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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 12/17/2025 has been entered. As directed by the amendment: Claims 1 and 9 are amended. Claims 6, 13 – 14 are cancelled. Thus, Claims 1 – 5 and 7 – 12 are currently pending. Applicant’s arguments regarding the Non-Final Rejection on 07/02/2025 have been fully considered (please see “Response to Arguments” section) and the following Final Rejection is made herein.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 5, 7 and 9 – 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2019/0047050 A1, priority date, June 5, 2017), hereinafter “Zhang”, in view of Unternahrer et al. (US 6,197, 133 B1), hereinafter “Unternahrer”, in further view of Nelson et al. (US 2018/0272460 A1) hereinafter “Nelson”, modified by Ash et al. (US 2014/0008334 A1) and hereinafter “Ash”.
Regarding claim 1, Zhang disclose a device (1) for manufacturing a part (100) made of metallic material (see annotated FIG.2), comprising a deposition member (a continuous deposition laser 4, see annotated FIG.2 *note here- the deposition member is interpreted to be the laser applied to the metal powder 3 deposited) for depositing said metallic material (the continuous deposition laser 4 is for deposing metal powder 3 into molten metal 2, (0020 and see annotated FIG.2)), characterized in that the device also comprises an impact member (4), (a short-pulse impact laser 5, see annotated FIG.2)) for impacting the metallic material being deposited by emitting an energy beam (5), so as to locally modify its crystal structure (the short-pulse laser beam 5 is for shocking or impacting, wherein under the action of the short-pulse laser forging, the metallic material deposited 3 is provided a mechanical effect of complete fusion and plasticization to form a fused metal crystal 9, (0020 – 0021 and annotated see FIG.2)), the deposition member and the impact member being slaved and synchronized (the deposition of the metal powder by the continuous deposition laser 4 and the shock forging performed by short-pulse impact laser 5 is a synchronized in a coupled manner, (0018 and see FIG.1)), the impact member being a pulsed laser (the impact member is a short-pulse impact laser 5, (0015, 0021 and annotated FIG.2)).
PNG
media_image1.png
538
904
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Zhang further discloses the forging parameters of the short-pulse laser beam 5 are monitored and controlled according to the thickness and area of the deposition material 3, (0021).
Zhang failed to explicitly specify the short-pulse laser beam 5 is having a pulse duration comprised between 5 nanoseconds and 150 nanoseconds.
However, Unternahrer that relates to laser shock peening (1: 01 – 05), also teaches that a typical short-pulse laser for shock peening would have pulse duration of about 10 – 20 nanoseconds (4:10 – 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to choose the pulse duration of the short-pulse laser beam 5 of Zhang to be between 5 nanoseconds and 150 nanoseconds as a typical short-pulse laser for impact shocking/peening is known to have a pulse duration of about 10 – 20 nanoseconds as taught in Unternahrer. Further, POSITA apprised of the short-pulse laser beam 5 and its parameters controlled according to the metal powder deposited in the additive manufacturing would easily and routinely choose the short-pulse laser of Zhang to be between 5 – 150 nanoseconds, as a prima facie case of obviousness exists when the claimed range lies inside the range disclosed by the prior art, MPEP 2144.05.I. In this case, Zhang already teaches short-pulse laser for impacting a deposition material that usually covers a pulse duration between ten and few hundred nanoseconds, discovering a narrower claimed pulse duration of 5 – 150 nanoseconds would amount to a mere routine optimization within ordinary skill in the art that is not patentably distinguishing from the prior art.
Zhang in view of Unternahrer do not explicitly teach the coupling distance between the deposition member and the impact member being comprised between 5 mm and 50 mm.
However, Nelson that relates to additive manufacturing of metals or alloys by a deposition leading laser and agitating trailing laser (0002, (0047 – 0048 and FIGS.1 and 2), also teaches that the trailing energy beam 17 for impacting can be chosen to be spaced apart from the leading deposition energy beam 16 at a distance, for example, of 3/8 inches = 9.525 mm, see parag. (0140) in a manner that is convenient to a break-up a dendritic microstructure that has formed in the trailing region; to increase replenishment of the solidifying melt pool; or to re-heat or re-melt, or redistribute material of the molten pool; or to stress relieve or anneal the solidified material from the solidification of the molten pool while the respective energy beams move together in the travel direction, (0070, 0139 – 0140, FIG.2 and FIGS. 4 – 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to choose the coupling of the continuous deposition laser 4 and the short-pulse impact laser 5 of Zhang to be a distance between 5 mm and 50 mm so that the short-pulse impact laser 5 would be able to break-up a dendritic microstructure that has formed in the trailing region, facilitating increased replenishment of the solidifying melt pool and relieving or annealing the solidified material while the short-pulse impact laser 5 moves with the continuous deposition laser 4 as taught in Nelson.
Zhang in view of Unternahrer in Furter view of Nelson still does not explicitly teach the continuous deposition laser 4 is powered by a first electrical source and the short-pulse impact laser 5 powered by a second electrical source distinct from the first electrical source.
However, Ash that relates to a system and method of laser melting filler material in a cladding or build up (0002), also teaches that the separate power supplies 130 and 230 are configured to electrically supply power to the individual laser device 120 and 220 respectively, (0018 – 0020 and please see FIG.1). This arrangement of having independent electrical power supplies for each laser source has a recognized advantage of independently controlling and adjusting power to each laser without affecting the other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify each of the continuous deposition laser 4 and the short-pulse impact laser 5 to be powered with their own electrical power supplies as doing so is known to have the advantage of controlling each laser power independently without affecting the other laser source. POSITA appraised of Ash’s setup that independently provides power source (130, 230) for each of the laser devices (120, 220, would easily and routinely apply the same to the continuous deposition laser 4 and the short-pulse impact laser 5 of Zhang, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to realize independent control of power of each laser without affecting one another.
Regarding claim 2, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches the device (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the deposition member (2) is configured to deposit beads (101) of molten metal (the continuous deposition laser 4 is configured to deposing beads of molten metal 2, Zhang (see annotated FIG.2)).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches the device (1) as claimed in claim 2, wherein the deposition member (2) is configured to deposit beads (10) of molten titanium-based alloy (the continuous deposition laser 4 is configured to deposit beads of molten metal 2 from the metal powder 3 delivered, Zhang (see annotated FIG.2).
Zhang view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash does not explicitly teach the metal powder for forming part is titanium-based.
However, Nelson teaches the metal powder for additively forming the part can be chosen from metallic materials comprising titanium or titanium alloys that are susceptible for hot cracking defect that require trailing laser shocking or impacting to shock the molten metal and fuse the crystal structure formed therein, Nelson (0047, 0077, 0096 and FIG.2)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to choose the metal powder of Zhang to be comprising titanium or titanium alloys in order to apply the short-pulse laser beam 5 for shocking or impacting in order to shock the molten metal and fuse the crystal structure formed in the part as taught in Nelson.
Regarding claim 4, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches the device (1) as claimed in claim 2, wherein the impact member (4) is configured to focus the energy beam (5) on at least one of the beads (101), (the short-pulse impact laser 5 is configured to focus the laser beam onto the weld beads, see Zhang’s annotated FIG.2).
Regarding claim 5, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches the device (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the impact member (4) is adapted to locally modify the crystal structure into an equiaxed structure (short-pulse laser beam 5 is adapted to perform shocking by generate plasmas 6 that penetrate through a certain depth of a cladding layer 1 that create shock waves to facilitate complete fusion and plasticization of the beads to form a fused metal crystal 9, , Zhang (0020- 0021 and see annotated FIG.2)).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches the device (1) as claimed in The device (1) as claimed in 1, comprising a closed enclosure confining the deposition member (2) and the impact member (4), (a suitable housing
defining a chamber 28 is employed to enclose at least the material delivery device, the
electron/laser beam generator, and/or the work piece support, Nelson (0055)).
Regarding claim 9, Zhang discloses a process for manufacturing alloy part (100), using a device (1) as claimed in claim 1(a method composite additive manufacturing a part from a metal powder, (see annotated FIG. 1, claims 1- 5)), comprising a deposition member (a continuous deposition laser 4, see annotated FIG.2), the process comprising focusing a pulsed laser on metallic material being deposited in order to locally modify the crystal structure of the material(applying a short-pulse laser beam 5 for shocking or impacting, wherein under the action of the short-pulse laser forging, the metallic material deposited 3 is provided a mechanical effect of complete fusion and plasticization to form a fused metal crystal 9, (0020 – 0021 and annotated see FIG.2)).
Zhang failed to explicitly specify the short-pulse laser beam 5 is having a pulse duration comprised between 5 nanoseconds and 150 nanoseconds.
However, Unternahrer that relates to laser shock peening (1: 01 – 05), also teaches that a typical short-pulse laser for shock peening would have pulse duration of about 10 – 20 nanoseconds (4:10 – 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to choose the pulse duration of the short-pulse laser beam 5 of Zhang to be between 5 nanoseconds and 150 nanoseconds as a typical short-pulse laser for impact shocking/peening is known to have a pulse duration of about 10 – 20 nanoseconds as taught in Unternahrer. Further, POSITA apprised of the short-pulse laser beam 5 and its parameters controlled according to the metal powder deposited in the additive manufacturing would easily and routinely choose the short-pulse laser of Zhang to be between 5 – 150 nanoseconds, as a prima facie case of obviousness exists when the claimed range lies inside the range disclosed by the prior art, MPEP 2144.05.I. In this case, Zhang already teaches short-pulse laser for impacting a deposition material that usually covers a pulse duration between ten and few hundred nanoseconds, discovering a narrower claimed pulse duration of 5 – 150 nanoseconds would amount to a mere routine optimization within ordinary skill in the art that is not patentably distinguishing from the prior art.
Zhang in view of Unternahrer does not explicitly teach the metal powder for forming part is titanium-based.
However, Nelson teaches the metal powder for additively forming the part can be chosen from metallic materials comprising titanium or titanium alloys that are susceptible for hot cracking defect that require trailing laser shocking or impacting to shock the molten metal and fuse the crystal structure formed therein, Nelson (0047, 0077, 0096 and FIG.2)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to choose the metal powder of Zhang to be comprising titanium or titanium alloys in order to apply the short-pulse laser beam 5 for shocking or impacting in order to shock the molten metal and fuse the crystal structure formed in the part as taught in Nelson.
Zhang in view of Unternahrer in Furter view of Nelson still does not explicitly teach the continuous deposition laser 4 is powered by a first electrical source and the short-pulse impact laser 5 powered by a second electrical source distinct from the first electrical source.
However, Ash that relates to a system and method of laser melting filler material in a cladding or build up (0002), also teaches that the separate power supplies 130 and 230 are configured to electrically supply power to the individual laser device 120 and 220 respectively, (0018 – 0020 and please see FIG.1). This arrangement of having independent electrical power supplies for each laser source has a recognized advantage of independently controlling and adjusting power to each laser without affecting the other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify each of the continuous deposition laser 4 and the short-pulse impact laser 5 to be powered with their own electrical power supplies as doing so is known to have the advantage of controlling each laser power independently without affecting the other laser source. POSITA appraised of Ash’s setup that independently provides power source (130, 230) for each of the laser devices (120, 220, would easily and routinely apply the same to the continuous deposition laser 4 and the short-pulse impact laser 5 of Zhang, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to realize independent control of power of each laser without affecting one another.
Regarding claim 10, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches the process as claimed in claim 9, comprising locally strain-hardening the material by the energy beam (5), (the short-pulse laser beam 5 performs shocking by generating plasma 6 that local shock wave (stain/stress) to molten material, Zhang (0020, see annotated FIG2)).
Regarding claim 11, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches the process as claimed in claims the process comprising focusing an energy beam (5) on material being deposited, in order to locally modify the crystal structure of the material, wherein, upon contact with said bead (101), the laser generates a plasma (103), the generation of the plasma (103) releasing a mechanical wave (105) strain-hardening the bead (101) and relaxing at least a portion of the part (100), (the short-pulse laser beam 5 performs shocking by generating plasma 6 that locally penetrates the molten material with a shock wave (stain/stress) to produce a mechanical effect of complete fusion of the material to form a fused Cystal structure 9, Zhang (0020, see annotated FIG2)).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches a part (100) directly obtained by a process as claimed in claim 9 (stacking the material in the cladding region layer by layer to form a part/workpiece, Zhang (0024 and see annotated FIG.2)).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash and Hyatt et al. (US 2021/0146613 A1, priority date June 06, 2017) and hereinafter "Hyatt".
Regrading claim 8, Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash teaches the device (1) as claimed in claim 7, a temperature sensor for regulating a temperature of the cladding process, such that the metal materials are exposed to a temperature range that is most favorable for plastic forming after the metal materials are cladded, Zang (0020), and temperature sensors, thermocouples and electromagnetic coils are used for receiving information and regulating one or more processing parameters, or parameters associated with the additively manufactured article of the processing chamber, like travel speed, position, temperature, Nelson (0052,0056 - 0057, 0084 and 0152).
Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash do not explicitly discuss a camera coupled to a pyrometer for viewing the part and measuring the temperature before the energy beam (5) is emitted by the impact member (4).
However, Hyatt that relates to additive manufacturing systems and controlling solidification rate during additive manufacturing (0001), also teaches a camera 314 coupled to a pyrometer 316 for viewing the part and measuring the temperature of the additive manufacturing process, (0089 - 0092 and see FIG.15).
This enables the controller 320 of the additive manufacturing apparatus to regulate the additive manufacturing process temperature based on the measurements from the pyrometer and camera and calculate correction temperature values for production of the part (0095).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device taught by Zhang in view of Unternahrer in further view of Nelson modified by Ash to include a camera coupled to a pyrometer in order to regulate the additive manufacturing process temperature based on the measurements from the pyrometer and camera and calculate correction temperature values for production of the part as taught in Hyatt.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) in the Non-Final Rejection on 07/02/2020 have been fully 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.
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 DILNESSA B BELAY whose telephone number is (571)272-3136. The examiner can normally be reached M-F approx. 8:00 am - 5:30 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571)270-5095. 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.
/DILNESSA B BELAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/STEVEN W CRABB/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761