DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/6/2026 has been entered.
Status
Claims 1-5 and 7-20 are pending. Claims 1 and 17 are amended.
Claims 1-5 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 USC 112(b) and 35 USC 103.
Response to Amendment
The objection to claims 1 and 17 is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/6/2026 regarding rejection under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant references the specification [0041], [0045], and [0046] and argues that the scalar attribute is not the same information as the first FAS ID and that the indexing and storing steps can be completed simultaneously.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. While the intended scope of the claims may have been to limit the scalar attribute to different information from the FAS ID, the claim interpretation was adopted in the previous action to satisfy the “simultaneously” limitation. The claim interpretation from the previous office action is maintained. If the scalar attribute and the FAS ID are interpreted as different information, the “indexing” and “storing” steps cannot be completed simultaneously. Although [0041] of the specification generally describes performing steps simultaneously, it does not provide further details on how the indexing and storing steps could be performed simultaneously. The storing step recites “storing … at least one first scalar attribute for the first FAS element”. Indexing a first FAS element is a prerequisite for storing a scalar associated with the first FAS element; otherwise, the scalar value could not be based on the first FAS element. The rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 11-13 filed 2/6/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-5 and 7-20 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the claim amendments and previously cited prior art.
The dependent claims are argued to be allowable because the independent claims are supposedly allowable. However, the independent claims are not allowable; therefore, the dependent claims are not allowable since they do not add any further allowable limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claims 1 and 17, the limitation wherein the indexing… and the storing … are performed simultaneously” is unclear. In the indexing limitation, a first function-attributed surface (FAS) element is indexed by assigning a FAS ID. In the storing limitation, a scalar attribute is associated with the first FAS element. It is unclear how the storing limitation can be performed at the same time as the indexing limitation because the storing relies on the identification of the first FAS element. For the sake of examination, the limitation is interpreted as follows: The FAS ID is the scalar attribute associated with the first FAS element. Therefore, by associating the FAS ID with the first FAS element, a scalar attribute is stored for the first FAS element.
The remaining claims depend on the independent claims 1 or 17 and inherit the deficiency.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sykes et al. (US 2020/0096967 A1) in view of Bavoil et al. (US 2014/0160124 A1) and Apte et al. (US 2021/0312099 A1) and Byers et al. (US 2018/0315237 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sykes discloses a method for augmenting a three-dimensional model of a component in a computer-aided design (CAD) environment, the method comprising: (Abstract “A method and apparatus for manufacturing a part. The part is designed using a CAD system to generate a CAD part model of the part. Features of the part are identified from the CAD part model of the part. A parametric specification of the part is generated using the features of the part.”)
a three-dimensional CAD model of the component, a first three-dimensional surface representation of a first component surface of the three-dimensional CAD model as a first function-attributed surface (FAS) element ([0032] “CAD system 108 may be a computer-aided design system for generating a three-dimensional model of part 102.” [0034] “The geometric surfaces may be individually defined by parametric functions or may result from addition and subtraction of a plurality of geometric solids such as spheres, cylinders, rectilinear boxes, and the like.” The 3D part model contains 3D part surfaces. [0039] “Each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable. For example, without limitation, each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable by obtaining input from a design engineer or other appropriate user 120 using graphical user interface 106.” Each surface has a value assigned to it.)
storing, on more or more memory devices, at least one first scalar attribute for the first FAS element as a first FAS dataset ([0039] “Each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable. For example, without limitation, each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable by obtaining input from a design engineer or other appropriate user 120 using graphical user interface 106.” Each surface has a value assigned to it. Fig. 18 #1806 “Memory”)
generating a graphical user interface displayed on a screen ([0031] “Graphical user interface 106 may include any appropriate user display and input devices to allow user 120 to interact with parametric part manufacturing system 100.” Fig. 18 #1814 “Display”); and
receiving product manufacturing information (PMI) for the first FAS element from a user via an input on the screen displaying the graphical user interface and storing the PMI in the first FAS dataset (Fig. 9 909, [0087] “Parts may be assigned to packaging category and material handling resources based on attributes (operation 904). Packing material requirements matching volume, weight, and resource requirements may be determined (operation 906). Stock requirements for planning and procurement of packing materials and equipment needs may be reported (operation 908). An adjusted manufacturing approach for aircraft production may be executed (operation 910) for production of aircraft (operation 912), with the process terminating thereafter.”, Fig. 18 “Input/Output Unit”, “Communications Unit”, “Display”)
Sykes does not teach a gas turbine component,
indexing, on a computer, in a three-dimensional CAD model of the component, a first three-dimensional surface representation of a first component surface of the three-dimensional CAD model as a first function-attributed surface (FAS) element by assigning the first three-dimensional surface representation a unique first FAS ID which associates the first FAS element with the component , the first component surface being one of a plurality of component surfaces of the three-dimensional CAD model of the component;
storing, on one or more memory devices, at least one first scalar attribute for the first FAS element as a first FAS dataset and assigning the unique first FAS ID to the first FAS dataset;
wherein the PMI includes geometric dimensioning and tolerancing information including one of a stress peak area, airflow direction with respect to the first component surface, stack-up information, life cycle information, repair information, or information gathered during operation of the component;
configuring the three-dimensional CAD model to, on the graphical user interface displayed on the screen, when executed in the CAD environment, display on a screen associated with the CAD environment a FAS tree that includes a plurality of FAS elements associated with the component and corresponding to respective component surfaces of the plurality of component surfaces, the plurality of FAS elements including the first FAS element.
and using the three-dimensional CAD model for manufacturing the modeled gas turbine engine component utilizing a manufacturing equipment;
wherein the unique first FAS ID includes one or more digits assigned based on a FAS hierarchical tree, the hierarchical tree including one of one or more structural features or portions of a particular module of FAS elements, one or more families of a feature of the plurality of FAS elements, and one or more surfaces of a family of the one or more families of the plurality of FAS elements;
wherein the indexing the first three-dimensional surface representation of the first component surface of the three-dimensional CAD model as the FAS element and the storing the at least one first scalar attribute for the first FAS element as the first FAS dataset in the FAS database is performed simultaneously.
Bavoil does teach indexing, on a computer, in a three-dimensional CAD model of the component, a first three-dimensional surface representation of a first component surface of the three-dimensional CAD model as a first function-attributed surface (FAS) element by assigning the first three-dimensional surface representation a unique first FAS ID which associates the first FAS element with the component ([0002] “Many computer graphic images are created by mathematically modeling the interaction of light with a three dimensional scene from a given viewpoint.” [0004] “[0004] Scene geometry is typically represented by geometric primitives, such as points, lines, polygons (for example, triangles and quadrilaterals), and curved surfaces, defined by one or more two- or three-dimensional vertices.” The 3d scene includes polygons and/or other surfaces. Fig. 4 “PRIMITIVE ID” corresponds to a visible polygon or surface in the 3D scene. The primitive ID is a FAS ID associated with a FAS element.), the first component surface being one of a plurality of component surfaces of the three-dimensional CAD model of the component (Fig. 2 214-1 through 214-M “Visible Polygon”);
storing, on one or more memory devices, at least one first scalar attribute for the first FAS element as a first FAS dataset (Fig. 3 The polygon is made up of vertices. [0004] “Each vertex may have additional scalar or vector attributes used to determine qualities such as the color, transparency, lighting, shading, and animation of the vertex and its associated geometric primitives.”, Fig. 18 “Memory”) and assigning the unique first FAS ID to the first FAS dataset (Fig. 4 “PRIMITIVE ID” corresponds to a visible polygon or surface in the 3D scene. The primitive ID is a FAS ID associated with a FAS element. [0038] “Certain embodiments may not store visible polygon data structure 206, but rely on a primitive ID of visible polygons 214-1 through 214-M to reconstruct the polygons from a scene database.”);
wherein the indexing the first three-dimensional surface representation of the first component surface of the three-dimensional CAD model as the FAS element and the storing the at least one first scalar attribute for the first FAS element as the first FAS dataset in the FAS database are performed simultaneously (See rejection under 35 USC 112(b) for claim interpretation. The indexing and storing limitations are taught by Bavoil as shown above. Fig. 4 “PRIMITIVE ID” corresponds to a visible polygon or surface in the 3D scene. The primitive ID is a FAS ID associated with a FAS element. As described in the claim interpretation in the rejection under 35 USC 112(b), the FAS ID is a scalar attribute, so by indexing the first FAS element, the scalar attribute is performed simultaneously as they may refer to the same information.).
Sykes and Bavoil are analogous because they are from the “same field of endeavor” 3D modelling.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sykes and Bavoil before him or her, to modify Sykes to include polygon IDs as taught by Bavoil.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Bavoil [0024] “It is realized herein that the visible polygons in the scene may be identified during rendering of each pixel and then stored in the G-buffer. It is further realized herein that the visible polygons may be represented in the G-buffer by their respective vertices. It is also realized herein that a primitive ID number associated with each polygon is also useful information further down the graphics pipeline for processes aimed at reducing redundancy in the set of visible polygons.”.
Sykes and Bavoil do not teach a gas turbine component,
configuring the three-dimensional CAD model to, on the graphical user interface displayed on the screen, when executed in the CAD environment, display on a screen associated with the CAD environment a FAS tree that includes a plurality of FAS elements associated with the component and corresponding to respective component surfaces of the plurality of component surfaces, the plurality of FAS elements including the first FAS element.
wherein the PMI includes geometric dimensioning and tolerancing information including one of a stress peak area, airflow direction with respect to the first component surface, stack-up information, life cycle information, repair information, or information gathered during operation of the component; or
using the three-dimensional CAD model for manufacturing the modeled gas turbine engine component utilizing a manufacturing equipment.
wherein the unique first FAS ID includes one or more digits assigned based on a FAS hierarchical tree, the hierarchical tree including one of one or more structural features or portions of a particular module of FAS elements, one or more families of a feature of the plurality of FAS elements, and one or more surfaces of a family of the one or more families of the plurality of FAS elements;
Apte does teach configuring the three-dimensional CAD model to, on the graphical user interface displayed on the screen, when executed in the CAD environment, display on a screen associated with the CAD environment a FAS tree (Fig. 1A “Display Screen”, Fig. 1B 150 “Feature Tree” [0014] Feature tree (i.e., specification tree or tree): In conventional CAD programs, the features in a 3D model are organized in the form of a tree, called a feature tree or specification tree, that lists each feature and defines how the feature relates to higher and lower level features in the tree.” ) that includes a plurality of FAS elements associated with the component and corresponding to respective component surfaces of the plurality of component surfaces ([0013] Feature node: A representation of a feature in a feature tree is called a feature node. Most modem CAD programs associate a unique identifier, such as a number or an alphanumeric text, with each feature node.), the plurality of FAS elements including the first FAS element ([0007] Body: A solid body includes topological data and geometric data. The topological data (e.g., faces, edges, vertices, etc.) in a solid body have corresponding geometric data in the same solid body. Each vertex corresponds to a point. Each edge corresponds to a curve. Each face corresponds to a surface.”, [0012]-[0013], [0017] The feature tree includes feature nodes which represent features. A part is made up of features and can include multiple bodies which have surfaces.).
wherein the unique first FAS ID includes one or more digits assigned based on a FAS hierarchical tree (Fig. 2 #250 “Component 1” “Component 2” The components are identified with digits. The components belong to the “Physical Product 1” and are numbered based on belonging to that hierarchical tree.), the hierarchical tree including one of one or more structural features or portions of a particular module of FAS elements (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, only one of the listed alternatives must be taught. The instant claim limitation “one of” indicates that the following listed options are alternatives. Fig. 2 #250 The Physical Product 1 is higher in the hierarchical feature tree than the extrusion features. The claim term “module” is generic and is interpreted as a grouping of one or more structural features such as the 3D CAD model 206.).
Sykes, Bavoil, and Apte are analogous because they are from the “same field of endeavor”.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sykes, Bavoil, and Apte before him or her, to modify Sykes and Bavoil to include a feature tree as taught by Apte.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Apte [0086] “While an example embodiment disclosed herein may be described as benefiting a user in a collaborative setting, it should be understood that such benefit is not limited thereto. For example, a single user may create a 3D-link to a location of a 3D model and add notes to it so that they can come back to the 3D model at a later date and recall what they were doing and what needs to be done next.”
Apte does not teach a gas turbine component,
wherein the PMI includes geometric dimensioning and tolerancing information including one of a stress peak area, airflow direction with respect to the first component surface, stack-up information, life cycle information, repair information, or information gathered during operation of the component; or
using the three-dimensional CAD model for manufacturing the modeled gas turbine engine component utilizing a manufacturing equipment.
Byers teaches a gas turbine component ([0030] “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the power production system 100 includes a gas turbine system 102,”),
wherein the PMI includes geometric dimensioning and tolerancing information including one of ( [0037] “For example, the PMI data may reflect geometric dimensions, tolerances, text ( e.g., annotations, notes), other dimensions, material type, material specifications, finishes ( e.g., surface finishes), clearances, and so on, associated with the 3D models.” Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, only one of the listed alternatives must be taught. ) life cycle information ([0025] “operational conditions that the part or product is expected to encounter (e.g., temperatures, pressures), certifications to be adhered to, quality control requirements, performance requirements, and so on.” The expected conditions are conditions over the lifecycle of the component.) and
using the three-dimensional CAD model for manufacturing the modeled gas turbine engine component utilizing a manufacturing equipment. (Fig. 1 “Manufacture” [0020] “The CAx system 10 may additionally provide for manufacturing processes 18 that may include manufacturing automation support. For example, additive manufacturing models may be derived, such as 3D printing models for material jetting, binder jetting, vat photopolymerization, powder bed fusion, sheet lamination, directed energy deposition, material extrusion, and the like, to create the part or product.”).
Sykes, Bavoil, Apte, and Byers are analogous because they are from the “same field of endeavor” 3D modelling.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sykes, Bavoil, and Apte before him or her, to modify Sykes, Bavoil, and Apte to include manufacturing a gas turbine engine component as taught by Byers.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Byers [0030] It may be beneficial to describe a machine that would incorporate one or more parts manufactured and tracked by the processes 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22, for example, via the CAx system 10. Accordingly, FIG. 3 illustrates an example of a power production system 100 that may be entirely (or partially) conceived, designed, engineered, manufactured, serviced, and tracked by the CAx system 10.
Regarding claim 2, Sykes in view of Bavoil, Apte, and Byers teaches the method of claim 1, and Sykes teaches a three-dimensional CAD model of the component, a second three-dimensional surface representation of a first component surface of the three-dimensional CAD model as a second function-attributed surface (FAS) element ([0032] “CAD system 108 may be a computer-aided design system for generating a three-dimensional model of part 102.” [0034] “The geometric surfaces may be individually defined by parametric functions or may result from addition and subtraction of a plurality of geometric solids such as spheres, cylinders, rectilinear boxes, and the like.” The 3D part model contains 3D part surfaces. [0039] “Each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable. For example, without limitation, each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable by obtaining input from a design engineer or other appropriate user 120 using graphical user interface 106.” Each surface has a value assigned to it.)
storing, on the one or more memory devices, at least one second scalar attribute for the second FAS element as a second FAS dataset in the FAS database ([0039] “Each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable. For example, without limitation, each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable by obtaining input from a design engineer or other appropriate user 120 using graphical user interface 106.” Each surface has a value assigned to it. Fig. 18 “Memory”)
wherein the plurality of FAS elements includes the second FAS element ([0034] “The geometric surfaces may be individually defined by parametric functions or may result from addition and subtraction of a plurality of geometric solids such as spheres, cylinders, rectilinear boxes, and the like.” The 3D part model contains 3D part surfaces.).
Sykes does not teach indexing, on the computer, in the three-dimensional CAD model of the component, a second three-dimensional surface representation of a second component surface of the three-dimensional CAD model as a second FAS element by assigning the second three-dimensional surface representation a unique second FAS ID which associates the second FAS element with the component; and
Storing, on the one or more memory devices, at least one second scalar attribute for the second FAS element as a second FAS dataset in the FAS database and assigning the unique second FAS ID to the second FAS dataset;
Bavoil does teach indexing, on the computer, in a three-dimensional CAD model of the component, a second three-dimensional surface representation of a second component surface of the three-dimensional CAD model as a second function-attributed surface (FAS) element by assigning the second three-dimensional surface representation a unique second FAS ID which associates the first FAS element with the component ([0002] “Many computer graphic images are created by mathematically modeling the interaction of light with a three dimensional scene from a given viewpoint.” [0004] “[0004] Scene geometry is typically represented by geometric primitives, such as points, lines, polygons (for example, triangles and quadrilaterals), and curved surfaces, defined by one or more two- or three-dimensional vertices.” The 3d scene includes polygons and/or other surfaces. Fig. 4 “PRIMITIVE ID” corresponds to a visible polygon or surface in the 3D scene. The primitive ID is a FAS ID associated with a FAS element.);
Storing, on the one or more memory devices, at least one second scalar attribute for the second FAS element as a second FAS dataset in the FAS database (Fig. 3 The polygon is made up of vertices. [0004] “Each vertex may have additional scalar or vector attributes used to determine qualities such as the color, transparency, lighting, shading, and animation of the vertex and its associated geometric primitives.”, Fig. 1 “System memory” “GPU Local Memory” “On-Chip GPU Memory”) and assigning the unique second FAS ID to the second FAS dataset (Fig. 4 “PRIMITIVE ID” corresponds to a visible polygon or surface in the 3D scene. The primitive ID is a FAS ID associated with a FAS element. [0038] “Certain embodiments may not store visible polygon data structure 206, but rely on a primitive ID of visible polygons 214-1 through 214-M to reconstruct the polygons from a scene database.”);
Sykes and Bavoil are analogous because they are from the “same field of endeavor” 3D modelling.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sykes and Bavoil before him or her, to modify Sykes to include polygon IDs as taught by Bavoil.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Bavoil [0024] “It is realized herein that the visible polygons in the scene may be identified during rendering of each pixel and then stored in the G-buffer. It is further realized herein that the visible polygons may be represented in the G-buffer by their respective vertices. It is also realized herein that a primitive ID number associated with each polygon is also useful information further down the graphics pipeline for processes aimed at reducing redundancy in the set of visible polygons.”.
Regarding claim 3, Sykes in view of Bavoil, Apte, and Byers teaches the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach further comprising linking the FAS tree to the first FAS dataset and the first FAS element with the unique first FAS ID.
Bavoil does teach further comprising linking the first FAS element with the unique first FAS ID (Fig. 4 Primitive ID and Visible Polygon. The visible polygon is linked to the primitive ID.).
Sykes and Bavoil are analogous because they are from the “same field of endeavor” 3D modelling.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sykes and Bavoil before him or her, to modify Sykes to include polygon IDs as taught by Bavoil.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Bavoil [0024] “It is realized herein that the visible polygons in the scene may be identified during rendering of each pixel and then stored in the G-buffer. It is further realized herein that the visible polygons may be represented in the G-buffer by their respective vertices. It is also realized herein that a primitive ID number associated with each polygon is also useful information further down the graphics pipeline for processes aimed at reducing redundancy in the set of visible polygons.”.
Bavoil does not teach linking the FAS tree to the first FAS dataset.
Apte does teach linking the FAS tree to the first FAS dataset ([0013]-[0014] The features in the feature tree have unique identifiers. The identifiers, analogous to the FAS IDs in the FAS dataset, are linked to the feature tree.).
Sykes, Bavoil, and Apte are analogous because they are from the “same field of endeavor” .
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sykes, Bavoil, and Apte before him or her, to modify Sykes and Bavoil to include a feature tree as taught by Apte.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Apte [0013] “Most modem CAD programs associate a unique identifier, […], with each feature node.”
Regarding claim 4, Sykes in view of Bavoil, Apte, and Byers teaches the method of claim 3, but Sykes and Bavoil do not teach further comprising displaying, on the screen, the first FAS dataset with the unique first FAS ID in the FAS tree.
Apte teaches further comprising displaying, on the screen, the first FAS dataset with the unique first FAS ID in the FAS tree (Fig. 1 “Display Screen”, Fig. 2 “Feature Tree” Each node in the feature tree has a unique identifier.).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Apte [0013] “Most modem CAD programs associate a unique identifier, […], with each feature node.”
Regarding claim 5, Sykes in view of Bavoil, Apte, and Byers teaches the method of claim 4, and Sykes teaches wherein displaying the first FAS dataset includes displaying, on the screen, the first FAS dataset formatted according to an engineering industry standard ([0044] “An encoded part description of part 102 may be generated using a part encoding subsystem of parametric part system 112. In accordance with an illustrative embodiment, the identified features of part 102 may be used to distinguish between parts and to distinguish between part categories to generate the encoded part description.” [0110] ”Display 1814 provides a mechanism to display information to a user.”).
Regarding claim 7, Sykes in view of Bavoil, Apte, and Byers teaches the method of claim 1, and Sykes teaches a three-dimensional CAD model of the component, geometrical representation of a non-surface geometrical element of the three-dimensional CAD model as a second function-attributed surface (FAS) element ([0032] “CAD system 108 may be a computer-aided design system for generating a three-dimensional model of part 102.” [0034] “The geometric surfaces may be individually defined by parametric functions or may result from addition and subtraction of a plurality of geometric solids such as spheres, cylinders, rectilinear boxes, and the like.” The 3D part model contains 3D part surfaces. [0039] “Each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable. For example, without limitation, each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable by obtaining input from a design engineer or other appropriate user 120 using graphical user interface 106.” Each surface has a value assigned to it.)
Storing, on the one or more memory devices, at least one second scalar attribute for the second FAS element as a second FAS dataset in the FAS database ([0039] “Each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable. For example, without limitation, each measurable attribute of a feature may be categorized as fixed or scalable by obtaining input from a design engineer or other appropriate user 120 using graphical user interface 106.” Each surface has a value assigned to it. Fig. 18 “Memory”)
wherein the plurality of FAS elements includes the second FAS element ([0034] “The geometric surfaces may be individually defined by parametric functions or may result from addition and subtraction of a plurality of geometric solids such as spheres, cylinders, rectilinear boxes, and the like.” The 3D part model contains 3D part surfaces.).
Sykes does not teach indexing, on the computer, in the three-dimensional CAD model of the component, a geometrical representation of a non-surface geometrical element of the three-dimensional CAD model as a second FAS element by assigning the geometrical representation a unique second FAS ID which associates the second FAS element with the component; and
storing, on the one or more memory devices, at least one second scalar attribute for the second FAS element as a second FAS dataset in the FAS database and assigning the unique second FAS ID to the second FAS dataset;
Bavoil does teach indexing, on the computer, in a three-dimensional CAD model of the component, a geometrical representation of a non-surface geometrical element of the three-dimensional CAD model as a second function-attributed surface (FAS) element by assigning the geometrical representation a unique second FAS ID which associates the first FAS element with the component ([0002] “Many computer graphic images are created by mathematically modeling the interaction of light with a three dimensional scene from a given viewpoint.” [0004] “[0004] Scene geometry is typically represented by geometric primitives, such as points, lines, polygons (for example, triangles and quadrilaterals), and curved surfaces, defined by one or more two- or three-dimensional vertices.” The 3d scene includes points. Fig. 4 “PRIMITIVE ID” corresponds to a visible polygon with points in the 3D scene. The primitive ID is a FAS ID associated with FAS point elements.),
storing at least one second scalar attribute for the second FAS element as a second FAS dataset in the FAS database (Fig. 3 The polygon is made up of vertices. [0004] “Each vertex may have additional scalar or vector attributes used to determine qualities such as the color, transparency, lighting, shading, and animation of the vertex and its associated geometric primitives.” Fig. 1 “System memory” “GPU Local Memory” “On-Chip GPU Memory”) and assigning the unique second FAS ID to the second FAS dataset (Fig. 4 “PRIMITIVE ID” corresponds to a visible polygon or surface in the 3D scene. The primitive ID is a FAS ID associated with a FAS element. [0038] “Certain embodiments may not store visible polygon data structure 206, but rely on a primitive ID of visible polygons 214-1 through 214-M to reconstruct the polygons from a scene database.”);
Sykes and Bavoil are analogous because they are from the “same field of endeavor” 3D modelling.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sykes and Bavoil before him or her, to modify Sykes to include polygon IDs as taught by Bavoil.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Bavoil [0024] “It is realized herein that the visible polygons in the scene may be identified during rendering of each pixel and then stored in the G-buffer. It is further realized herein that the visible polygons may be represented in the G-buffer by their respective vertices. It is also realized herein that a primitive ID number associated with each polygon is also useful information further down the graphics pipeline for processes aimed at reducing redundancy in the set of visible polygons.”.
Regarding claim 8, Sykes in view of Bavoil, Apte, and Byers teaches the method of claim 7, but Sykes does not teach wherein the non-surface geometrical element is one of a point , a line, an axis, a plane, or a volume of the three-dimensional CAD model.
Bavoil teaches wherein the non-surface geometrical element is one of a point (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, only one of the listed alternatives must be taught. Fig. 4 Vertex A through C-A, Fig. 4 “PRIMITIVE ID” corresponds to a visible polygon with points in the 3D scene. The primitive ID is a FAS ID associated with FAS point elements.).
Sykes and Bavoil are analogous because they are from the “same field of endeavor” 3D modelling.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Sykes and Bavoil before him or her, to modify Sykes to include polygon IDs as taught by Bavoil.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Bavoil [0024] “It is realized herein that the visible polygons in the scene may be identified during rendering of each pixel and then stored in the G-buffer. It is further realized herein that the visible polygons may be represented in the G-buffer by their respective vertices. It is also realized herein that a primitive ID number associated with each polygon is also useful information further down the graphics pipeline for processes aimed at reducing redundancy in the set of visible polygons.”.
Regarding claim 9, Sykes discloses a data processing system for augmenting a three-dimensional model of a component in a computer-aided design (CAD) environment, the system comprising: ([0032] “In accordance with an illustrative embodiment, the use of CAD system 108 to design part 102 may be augmented by parametric part system 112.”) a processor; and one or more memory devices in signal communication with the processor, the one or more memory devices containing instructions recorded therein which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: ([0105] “Communications fabric 1802 provides communications between processor unit 1804, memory 1806, persistent storage 1808, communications unit 1810, input/output (I/O) unit 1812, and display 1814. Memory 1806, persistent storage 1808, communications unit 1810, input/output (I/O) unit 1812, and display 1814 are examples of resources accessible by processor unit 1804 via communications fabric 1802.”).
The remainder of claim 9 is rejected in the same way as claim 1.
Claims 10-15 are rejected in substantially the same way as claims 2-5 and 7-8.
Regarding claim 16, Sykes in view of Bavoil, Apte, and Byers teach the system of claim 10, and Sykes teaches further comprising a communication network in signal communication with the processor ([0105] “Communications fabric 1802 provides communications between processor unit 1804, memory 1806, persistent storage 1808, communications unit 1810, input/output (I/O) unit 1812, and display 1814. Memory 1806, persistent storage 1808, communications unit 1810, input/output (I/O) unit 1812, and display 1814 are examples of resources accessible by processor unit 1804 via communications fabric 1802.”).
Regarding claim 17, Sykes discloses a method for augmenting a three-dimensional model of a component in a computer-aided design (CAD) environment, the method comprising: (Abstract “A method and apparatus for manufacturing a part. The part is designed using a CAD system to generate a CAD part model of the part. Features of the part are identified from the CAD part model of the part. A parametric specification of the part is generated using the features of the part.”)
The remainder of claim 17 is rejected in the same way as claims 1 and 2.
Claims 18-20 are rejected in substantially the same way as claims 3-5.
Conclusion
The examiner respectfully requests, in response to this Office action, support is shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. Indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s).
When responding to this Office Action, the applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TROY A MAUST whose telephone number is (571)272-1931. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8AM to 4PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rehana Perveen, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-3676. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/T.A.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2189
/REHANA PERVEEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2189