature feedback system functions to achieve a target temperature (predetermined minimum temperature) via adjustments and because the preheating and fusing steps occur serially, i.e., in sequence or in order, the fusing occurs only after the target preheat temperature has been reached (step (f) is performed for the first time for the layer if the associated heating regions have been heated to their respectively predetermined minimum temperature). See para. [0083], [0089], [0097]-[0099]; Block 110; FIG. 10.
Regarding claim 8, Burris teaches that the energy beam is projected on an area of layer of powdered material substantially immediately after the corresponding volume of powdered material is melted such that energy beams control the cooling cycle (at least one further region in the layer is selected by the control device and the heating region associated with the further region is heated by the heating device). Para. [0077], [0078]. Regions are selected for melting and annealing before a subsequent layer is deposited and later subject to further consolidation (predetermined maximum number of solidified regions and/or regions heated to their respective predetermined minimum temperature has been reached or exceeded). Para. [0019], [0060], [0077], [0078].
Regarding claim 9, Burris teaches that a processor controls a power output or other operating parameter of the laser diode to yield a suitable temperature at a corresponding laser interaction zone such that the powdered material reaches a target temperature or a target temperature range (control device controls and/or regulates the heating device and the energy source depending on each other). Para. [0019], [0069]. Multiple laser diodes and can be controlled and regulated independently or simultaneously. Para. [0069].
Regarding claim 10, Burris teaches that the energy beams are projected serially onto the particular area being treated and separated by fixed offset. Para. [0083], [0089], [0097]-[0099]; Block 110; FIGS. 8 and 10. In this configuration, the third energy beam (heating device) does not project onto the fused area (solidifying region) once it has been preheated, resulting in the solidifying region not heated by the heating device (heating of the solidifying region by the heating device is aborted or reduced with respect to heating in step (d) before, during, or after heating).
Regarding claim 12, Burris teaches that the temperature of annealing (Block S120) of a fused area (heating of an already locally solidified region) can be controlled such that it meets target temperature in a functionality similar to fusing (Block S110) (control device controls and/or regulates the heating device such that an already locally solidified sub-region has at least a predetermined minimum temperature and/or has at most a predetermined maximum temperature). Para. [0046], [0069], [0078], [0088], [0100], [0101].
Regarding claim 13, Burris teaches that the laser is scanned over the build platform during the build (relative movement of the heating device and the solidified region effected by distance and/or direction). Para. [0067], [0068], [0097]; FIGS. 8, 9, 10, and 11. The laser is sufficient to selectively melt multiple regions of the material (maximum effective range of the heating device allows for heating the region to a temperature of at least 1000oC and/or at least 70% of the melting temperature in oC of the component material). Para. [0018], [0019], [0046]. Temperature control of the fused area depends on whether the detected temperature matches a target temperature, tolerance, and/or gradient (the temperature verification of at least a predetermined section of the solidified region corresponds to a preset temperature progression and/or at most the predetermined maximum temperature). Para. [0069], [0101].
Claims 1, 3-13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2019/0047226 (A1) to Ishikawa et al. (“Ishikawa”).
Regarding claim 1, Ishikawa teaches temperature control for an additive manufacturing process (method for additive production of at least one component layer of an object that is being constructed in a layerwise fabrication). Abstract; para. [0001]. The method includes a step of dispensing successive layers of feed material, e.g., particles, onto a platform (generating at least one layer from a powdery component material in the region of a structuring and joining zone). Para. [0005], [0034], [0035].
A temperature map of the layer of feed material is generated from data (model data) received by a controller (control device) from first, second, and third cameras. Para. [0007], [0011]. The temperature map is divided into a grid (subdivided model data displaying virtual sub-regions). See FIG. 3; para. [0055]-[0057]. The temperature map is used to identify which regions are less than the temperature of the surrounding area (144) and those that are greater than the temperature of the surrounding area (150). Para. [0057].
When these temperatures do not match a desired temperature profile, a heat source (heating device) (116) is activated or deactivated to emit energy at a greater or lower rate with greater intensity or lower intensity to conform to the desired temperature profile (selecting at least one of the virtual sub-regions by the control device and locally heating a first heating region in a first real sub-region of the layer corresponding to the virtual sub-region). Para. [0074]-[0076]. Sensors combine to provide a closed loop feedback control of the system that delivers energy. Para. [0018], [0072]. The adjustment of the heat source to conform to the desired temperature profile indicates that a predetermined minimum temperature at least in a predetermined inspection region is verified.
The heat source (116) is deployed to pre-heat (locally heat) the powdered feed material by raising its temperature to below a fusing temperature. Para. [0038], [0045]. The material is then heated by energy source (118) (second device different than the heating device) and fused (locally solidified) according to a predefined pattern. Para. [0046], [0047]. The heat source (116) delivers energy to a portion of the build area before the energy source (118) is applied, with the heat source (116) pre-heating the region in preparation for the energy source (118) (e.g., beam of energy) to melt and sinter the region (locally solidifying at least in a predetermined solidifying region by selectively irradiating by at least one energy beam of an energy source). Para. [0047], [0052], [0053].
Fusing feed material at a pre-heated elevated temperature facilitates faster scanning without risk of incomplete fusion (locally solidify if the first heating region has at least the predetermined minimum temperature in the inspection region). Para. [0053]. Given that the desired temperature profile must be matched and that pre-heating occurs to prepare for the fusing step, as noted above, it follows that fusing does not occur until the pre-heating temperature profile is satisfied (i.e., approval of solidification of the first heating region occurs only if the inspection region associated with the first real sub-region has reached the predetermined minimum temperature and local solidification occurs once the approval has been made).
The energy delivery system (114) and process are applied to multiple areas as the system moves forward to other adjacent and/or subsequent voxels within the layer and for additional layers (performing claim steps (g), (h), and (i) and repeating step (g) through step (i) for consecutive and subsequent heating regions to complete a cross-section of the object in a respective layer). Para. [0039], [0041], [0056], [0058], [0066]; FIG. 2.
Regarding claim 3, Ishikawa teaches that the sections/cells/voxels (real sub-regions) that are to be compared (inspection regions), pre-heated (heated), and fused (solidified) are the same (substantially identical), overlapping (intersecting), and/or adjacent (consecutive). See FIG. 2; para. [0051], [0052], [0058].
Regarding claim 4, Ishikawa teaches that the energy delivery system (114) (heat source and energy source) is applied to multiple areas (at least steps (c) to (f) are performed for two or more sub-regions of the layer to be solidified). Para. [0039], [0041], [0066]; FIG. 2.
Regarding claim 5, Ishikawa teaches that the infrared light (133) (corresponds to heat source (116)) can be applied (at least one of the steps (c) to (e) for at least one further sub-region) while beam spot (139) (corresponds to energy source (118)) heats a region (during step (f)). FIGS. 1B and 2.
Regarding claim 6, Ishikawa teaches that the energy source (118) is swept along a scanning pattern. Para. [0049]. Multiple infrared lamps (117) (corresponds to heat source (116)) can be selectively activated to illuminate sections. Para. [0043]; FIG. 1B. Because a plurality of regions can be pre-heated, at least one further sub-region can have at least the predetermined minimum temperature as soon as the irradiation of the preceding sub-region by the energy source is completed.
Regarding claim 7, Ishikawa teaches that a region is pre-heated in preparation for melting and sintering the region (step (f) is only performed for the first time for the layer if at least a predetermined minimum number of sub-regions of the layer has been selected and the associated heating regions have been heated to their respectively predetermined minimum temperature). Para. [0047], [0052], [0053].
Regarding claim 8, Ishikawa teaches that areas (at least one further region) that do not match a desired temperature profile or an average temperature according to the controller (control device) are adjusted by varying the heat source (heating device) (116) so that the temperatures do conform (at least one further region of the layer is selected by the control device and the heating region associated with the further region is heated by the heating device if a predetermined maximum number of solidified regions and/or regions heated to their respectively predetermined minimum temperature has been reached or exceeded). Para. [0055], [0075]-[0078]; FIG. 3.
Regarding claim 9, Ishikawa teaches that the energy delivery system (114) includes the heat source (116) and the energy source (118) and is controlled by a controller (119) (control device controls and/or regulates the heating device and the energy source depending on each other). Para. [0030], [0031]; FIGS. 1A and 1B.
Regarding claim 10, Ishikawa teaches that the heat source (116) can continue to deliver energy to the melted and fused region (solidifying region is heated during step (f) by the heating device). Para. [0054].
Regarding claim 11, Ishikawa teaches that heat can be applied to areas after they have been fused to modify the microstructure of the fused areas and to minimize the temperature variation over the layer being produced (predetermined minimum temperature and/or a predetermined maximum temperature or a predetermined temperature progression is selected for a number of inspection regions and/or solidifying regions respectively depending on an area and/or geometry and/or a sought microstructure of a component cross-section or section of the component cross-section to be solidified or being solidified). Para. [0028], [0084].
Regarding claim 12, Ishikawa teaches that the energy delivery system (114) includes the heat source (heating device) (116) and is controlled by a controller (119) (control device controls and/or regulates the heating device). Para. [0030], [0031]; FIGS. 1A and 1B. The heat source (116) can continue to deliver energy to the melted and fused region to heat-treat the region (already locally solidified region has at least a predetermined minimum temperature and/or has at most a predetermined maximum temperature). Para. [0028], [0054], [0084].
Regarding claim 13, Ishikawa teaches that the heat source (116) is movable relative to the platform (and therefore the build area). Para. [0041], [0044], [0046]. The energy source (118) is also moveable relative to the build area. Para. [0049]. Example relative directions are indicated in FIG. 2 (relative movement of the at least one heating region of the heating device and of the solidified region is effected by a distance and/or in a direction). The beam spot (139) heats the region such that it melts (the region leaves a maximum effective range of the heating device which allows the heating the region to a temperature value of at least 1000oC and/or at least 70% or the melting temperature in oC of the currently used component material). Para. [0046], [0049], [0058]. The temperature and thermal gradients of the melt pool are monitored so as to control the size and shape of the melt pool (dependent on positive verification to the effect if the temperature of at least a predetermined section of the solidified region corresponds to a preset temperature progression and/or at most to a predetermined maximum temperature). Para. [0058]-[0064].
Regarding claim 16, Ishikawa teaches that there is a repeatable and desirable temperature profile, i.e., temperature as a function of time at a particular position, of the topmost layer of feed material (minimum temperature and/or the maximum temperature and/or temperature progression is separately set for each inspection region and/or solidifying region). Para. [0018], [0026], [0038], [0070]-[0078].
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 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burris, as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 2, Burris is silent regarding a specific numerical volume or surface area of being treated by energy beams/lasers (heating device). However, Burris teaches that one or more discrete volumes of material are exposed to the energy beams at any given instant during the build. Para. [0080]. The apparatus controls the melt pool size. Para. [0046]. The volume or sub-volume treated by the lasers can be selected. Para. [0072], [0078], [0085]. The preheat areas are selectively chosen. Para. [0068], [0072], [0084].
Selective heating suggests that the volume of powder being treated is finite (discrete and therefore more than zero percent) but less than the whole area to be fused (less than 100%), which overlaps the claimed range. This is further visually illustrated in FIG. 3A, for example, which shows that the laser sintering sites (sites to be treated by preheating, fusing, and/or annealing) cover about roughly one-fourth of the area of the topmost layer of powdered material, which falls within the claimed range of at least 0.01% and at most 50% of a surface of a work plane in the structuring and joining zone.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected any percentage of particular surface area of powder in accordance with a desired speed of build (e.g., one would fuse larger volumes of powder at a time to finish the build faster) or level of uniform resolution (one would fuse smaller volumes of powder at a time for more precise quality control of the whole part) or dimensional size requirements of the part being built.
Regarding claim 19, Burris discloses a sequence of inputting and increasing power density to attain a preheated state implicitly from room temperature or a lower temperature, the preheating being insufficient to melt the powder (local heating includes heating a layer to a first temperature, heating from the first temperature to a second temperature higher than the first temperature). Para. [0083]. The powder is then melted (irradiating the layer to increase its temperature to a third temperature greater than the second temperature). Para. [0083]. The layer is then annealed for stress relief by heating at low temperature (step of post-heating phase whereby the layer decreases to a fourth temperature being less than the third temperature). Para. [0079], [0083], [0087].
Temperatures operates within target ranges and tolerances (layer has temperature within a present minimum temperature and preset maximum temperature during heating, solidification, and post-heating. Para. [0069], [0077]-[0079], [0101].
Burris does not expressly disclose reducing the delivery of heat to the layer during local solidification. However, the power is adjusted as necessary based on the detected temperature of the topmost region of deposited material. Para. [0069], [0089]. It follows that it would be one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power supplied, and therefore heat delivered, by reducing it during solidification if the temperature of the layer overshoots a tolerated maximum in order to remain properly within a required temperature range.
Claims 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burris, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2015/0064048 (A1) to Bessac et al. (“Bessac”).
Regarding claims 11 and 16, Burris teaches selecting a peak or target temperature including for preheating and a cooling schedule (para. [0101]), but does not teach selecting them depending on area and/or geometry and/or sought microstructure, with minimum temperature and/or maximum temperature and/or temperature progression being separately set for each inspection and/or solidifying region.
Bessac, directed to a method and apparatus for fabricating a three-dimensional object, teaches that the heating profile, including heating and quenching, during the build process is selected so as to obtain a desired microstructure. Para. [0072]. For example, a martensitic quenching is aimed at improving the tribological and mechanical properties, such as resistance to wear, bending, or torsion, of the treated material (cooling schedule depends on microstructure). Para. [0072].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected a temperature profile based on microstructure because the microstructure dictates the properties of the built part. Customizing the properties of a part enables the user to fabricate a part possessing characteristics suited for a particular application. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to have set the minimum, maximum, and/or temperature progression for each region in order to produce a part with tailored properties within a layer and between/among layers.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burris, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CN 106825348 (A) to Suo et al. (“Suo”) (abstract and computer-generated translation are attached).
Regarding claim 17, Burris teaches that the melting/fusing is carried out by a first energy beam (second device). Para. [0083]. The energy beam may be a laser. Para. [0019], [0032], [0037]-[0048].
Burris discloses that preheating (local heating) is performed by the third energy beam (heating device) (para. [0083]), but does not disclose carrying out preheating using an induction heater.
Suo is drawn to an additive manufacturing device for metal forge welding. Abstract. The additive manufacturing device includes a preheating unit (8) that locally heats the surface of the workpiece to a set temperature. Claims 1 and 6; para. [0009], [0016], [0034]. The preheating unit can preheat a local area to be processed on the surface of a workpiece, and the heating can be electromagnetic induction or electron beam or laser. Para. [0036].
It has been held that it is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known for the same purpose. MPEP § 2144.06(II). In the present instance, electromagnetic induction heating and lasers are suitable alternatives for the preheating of a surface in an additive manufacturing process, as taught by Suo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used them interchangeably because they are known equivalent techniques that predictably supplying heat prior to consolidation in a layer-by-layer additive method.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burris, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Suo and US 2015/0246481 (A1) to Schlick et al. (“Schlick”).
Regarding claim 18, Burris discloses that preheating (local heating) is performed by the third energy beam (heating device) (para. [0083]), but does not disclose carrying out preheating using an induction coil.
Suo is drawn to an additive manufacturing device for metal forge welding. Abstract. The additive manufacturing device includes a preheating unit (8) that locally heats the surface of the workpiece to a set temperature. Claims 1 and 6; para. [0009], [0016], [0034]. The preheating unit can preheat a local area to be processed on the surface of a workpiece, and the heating can be electromagnetic induction or electron beam or laser. Para. [0036]. Electromagnetic induction utilizes a coil. Para. [0039].
It has been held that it is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known for the same purpose. MPEP § 2144.06(II). In the present instance, electromagnetic induction heating, electron beams, and lasers are suitable alternatives for the preheating of a surface in an additive manufacturing process, as taught by Suo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used them interchangeably because they are known equivalent techniques that predictably supplying heat prior to consolidation in a layer-by-layer additive method.
Burris illustrates the beams mounted on a gantry movable in an X-Y plane that hovers over the powder layer (heating device comprises a frame mounted for movement over a build area within which the object is being constructed). Para. [0063]-[0067]; FIGS. 2 and 3B. Suo does not teach the electromagnetic coil as being a frame defining a frame boundary surrounding an area within the frame encompassing a heating region.
Schlick is directed to an apparatus and method for additive manufacturing components. Abstract. The method includes a step for enabling local pre-heating over the entire powder layer or the entire component. Para. [0016]. Preheating is performed by induction coils (103, 113) that are movable along rails (111, 112) in one plane substantially parallel to the surface in which the powder is melted by a laser beam. Para. [0039].
Figs. 2 and 3 show the coils as framing the region to be heat treated (frame defining a frame boundary surrounding an area within the frame encompassing a heating region, the frame including an induction coil device for heating at least a part of the build area below the frame and within the boundary of the frame). Due to the movability of the induction coils and the corresponding movability and orientation of the laser beam, all areas of the processing chamber containing the powder bed chambers can be reached, so that arbitrary components can be produced and treated accordingly. Para. [0039].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have implemented the preheating frame of Schlick into the device of Burris, as modified by Suo, because the Schick’s setup provide flexibility to cover any and all regions of the component and/or powder layer.
Claims 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa, as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 2, Ishikawa is silent regarding a specific numerical volume or surface area of being treated by energy beams/lasers (heating device). However, Ishikawa teaches that the build area includes voxels, cells, and sections. Para. [0039]. Selective heating suggests that the volume of powder being treated is finite (discrete and therefore more than zero percent) but less than the whole area to be fused (less than 100%), which overlaps the claimed range. Para. [0030], [0038], [0045].
This is further visually illustrated in FIG. 2, for example, which shows regions (regions to be treated by preheating, fusing, and/or annealing) cover about approximately one-fourth of the area of the topmost layer of powdered material, which falls within the claimed range of at least 0.01% and at most 50% of a surface of a work plane in the structuring and joining zone.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected any percentage of particular surface area of powder in accordance with a desired speed of build (e.g., one would fuse larger volumes of powder at a time to finish the build faster) or level of uniform resolution (one would fuse smaller volumes of powder at a time for more precise quality control of the whole part) or dimensional size requirements of the part being built.
Regarding claim 19, Ishikawa discloses gradually raising the temperature to pre-heat the powder, the preheating temperature controlled so that the material is not overheated and not melted (local heating includes heating a layer to a first temperature, heating from the first temperature to a second temperature higher than the first temperature). Para. [0027], [0028], [0045], [0053]. The powder is then melted and fused (irradiating the layer to increase its temperature to a third temperature greater than the second temperature). Para. [0031], [0045]-[0047], [0054]. The layer is then heat-heated to control the cooling rate of the material (step of post-heating phase whereby the layer decreases to a fourth temperature being less than the third temperature). Para. [0028], [0054], [0084].
The manufacturing process is intended to follow a repeatable and desired temperatures profile (layer has temperature within a present minimum temperature and preset maximum temperature during heating, solidification, and post-heating). Para. [0026].
Ishikawa does not expressly disclose reducing the delivery of heat to the layer during local solidification. However, one or more parameters, including power, is adjusted as necessary based on the detected signals to adhere to predetermined fusing quality standards and temperatures. Para. [0069], [0071], [0074], [0075], [0078], [0079]. It follows that it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power supplied, and therefore heat delivered, by reducing it during solidification if the temperature of the layer exceeds maximum in the temperature profile in order to remain properly within a required temperature range.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schlick.
Regarding claim 17, Ishikawa discloses that the energy source (second device) for fusing feed material can be a laser. Para. [0009], [0048].
Ishikawa teaches that the infrared light (133) (corresponds to heat source (116)) (heating device) can be applied for preheating (para. [0045]; FIGS. 1B and 2), but does not disclose carrying out preheating using an induction heater.
Schlick is directed to an apparatus and method for additive manufacturing components. Abstract. The method includes a step for enabling local pre-heating over the entire powder layer or the entire component. Para. [0016]. An induction heater is shown; however, infrared heaters can be used to heat the powder bed and the component from the top. Para. [0032]. In an example, preheating is performed by induction coils (103, 113) that are movable along rails (111, 112) in one plane substantially parallel to the surface in which the powder is melted by a laser beam. Para. [0039].
It has been held that it is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known for the same purpose. MPEP § 2144.06(II). In the present instance, infrared heaters and induction heaters are suitable alternatives for the heating of a surface in an additive manufacturing process, as taught by Schlick. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used them interchangeably because they are known equivalent techniques that predictably supplying heat in a layer-by-layer additive method.
Regarding claim 18, Ishikawa teaches that the infrared light (133) (corresponds to heat source (116)) (heating device) can be applied for preheating (para. [0045]; FIGS. 1B and 2), but does not disclose carrying out preheating using an induction coil or an induction coil as being a frame defining a frame boundary surrounding an area within the frame encompassing a heating region.
Schlick is directed to an apparatus and method for additive manufacturing components. Abstract. The method includes a step for enabling local pre-heating over the entire powder layer or the entire component. Para. [0016]. An induction heater is shown; however, infrared heaters can be used to heat the powder bed and the component from the top. Para. [0032]. In an example, preheating is performed by induction coils (103, 113) that are movable along rails (111, 112) in one plane substantially parallel to the surface in which the powder is melted by a laser beam. Para. [0039].
It has been held that it is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known for the same purpose. MPEP § 2144.06(II). In the present instance, infrared heaters and induction heaters are suitable alternatives for the heating of a surface in an additive manufacturing process, as taught by Schlick. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used them interchangeably because they are known equivalent techniques that predictably supplying heat in a layer-by-layer additive method.
Furthermore, Schlick discloses a method includes a step for enabling local pre-heating over the entire powder layer or the entire component. Para. [0016]. Preheating is performed by induction coils (103, 113) that are movable along rails (111, 112) in one plane substantially parallel to the surface in which the powder is melted by a laser beam. Para. [0039].
Figs. 2 and 3 show the coils as framing the region to be heat treated (frame defining a frame boundary surrounding an area within the frame encompassing a heating region, the frame including an induction coil device for heating at least a part of the build area below the frame and within the boundary of the frame). Due to the movability of the induction coils and the corresponding movability and orientation of the laser beam, all areas of the processing chamber containing the powder bed chambers can be reached, so that arbitrary components can be produced and treated accordingly. Para. [0039].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have implemented the preheating frame of Schlick into the device of Ishikawa because the Schick’s setup provide flexibility to cover any and all regions of the component and/or powder layer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that neither Burris nor Ishikawa teaches the claimed test and release step. Applicant argues that Burris and Ishikawa rely on a “principle of hope,” where the necessary target temperature will prevail in time, whereas the claimed invention accounts for situations in which the target temperature is never reached or not reached in time and that prevents solidification from proceeding by interrupting or terminating the process.
In response to Applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (e.g., a release step) are not recited in the rejected claims. The claims provide no guidance regarding how to proceed if the target temperature is not reached. The claims do not recite any termination step, and they do not recite any temporal component such as a situation where the time to preheat is prohibitively long by the user’s standards. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP § 2145(VI), citing In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
It is noted that Burris and Ishikawa require following temperature profiles, as discussed above. If the temperature is not met, such as preheating is insufficient or too high, continuing the process would not make sense because the resulting component would not meet part quality due to warping or poor fusing quality, for example, because the powder is too cold (for example, an undesirably large temperature gap between preheat and melting temperatures) or too hot (powder becomes tacky or over-melted). See, for example, Burris at para. [0069] and Ishikawa at para. [0026], [0028], [0045]. Therefore, it is implied that the temperature profile must be reached and adhered to at each step before proceeding with the next step of the build process or else the final product will be of low quality.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2015/0061170 (A1) to Engel et al. discloses a step of aborting a step of producing further material layers if individual characteristics of defined material layer exceed a predefined threshold level. Para. [0037], [0063].
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 VANESSA T. LUK whose telephone number is (571)270-3587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM ET.
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, Keith D. Hendricks, can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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.
/VANESSA T. LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
March 17, 2026