DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 09/15/2025 has been entered and accepted.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21, 29, 37-38, 41-43, and 45-46 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. A new rejection has been made below over SEOJEONGHUN (KR 20030039929 A) in view of Schurmann (US 20130043225 A1), TAKUSHIMA (US 20210370409 A1), and PARK (KR 20180040531 A).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 21, 29, 37-38, 41, and 45-46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEOJEONGHUN (KR 20030039929 A) in view of Schurmann (US 20130043225 A1), TAKUSHIMA (US 20210370409 A1), and PARK (KR 20180040531 A).
Regarding claim 21, SEOJEONGHUN (KR 20030039929 A) teaches a method of operating a laser additive manufacturing system, comprising:
receiving image data from a plurality of camera sensors (Figure 5 Paragraph 76, image forming device 407 is set at an angle with respect to the laser beam such as to image the melt pool; Paragraph 91, additional image imaging devices are installed such to avoid the problem that the images of the molten pool are observed to be different from each other), wherein:
each respective camera sensor's field of view encompasses an active processing area (Paragraph 62, physical position and height of the melting pool is calculated using an image processing technique);
determining a centroid of the active processing area based on the image data received from the plurality of camera sensors (Paragraph 93, accounting through imaging device 407 the gravity center of the molten bath; since Paragraph 68 teaches that the coating is applied uniformly and Paragraph 119 teaches that the layer is formed with uniform thickness, the gravity center would be the same as the centroid);
determining a current height of a part being built by the laser additive manufacturing system based on the determined centroid of the active processing area (Paragraphs 92-93, height of the molten pool is obtained by means of determining the center of the actual melt pool); and
While the Office does not concede said point, the Applicant may argue that SEOJEONGHUN does not explicitly teach a centroid. However, Schurmann (US 20130043225 A1) teaches a laser processing head and method for processing a workpiece comprising determining a geometric centroid of an imaged melt pool surface. One of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate how determining a centroid would be more advantageous than determining a center when working with an asymmetrical processing area.
the material is a wire (Paragraph 67, cladding material is a wire)
SEOJEONGHUN fails to teach:
receiving image data from a plurality of camera sensors, wherein:
each respective camera sensor of the plurality of camera sensors is laterally offset from and connected to a deposition assembly of the laser additive manufacturing system via a respective fixed length horizontal extension element such that a position of each respective camera is fixed with respect to the deposition assembly during movement of the deposition assembly
changing a material flow rate based on the current height of the part being built, wherein
the material flow rate is increased if the current height of the part being built is below the height of the selected design layer of the layered model of the part being built,
the material flow rate is decreased if the current height of the part being built is above the height of the selected design layer of the layered model of the part being built
TAKUSHIMA (US 20210370409 A1) teaches an additive manufacturing apparatus, wherein:
changing a material flow rate based on the current height of the part being built (Paragraphs 48-49, control is performed to adjust the wire feed speed based on the height in the region of interest), wherein
the material flow rate is increased if the current height of the part being built is below the height of the selected design layer of the layered model of the part being built (Paragraphs 48-49, the control is provided to increase the wire feed speed in region 3 wherein the layer height is below a target deposition height),
the material flow rate is decreased if the current height of the part being built is above the height of the selected design layer of the layered model of the part being built (Paragraphs 48-49, the control is provided to reduce the wire feed speed in region 2 wherein the layer height is above a target deposition height)
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified SEOJEONGHUN with TAKUSHIMA and material flow rate of delivered wire be changed based on the current height of the part being built. This would have been done such that the deposition height with respect to the target wire to be constantly maintained (TAKUSHIMA Paragraph 50).
SEOJEONGHUN modified with TAKUSHIMA fails to teach:
receiving image data from a plurality of camera sensors, wherein:
each respective camera sensor of the plurality of camera sensors is laterally offset from and connected to a deposition assembly of the laser additive manufacturing system via a respective fixed length horizontal extension element such that a position of each respective camera is fixed with respect to the deposition assembly during movement of the deposition assembly
PARK (KR 20180040531 A) teaches 3D printing laser beam irradiation apparatus, wherein:
receiving image data from a plurality of camera sensors (Figures 5-6, plurality of camera sensors), wherein:
each respective camera sensor of the plurality of camera sensors is laterally offset from and connected to a deposition assembly of the additive manufacturing system via a respective fixed length horizontal extension element such that a position of each respective camera is fixed with respect to the deposition assembly during movement of the deposition assembly (Figures 5-6 Paragraphs 54-55, additional photographing units 16 are included on the left and right side of the laser nozzle and are offset from the laser nozzle by respective fixed length horizontal extension element such that moving the laser nozzle would move the cameras fixed to said nozzle);
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified SEOJEONGHUN with PARK and have the camera sensors be laterally offset and connected to the deposition assembly of the additive manufacturing machine. This would have been done to secure the position of the cameras while calculate additional shape information such as position and height of the molten pool (PARK Paragraphs 54-55).
Regarding claim 29, SEOJEONGHUN as modified teaches the method of Claim 21, wherein
the active processing area comprises a melt pool (Paragraphs 92-93, height of the molten pool is obtained by means of determining the center of the actual melt pool).
Regarding claim 37, SEOJEONGHUN as modified teaches the method of Claim 21.
TAKUSHIMA further teaches:
changing the speed of the speed of the process motion system comprises increasing the speed of the process motion system based on the current height of the part being built being above a height of a selected design layer of a layered model of the part being built (Claims 26-27, controller increases the speed of the moving position in a case in which the measurement result is greater than a target value that is a preset height of a layered product; Paragraphs 49-50, changing the amount of deposition may include changing the stage feed speed wherein as an example a smaller amount of deposition can be achieved by increase stage speed).
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 21.
Regarding claim 38, SEOJEONGHUN as modified teaches the method of Claim 21.
TAKUSHIMA further teaches:
changing the speed of the speed of the process motion system comprises decreasing the speed of the process motion system based on the current height of the part being built being below a height of a selected design layer of a layered model of the part being built (Claims 26-27, controller decreases the speed of the moving position in a case in which the measurement result is less than a target value that is a preset height of a layered product; Paragraphs 49-50, changing the amount of deposition may include changing the stage feed speed wherein as an example a smaller amount of deposition can be achieved by increase stage speed).
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 21.
Regarding claim 41, SEOJEONGHUN as modified teaches the method of Claim 21, wherein
each camera sensor of the plurality of camera sensors has a field of view that does not include a deposition element of the laser additive manufacturing system (Figures 8-9, field of view which does not include a deposition element of the additive manufacturing system).
Regarding claim 45, SEOJEONGHUN as modified teaches the method of Claim 21, wherein
each camera sensor of the plurality of camera sensors has a field of view angled 45 or fewer degrees relative to a horizon (Paragraph 76, image imaging device 407 is set to form an angle of 90-theda with the optical axis of the laser beam).
PARK further teaches:
each camera sensor of the plurality of camera sensors has a field of view angled 45 or fewer degrees relative to a horizon (Paragraph 54, additional photographing unit 16 has an optical axis forming an angle of 0 to 90 degrees with the optical axis of the laser beam for photographing the molten pool).
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 21.
Regarding claim 46, SEOJEONGHUN as modified teaches the method of Claim 21, wherein
each respective sensor of the plurality of camera sensors has a field of view angled 30 or fewer degrees relative to a horizon (Paragraph 62, image imaging device 407 is set to form an angle of 90-theda with the optical axis of the laser beam).
PARK further teaches:
each respective sensor of the plurality of camera sensors has a field of view angled 30 or fewer degrees relative to a horizon (Paragraph 54, additional photographing unit 16 has an optical axis forming an angle of 0 to 90 degrees with the optical axis of the laser beam for photographing the molten pool).
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 21.
Claim(s) 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEOJEONGHUN (KR 20030039929 A) in view of Schurmann (US 20130043225 A1), TAKUSHIMA (US 20210370409 A1), and PARK (KR 20180040531 A) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of PLOTT (US 20210129443 A1).
Regarding claim 42, SEOJEONGHUN as modified teaches the method of Claim 21.
SEOJEONGHUN fails to explicitly teach:
each camera sensor of the plurality of camera sensors has a field of view that includes a deposition element of the laser additive manufacturing system.
PLOTT (US 20210129443 A1) teaches a laser beam additively manufacturing device, wherein:
the field of view of the camera sensor includes a deposition element of the laser additive manufacturing system (Paragraph 67, camera in communication with a camera is configured to perform an image analysis to determine a height of a layer of the 3D-object being printed; Paragraph 74, thickness of layers is measured by camera means; Figure 6 Paragraph 201, camera is utilized to capture images to observe the nozzle during printing).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified SEOJEONGHUN with PLOTT and have each camera sensor monitor the nozzle during printing to determine a height of a layer. This would have been done to perform image analysis to measure and/or determine a plurality of evaluations of the 3D object being printing (PLOTT Paragraph 67) as well as controlling nozzle height (PLOTT Paragraph 38).
Claim(s) 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEOJEONGHUN (KR 20030039929 A) in view of Schurmann (US 20130043225 A1), TAKUSHIMA (US 20210370409 A1), and PARK (KR 20180040531 A) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of ISHII (US 20230117445 A1).
Regarding claim 43, SEOJEONGHUN as modified teaches the method of Claim 21.
SEOJEONGHUN fails to explicitly teach:
changing a directed energy power setting in order to change a width of the active processing area.
ISHII (US 20230117445 A1) teaches a three-dimensional additive manufacturing device, comprising:
changing a directed energy power setting in order to change a width of the active processing area (Paragraphs 56-58, feedback controller 64 controls output of the laser beam L on the basis of the image K to change the height of the bead B and the width of bead B can be appropriately maintained).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified SEOJEONGHUN with ISHII and change a directed energy power setting in order to change a width of the active processing area. This would have been done to such that the height of the bead can be more appropriately maintained and the width of the bead can be appropriately maintained (ISHII Paragraph 60).
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 FRANKLIN JEFFERSON WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM (E.S.T).
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/F.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761