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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blom (US 20190001655 A1).
Claim 1. Blom discloses a method of additive manufacturing, the method comprising:
receiving an input signal (nominal CAD 1202, Fig. 12), which is a representation of a composite geometry that is computed as a function of a primary geometry and a secondary geometry (nominal CAD 1202 is a virtual model of the component being built, par. 95);
producing a feedback signal as a function of a melt pool size at a given site- specific location of multiple site-specific locations of a part being manufactured by an additive manufacturing system (measurement means 1206 which include inspection and meteorology, par. 95, wherein examples of measurements include measuring attributes of the melt pool, claim 1);
controlling at least one of a power control parameter of a laser-equipped print head, translation rate parameter of a drive subsystem, or feedstock rate parameter of a material feed subsystem dynamically (geometry compensation function 1210, Fig. 12, wherein the build file, i.e. build parameters are adjusted, par. 95 and 65; the build parameters include the power, speed, orientation, position of energy sources, par. 50) as a function of at least an actuating error signal that represents a difference between the input signal and the feedback signal (deviation data 1208 obtained from the geometrical and material differences found between the nominal cad 1202 and the measured data 1204, par. 95-97) to enable the additive manufacturing system to produce a customized melt pool size or shape for the given site-specific location of the multiple site-specific locations to produce a part that, in a manufactured state, matches the composite geometry (deviation data is inputted into the geometry compensation function which adjusts the build parameters comprising of the melt pool size to form the built part, par. 97, Fig. 12;
Fig. 12 is a schematic for devices that dynamically adapt a build for additive manufacturing a part, therefore, it is understood that multiple melt pool sites will be measured and adjusted during the whole process to form the manufactured part).
Claim 2. Blom discloses the method of claim 1 further comprising:
sensing a temperature of the part at a proximal location to a site-specific location (temperature of the melt pool is measured, par. 54 and 73), at a distal location from the site-specific location, or a combination thereof; and
controlling at least one of the power control parameter, translation rate parameter, or feedstock rate parameter dynamically further as a function of the temperature sensed (power of the laser device is adjusted based on the measured temperature and desired temperature of the melt pool, par. 54).
Claim 3. Blom discloses the method of Claim 1 wherein producing the feedback signal includes capturing an image of the melt pool and extracting from the image a measure of at least one of size or shape of the melt pool (sensors are used to measure the size and shape of melt pools, par. 46, wherein the sensors include cameras, par. 73).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blom as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Soshi (US 20200079015 A1).
Claim 4. Blom does not disclose the method of Claim 1 further comprising regulating the translation rate parameter at a constant level while controlling at least one of the power control parameter or the feedstock rate parameter during translation of the print head.
Blom further discloses that this method can be used for other additive manufacturing systems (par. 35).
Soshi discloses an additive manufacturing device (abstract) wherein the speed and movement of the machining table is controlled by the feed apparatus (par. 14 and 31, Fig. 1) and the powder supply device supplies powder towards a laser beam concentration spot where the powder is melted and the supply rate can be adjusted (par. 11 and 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Blom to incorporate the teachings of Soshi and use Blom’s feedback method for Soshi’s apparatus. One of ordinary skill in the art would be capable of applying Blom’s method to Soshi’s apparatus and control the build parameters in Soshi’s to obtain a more accurate manufactured part.
Claim 5. Blom discloses the method of Claim 1 further comprising applying non-linear control at the given site- specific location to produce a custom surface profile at the given site-specific location (scan paths are generated to form the layers, par. 60; where it is understood that the toolpaths can move in two dimensions using the 2D galvanometers, par. 42; the broadest reasonable interpretation of non-linear control to produce a custom surface profile includes a laser path that moves in 2D), the non-linear control applied based upon values derived from machine instructions including at least one of a lookup table, a G-code representation, a voxel representation, list instructions (executable instructions, par. 30), or a command-line interface.
Claim 6. Blom does not disclose the method of Claim 1 further comprising controlling the translation rate parameter to cause the drive subsystem to translate the print head with respect to the part, to translate the part with respect to the print head, or to translate both the print head and the part with respect to a common reference point or relative to each other.
Soshi discloses an additive manufacturing device (abstract) wherein the speed and movement of the machining table is controlled by the feed apparatus (par. 14 and 31, Fig. 1) and the powder supply device supplies powder towards a laser beam concentration spot where the powder is melted and the supply rate can be adjusted (par. 11 and 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Blom to incorporate the teachings of Soshi and use Blom’s feedback method for Soshi’s apparatus. One of ordinary skill in the art would be capable of applying Blom’s method to Soshi’s apparatus and control the build parameters in Soshi’s to obtain a more accurate manufactured part.
Claim 7. Blom does not disclose the method of Claim 1 further comprising controlling the feedstock rate parameter to cause the material feed subsystem to direct feedstock material to the part at the site- specific locations along a first and a second dimension, at a given layer defined along a third dimension.
Soshi discloses an additive manufacturing device (abstract) controlling the feedstock rate parameter to cause the material feed subsystem to direct feedstock material to the part at the site- specific locations along a first and a second dimension (feed apparatus moves the machining table relative to the laser head and nozzle in a 3D space), at a given layer defined along a third dimension (additive manufacturing of a 3D object, par. 46; where it is understood that this involves multiple layers of powder being melted along a vertical direction or third dimension in order to form a 3D printed part).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Blom to incorporate the teachings of Soshi and use Blom’s feedback method for Soshi’s apparatus. One of ordinary skill in the art would be capable of applying Blom’s method to Soshi’s apparatus and control the build parameters in Soshi’s to obtain a more accurate manufactured part.
Claim(s) 9-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blom in view of Soshi
Claim 9. Blom discloses an additive manufacturing system (Fig. 1) comprising:
a laser-equipped print head (scanning head 18) configured to direct energy to a print head part (scanning device directs the laser beam to the part 28, Fig. 1), the energy of sufficient power to melt a material at site-specific locations of the part (laser forms melt pools on the surface, par. 43), the power adjustable via a laser power module according to a power control parameter (controller 26 adjusts the laser power, par. 54);
a closed-loop feedback control subsystem including a comparison unit (nominal CAD compared to the measured data, Fig. 12), controller (controller 26), and melt pool sensor (sensors are used to measure the size and shape of melt pools, par. 46, wherein the sensors include cameras, par. 73), the comparison unit configured
(i) to receive (a) an input signal (nominal CAD 1202, Fig. 12) that is a representation of a composite geometry of a primary geometry and a secondary geometry that the part is to match in a manufactured state at least at multiple site-specific locations (nominal CAD 1202 is a virtual model of the component being built, par. 95) and (b) a feedback signal (measurement means 1206 which include inspection and meteorology, par. 95, wherein examples of measurements include measuring attributes of the melt pool, claim 1) provided by the melt pool sensor that is a function of size or shape of a melt pool at a given site-specific location of the multiple site-specific locations (sensors are used to measure the size and shape of melt pools, par. 46, wherein the sensors include cameras, par. 73) and
(ii) to output an actuating error signal (deviation data, Fig. 12) that represents a difference between the input signal and the feedback signal, the controller configured to control at least one of the power control parameter, translation rate parameter, or feedstock rate parameter dynamically as a function of the actuating error signal (deviation data is put into the geometry compensation function, Fig. 12, par. 95-97) to enable the additive manufacturing system to produce a customized melt pool size or shape for the given site-specific location of the multiple site-specific locations to produce the part such that the part, in a manufactured state, substantially matches the composite geometry (geometry compensation function 1210, Fig. 12, wherein the build file, i.e. build parameters are adjusted, par. 95 and 65; the build parameters include the power, speed, orientation, position of energy sources, par. 50).
Blom does not disclose a drive subsystem configured to cause a translation between the print head and the part, the translation adjustable according to a translation rate parameter;
a material feed subsystem configured to direct feedstock material to the part at the site-specific locations to be irradiated by the directed energy of the laser-equipped print head, the feedstock material output adjustable according to a feedstock rate parameter.
Blom further discloses that this method can be used for other additive manufacturing systems (par. 35).
Soshi discloses an additive manufacturing device (abstract) wherein the speed and movement of the machining table is controlled by the feed apparatus (par. 14 and 31, Fig. 1) and the powder supply device supplies powder towards a laser beam concentration spot where the powder is melted and the supply rate can be adjusted (par. 11 and 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Blom to incorporate the teachings of Soshi and use Blom’s feedback method for Soshi’s apparatus. One of ordinary skill in the art would be capable of applying Blom’s method to Soshi’s apparatus and control the build parameters in Soshi’s to obtain a more accurate manufactured part.
Claim 10. Blom in view of Soshi discloses the system of Claim 9 further comprising at least one additional sensor configured
(i) to sense a temperature of the part at a proximal location to a site-specific location (temperature of the melt pool is measured, par. 54 and 73), at a distal location from the site-specific location, or at a combination thereof, and
(ii) to provide a respective sensor signal according to a temperature sensed by the at least one additional sensor (temperature of the melt pool is measured, par. 54 and 73; where it is understood that the temperature is transmitted in the form of a signal to the controller); and wherein the controller is further configured (i) to receive the respective sensor signal and
(ii) to control at least one of the power control parameter, translation rate parameter, or feedstock rate parameter dynamically further as a function of the temperature sensed (power of the laser device is adjusted based on the measured temperature and desired temperature of the melt pool, par. 54).
Claim 11. Blom in view of Soshi discloses the system of Claim 9 wherein the melt pool sensor includes a thermal or visible-light camera or a combination thereof (cameras, par. 73).
Claim 12. Blom in view of Soshi discloses the system of Claim 9 wherein the secondary geometry is one of multiple secondary geometries (CAD model may have multiple geometries, par. 52).
Claim 13. Blom in view of Soshi discloses the method of Claim 1 further comprising regulating the translation rate parameter at a constant level while controlling at least one of the power control parameter or the feedstock rate parameter during translation of the print head (the speed and movement of the machining table is controlled by the feed apparatus (par. 14 and 31, Fig. 1) and the powder supply device supplies powder towards a laser beam concentration spot where the powder is melted and the supply rate can be adjusted, par. 11 and 30, Soshi).
Claim 14. Blom in view of Soshi discloses the method of Claim 1 further comprising applying non-linear control at the given site- specific location to produce a custom surface profile at the given site-specific location (scan paths are generated to form the layers, par. 60; where it is understood that the toolpaths can move in two dimensions using the 2D galvanometers, par. 42; the broadest reasonable interpretation of non-linear control to produce a custom surface profile includes a laser path that moves in 2D), the non-linear control applied based upon values derived from machine instructions including at least one of a lookup table, a G-code representation, a voxel representation, list instructions (executable instructions, par. 30), or a command-line interface.
Claim 15. Blom in view of Soshi discloses the method of Claim 1 further comprising controlling the translation rate parameter to cause the drive subsystem to translate the print head with respect to the part, to translate the part with respect to the print head (speed and movement of the machining table is controlled by the feed apparatus, par. 14 and 31, Fig. 1, Soshi), or to translate both the print head and the part with respect to a common reference point or relative to each other.
Claim 16. Blom in view of Soshi discloses the method of claim 9 further controlling the feedstock rate parameter to cause the material feed subsystem to direct feedstock material to the part at the site- specific locations along a first and a second dimension (feed apparatus moves the machining table relative to the laser head and nozzle in a 3D space, Soshi), at a given layer defined along a third dimension (additive manufacturing of a 3D object, par. 46; where it is understood that this involves multiple layers of powder being melted along a vertical direction or third dimension in order to form a 3D printed part, Soshi).
Claim 17. Blom in view of Soshi discloses the system of Claim 9 wherein the
Blom does not disclose that the geometry compensation function is the controller.
However, Blom discloses a DMLM controller 308 (Fig. 3) which controls the laser. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art use the controller to implement the build parameters that were obtained from the geometry compensation function.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blom as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anand (US 20170372480 A1).
Claim 8. Blom does not disclose the method of Claim 1 further comprising computing the composite geometry based on an operation involving a first matrix describing the primary geometry and a second matrix describing the secondary geometry.
Anand discloses a method for pre-processing and post-processing in additive manufacturing wherein the CAD model is processed with an image processing based slicer to improve speed and reduce errors (par. 139) wherein an operation is performed on the matrices of the 3D model by marking each accessible support pixels on the 3D matrix for multiple matrices (par. 179-180).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Blom incorporate the teachings of Anand and mark each accessible support pixels on the 3D matrix for multiple matrices. Doing so would have the benefit of identify the support structures that can be accessed from the outside by a tool (par. 174, Anand)
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blom in view of Soshi as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Anand.
Claim 18. Blom does not disclose the system of Claim 9 further comprising a composite geometry calculation module configured to calculate the composite geometry based on an operation involving a first matrix describing the primary geometry and a second matrix describing the secondary geometry and to output the composite geometry as a representation thereof to the comparison unit.
Anand discloses an method for pre-processing and post-processing in additive manufacturing wherein the CAD model is processed with an image processing based slicer to improve speed and reduce errors (par. 139) wherein an operation is performed on the matrices of the 3D model by marking each accessible support pixels on the 3D matrix for multiple matrices (par. 179-180).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Blom to incorporate the teachings of Anand and mark each accessible support pixels on the 3D matrix for multiple matrices. Doing so would have the benefit of identify the support structures that can be accessed from the outside by a tool (par. 174, Anand).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMPSON A CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6422. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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.
/SIMPSON A CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
