CTFR 17/601,275 CTFR 94567 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 This Office Action has been issued in response to amendment filed 03/11/2026. Applicant's arguments have been carefully and fully considered; and they are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made. Accordingly, this action has been made FINAL. Claim Status Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 11, 14-17, 19-20, 25, 27-34, 50, and 52-54 have been amended. Claims 55-58 have been added. Claims 3 and 51 were canceled. Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 11, 14-17, 19-20, 25, 27-34, 50, and 52-58 remain pending and are ready for examination. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 55-58 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. 07-34-03 AIA The term “ ideal ” in claim s 55-58 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ ideal ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to read, “corrected size” . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 4-5, 7, 11, 14, 19-20, 25, and 27-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibazaki (US20170304946A1 -hereinafter Shibazaki) in view of Crystal et al. (US20110048266A1 -hereinafter Crystal) . Regarding Claim 1 , Shibazaki teaches a building system comprising: a build unit (see Fig. 1; Shibazaki: “beam shaping system 500”) and a processing apparatus (see [0145]; Shibazaki: “workpiece carrier system 300”) , the build unit including: (see Fig. 1; Shibazaki: “beam shaping system 500”) a build apparatus that builds a build object on a base member based on a set position (see [0032]; Shibazaki: “Shaping apparatus 100 is a M3DP (Metal 3D printer) that employs DED (Directed Energy Deposition). Shaping apparatus 100 can be used to form a three-dimensional shaped object on a table 12 to be described later by rapid prototyping, as well as to perform additive manufacturing by three-dimensional shaping on a workpiece (e.g. an existing component).”) [The table reads on ‘the base member’] , the set position being based on at least one of the base member and the build object (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “position information (shape information in the embodiment) within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface (e.g. the upper surface) of workpiece W mounted on table 12 is measured using measurement system 400, and then additive manufacturing (shaping) is performed on workpiece W after the measurement.”) ; and an output apparatus that outputs position information relating to a positional relationship between the set position and the build object to the processing apparatus; (see [0144]-[0145]; Shibazaki: “After the additive manufacturing to workpiece W has been completed, controller 600 moves table 12 on which workpiece W that has undergone additive manufacturing is loaded to the loading/unloading position previously described. Next, controller 600 gives instructions to workpiece carrier system 300 to unload the workpiece. In response to the instructions, workpiece carrier system 300 takes workpiece W that has undergone additive manufacturing from table 12 and carries the workpiece outside of shaping apparatus 100.”) However, Shibazaki does not explicitly teach: the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit, the processing operation using the position information output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. Crystal from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit (see Abstract; Crystal: “The method includes moving a workpiece along a first feed path for printing on the workpiece with a printer and moving the workpiece along a second feed path for cutting the workpiece with a cutter.”) [The cutter reads on ‘the processing apparatus’ and the printer reads on ‘the build unit’] , the processing operation using the position information output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. (see [0279]; Crystal: “Table 1 provides a center cut command in the design cut-only category.” See Table 1 and page [0266]: “Description: Change the size of the object.” See [0355]: “Calibration of the printing engine 2910 and/or the cutting engine 2920 may be used to calibrate the print head 2912 and the cut head 2922. The calibration may include printing fiducials on the paper and then detecting them using the optical sensor 2930 on the cutting head 2922. The positional information provided by the cutter's optical sensor 2930 may then be used to calibrate a cutter head positioning system, or it may be used to adjust the image provided to the print engine 2910.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Shibazaki to include Crystal’s features of the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit, the processing operation using the position information output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. Doing so would improve the accuracy of the cutting operation and/or during alignment. (Crystal, [0337]) Regarding Claim 4 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Crystal further teaches wherein the processing apparatus performs an alignment of the build object and the processing apparatus based on the position information outputted from the output apparatus and performs the processing operation based on a result of the alignment. (see [0366; Crystal: “It may also include adding fiducials to the print job at predetermined locations so that the cutting engine 2920 may use them for alignment. The operations further include sending 3314 the print job to the printing engine 2910 for printing, managing 3316 the passing or handoff of the printed page from the printing engine 2910 to the cutting engine 2920 (see e.g., FIG. 30A-30C), and sending 3318 the cut job to the cutting engine 2920 (e.g., to the cutter head 2922). This may also include reading fiducial marks printed on the page with an optical sensor 2930 and adjusting the cutting paths to the paper's position and orientation.”) The same motivation to combine Shibazaki and Crystal a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 4. Regarding Claim 5 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Shibazaki further teaches wherein the build apparatus builds the build object a relative position of which is fixed relative to the base member. (see [0039]; Shibazaki: “A chuck mechanism 13 (not shown in FIG. 3, refer to FIG. 11) for fixing workpiece W is provided at table 12.”) Regarding Claim 7 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Shibazaki further teaches wherein the position information includes information relating to a relative position of the set position and the base member. (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “controller 600, when measuring position information within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface on workpiece W, correlates the measurement results, measurement results of linear encoders 24 1 to 24 6 provided at rods 14 1 to 14 6 at the time of measurement, and measurement results of position measurement system 28, so that the position and attitude of the target surface of workpiece W mounted on table 12 can be correlated with a reference coordinate system (hereinafter called a table coordinate system) of shaping apparatus 100.”) Regarding Claim 11 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Shibazaki further teaches wherein the build apparatus builds the build object on the base member based on a build data, and the output apparatus outputs, as the position information, the build data that is associated with the set position. (see [0141]; Shibazaki: “controller 600 controls movement system 200 and beam shaping system 500 so that additive manufacturing is performed on each layer of the workpiece based on the data of each layer, and repeatedly performs formation of the straight line area and formation of the linear (slit shaped) molten pool by supplying shaping material from nozzle 84 a to the straight line beam while scanning table 12 in the scan direction, for each layer. Here, position and attitude control of the target surface on the workpiece at the time of additive manufacturing is performed taking into consideration the target surface measured earlier.”) Regarding Claim 14 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 8 above, Shibazaki further teaches further comprising a measurement apparatus that measures the built build object to obtain a measured result, the output apparatus outputting, as the position information, the measured result that is associated with the set position. (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “controller 600, when measuring position information within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface on workpiece W, correlates the measurement results, measurement results of linear encoders 24 1 to 24 6 provided at rods 14 1 to 14 6 at the time of measurement, and measurement results of position measurement system 28, so that the position and attitude of the target surface of workpiece W mounted on table 12 can be correlated with a reference coordinate system (hereinafter called a table coordinate system) of shaping apparatus 100.”) Regarding Claim 19 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 14 above, Shibazaki further teaches wherein the measurement apparatus measures the build object in a non-contact manner. (see [0062]; Shibazaki: “Measurement system 400 is equipped with a laser noncontact type three-dimensional measuring machine 401, as shown in FIG. 2.”) Regarding Claim 20 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Shibazaki further teaches further comprising a control apparatus that sets the set position. (see [0071]; Shibazaki: “the measurement described above to the test object (workpiece W) begins, and the position in directions of 6-DOF of table 12 is controlled by controller 600 on the table coordinate system, also during the measurement.”) Regarding Claim 25 , Shibazaki teaches a build system comprising: a build unit (see Fig. 1; Shibazaki: “beam shaping system 500”) and a processing apparatus (see [0145]; Shibazaki: “workpiece carrier system 300”) , the build unit including: (see Fig. 1; Shibazaki: “beam shaping system 500”) a build apparatus that builds a build object on a base member; (see [0032]; Shibazaki: “Shaping apparatus 100 is a M3DP (Metal 3D printer) that employs DED (Directed Energy Deposition). Shaping apparatus 100 can be used to form a three-dimensional shaped object on a table 12 to be described later by rapid prototyping, as well as to perform additive manufacturing by three-dimensional shaping on a workpiece (e.g. an existing component).”) a control apparatus that sets a set position on at least one of the base member and the build object (see [0071]; Shibazaki: “the measurement described above to the test object (workpiece W) begins, and the position in directions of 6-DOF of table 12 is controlled by controller 600 on the table coordinate system, also during the measurement.”) and controls the build apparatus based the set position; and (see [0077]; Shibazaki: “controller 600 scans the surface (target surface) of workpiece W and acquires the surface shape data, using the three-dimensional measuring machine 401 in the manner described above. Then, controller 600 performs least-square processing and performs correlation of the three-dimensional position and attitude of the target surface on the workpiece to the table coordinate system using the surface shape data. Here, because the position of table 12 in directions of 6-DOF is controlled on the table coordinate system by controller 600 also during the time of measurement to the test object (workpiece W) described above, control of the position (that is, position and attitude) of workpiece W in directions of 6-DOF including the time of additive manufacturing by three-dimensional shaping can all be performed by an open-loop control of table 12 according to the table coordinate system, after the three-dimensional position and attitude have been correlated to the table coordinate system.”) an output apparatus that outputs a first position information relating to the set position (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “position information (shape information in the embodiment) within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface (e.g. the upper surface) of workpiece W mounted on table 12 is measured using measurement system 400”) and a second position information relating to a positional relationship between the set position and a position of the build object to the processing apparatus; (see [0144]-[0145]; Shibazaki: “After the additive manufacturing to workpiece W has been completed, controller 600 moves table 12 on which workpiece W that has undergone additive manufacturing is loaded to the loading/unloading position previously described. Next, controller 600 gives instructions to workpiece carrier system 300 to unload the workpiece. In response to the instructions, workpiece carrier system 300 takes workpiece W that has undergone additive manufacturing from table 12 and carries the workpiece outside of shaping apparatus 100.”) However, Shibazaki does not explicitly teach: the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit, the processing operation using the position information output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. Crystal from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit (see Abstract; Crystal: “The method includes moving a workpiece along a first feed path for printing on the workpiece with a printer and moving the workpiece along a second feed path for cutting the workpiece with a cutter.”) [The cutter reads on ‘the processing apparatus’ and the printer reads on ‘the build unit’] , the processing operation using the position information output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. (see [0279]; Crystal: “Table 1 provides a center cut command in the design cut-only category.” See Table 1 and page [0266]: “Description: Change the size of the object.” See [0355]: “Calibration of the printing engine 2910 and/or the cutting engine 2920 may be used to calibrate the print head 2912 and the cut head 2922. The calibration may include printing fiducials on the paper and then detecting them using the optical sensor 2930 on the cutting head 2922. The positional information provided by the cutter's optical sensor 2930 may then be used to calibrate a cutter head positioning system, or it may be used to adjust the image provided to the print engine 2910.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Shibazaki to include Crystal’s features of the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit, the processing operation using the position information output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. Doing so would improve the accuracy of the cutting operation and/or during alignment. (Crystal, [0337]) Regarding Claim 27 , Shibazaki teaches a build system comprising: a build unit (see Fig. 1; Shibazaki: “beam shaping system 500”) and a processing apparatus (see [0145]; Shibazaki: “workpiece carrier system 300”) , the build unit including: (see Fig. 1; Shibazaki: “beam shaping system 500”) a build apparatus that builds a build object on a base member; and (see [0032]; Shibazaki: “Shaping apparatus 100 is a M3DP (Metal 3D printer) that employs DED (Directed Energy Deposition). Shaping apparatus 100 can be used to form a three-dimensional shaped object on a table 12 to be described later by rapid prototyping, as well as to perform additive manufacturing by three-dimensional shaping on a workpiece (e.g. an existing component).”) an output apparatus that outputs a three-dimensional shape data of the base member and a three-dimensional shape data of the build object to the processing apparatus; (see [0144]-[0145]; Shibazaki: “After the additive manufacturing to workpiece W has been completed, controller 600 moves table 12 on which workpiece W that has undergone additive manufacturing is loaded to the loading/unloading position previously described. Next, controller 600 gives instructions to workpiece carrier system 300 to unload the workpiece. In response to the instructions, workpiece carrier system 300 takes workpiece W that has undergone additive manufacturing from table 12 and carries the workpiece outside of shaping apparatus 100.”) However, Shibazaki does not explicitly teach: the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit, the processing operation using the three-dimensional shape data of the base member and the three-dimensional shape data of the build object output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. Crystal from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit (see Abstract; Crystal: “The method includes moving a workpiece along a first feed path for printing on the workpiece with a printer and moving the workpiece along a second feed path for cutting the workpiece with a cutter.”) [The cutter reads on ‘the processing apparatus’ and the printer reads on ‘the build unit’] , the processing operation using the three-dimensional shape data of the base member and the three-dimensional shape data of the build object output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. (see [0279]; Crystal: “Table 1 provides a center cut command in the design cut-only category.” See Table 1 and page [0266]: “Description: Change the size of the object.” See [0355]: “Calibration of the printing engine 2910 and/or the cutting engine 2920 may be used to calibrate the print head 2912 and the cut head 2922. The calibration may include printing fiducials on the paper and then detecting them using the optical sensor 2930 on the cutting head 2922. The positional information provided by the cutter's optical sensor 2930 may then be used to calibrate a cutter head positioning system, or it may be used to adjust the image provided to the print engine 2910.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Shibazaki to include Crystal’s features of the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit, the processing operation using the three-dimensional shape data of the base member and the three-dimensional shape data of the build object output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. Doing so would improve the accuracy of the cutting operation and/or during alignment. (Crystal, [0337]) Regarding Claim 28 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 27 above, Shibazaki further teaches wherein the output apparatus associates and outputs the three-dimensional shape data of the base member and the three-dimensional shape data of the build object. (see [0032]; Shibazaki: “Shaping apparatus 100 can be used to form a three-dimensional shaped object on a table 12 to be described later by rapid prototyping, as well as to perform additive manufacturing by three-dimensional shaping on a workpiece (e.g. an existing component).”) Regarding Claim 29 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 28 above, Shibazaki further teaches wherein the output apparatus outputs information relating to a set position that is set on the base member. (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “controller 600, when measuring position information within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface on workpiece W, correlates the measurement results, measurement results of linear encoders 24 1 to 24 6 provided at rods 14 1 to 14 6 at the time of measurement, and measurement results of position measurement system 28, so that the position and attitude of the target surface of workpiece W mounted on table 12 can be correlated with a reference coordinate system (hereinafter called a table coordinate system) of shaping apparatus 100.”) Regarding Claim 30 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 29 above, Shibazaki further teaches wherein the output apparatus associates and outputs the set position and the three- dimensional shape data of the base member. (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “controller 600, when measuring position information within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface on workpiece W, correlates the measurement results, measurement results of linear encoders 24 1 to 24 6 provided at rods 14 1 to 14 6 at the time of measurement, and measurement results of position measurement system 28, so that the position and attitude of the target surface of workpiece W mounted on table 12 can be correlated with a reference coordinate system (hereinafter called a table coordinate system) of shaping apparatus 100.”) Regarding Claim 31 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 29 above, Shibazaki further teaches wherein the output apparatus associates and outputs the set position and the three- dimensional shape data of the build object. (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “controller 600, when measuring position information within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface on workpiece W, correlates the measurement results, measurement results of linear encoders 24 1 to 24 6 provided at rods 14 1 to 14 6 at the time of measurement, and measurement results of position measurement system 28, so that the position and attitude of the target surface of workpiece W mounted on table 12 can be correlated with a reference coordinate system (hereinafter called a table coordinate system) of shaping apparatus 100.”) Regarding Claim 32 , Shibazaki teaches a build system comprising: a build unit (see Fig. 1; Shibazaki: “beam shaping system 500”) and a processing apparatus (see [0145]; Shibazaki: “workpiece carrier system 300”) , the build unit including: (see Fig. 1; Shibazaki: “beam shaping system 500”) a build apparatus that builds a build object on a base member; (see [0032]; Shibazaki: “Shaping apparatus 100 is a M3DP (Metal 3D printer) that employs DED (Directed Energy Deposition). Shaping apparatus 100 can be used to form a three-dimensional shaped object on a table 12 to be described later by rapid prototyping, as well as to perform additive manufacturing by three-dimensional shaping on a workpiece (e.g. an existing component).”) a measurement apparatus that obtains three-dimensional information of the base member and the build object; and (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “position information (shape information in the embodiment) within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface (e.g. the upper surface) of workpiece W mounted on table 12 is measured using measurement system 400”) an output apparatus that outputs a measured result by the measurement apparatus to the processing apparatus; (see [0058]; Shibazaki: “controller 600, when measuring position information within the three-dimensional space of at least a part of the target surface on workpiece W, correlates the measurement results, measurement results of linear encoders 24 1 to 24 6 provided at rods 14 1 to 14 6 at the time of measurement, and measurement results of position measurement system 28, so that the position and attitude of the target surface of workpiece W mounted on table 12 can be correlated with a reference coordinate system (hereinafter called a table coordinate system) of shaping apparatus 100.” See [0144]-[0145]: “After the additive manufacturing to workpiece W has been completed, controller 600 moves table 12 on which workpiece W that has undergone additive manufacturing is loaded to the loading/unloading position previously described. Next, controller 600 gives instructions to workpiece carrier system 300 to unload the workpiece. In response to the instructions, workpiece carrier system 300 takes workpiece W that has undergone additive manufacturing from table 12 and carries the workpiece outside of shaping apparatus 100.”) However, Shibazaki does not explicitly teach: the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit, the processing operation using the position information output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. Crystal from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches the processing apparatus is separate from the build unit and is configured to perform a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus after the build object built by the build apparatus has been removed from the build unit (see Abstract; Crystal: “The method includes moving a workpiece along a first feed path for printing on the workpiece with a printer and moving the workpiece along a second feed path for cutting the workpiece with a cutter.”) [The cutter reads on ‘the processing apparatus’ and the printer reads on ‘the build unit’] , the processing operation using the position information output by the output apparatus and changing a size of the build object built by the build apparatus. (see [0279]; Crystal: “Table 1 provides a center cut command in the design cut-only category.” See Table 1 and page [0266]: “Description: Change the size of the object.” See [0355]: “Calibration of the printing engine 2910 and/or the cutting engine 2920 may be used to calibrate the print head 2912 and the cut head 2922. The calibration may include printing fiducials on the paper and then detecting them using the optical sensor 2930 on the cutting head 2922. The positional information provided by the cutter's optical sensor 2930 may then be used to calibrate a cutter head positioning system, or it may be used to adjust the image provided to the print engine 2910.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Shibazaki to include Crystal’s features of outputting to a processing apparatus that is separate from the build apparatus and that performs a processing operation on the build object built by the build apparatus and that has been removed from the build apparatus. Doing so would improve the accuracy of the cutting operation and/or during alignment. (Crystal, [0337]) 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibazaki in view of Crystal in view of Taylor at al. (US20050282175A1 -hereinafter Taylor) . Regarding Claim 15 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 14 above; it does not explicitly teach wherein the measurement apparatus measures a position of the base member in a fiducial coordinate system of the build unit, the output apparatus outputs the position information relating to the set position in the fiducial coordinate system. Taylor from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the measurement apparatus measures a position of the base member in a fiducial coordinate system of the build unit (see Fig. 1 and [0046]; Taylor: “First, microfluidic device (30) is securely placed on stage (20). Based on a fixed feature of the microfluidic device (30), for example, an edge of the base support of microfluidic device (30), computer (110) then causes x,y drive (25) to move stage (20) about to align microfluidic device (30) in a first x,y position with a first of a plurality of fiducial marking (30), wherein the fiducial markings are embedded within microfluidic device at a known z dimension distance from a chamber center point, comes into focus by imaging device (60) based on dead reckoning from the fixed feature.”) , and the output apparatus outputs the position information relating to the set position in the fiducial coordinate system. (see [0046]; Taylor: “A user of the system then registers the precise coordinate of the fiducial with the imaging system. Two or more additional fiducial marks are then likewise mapped with the assistance of a user. In other embodiments, this process is automatic as the centroids of the fiducials can be calculated precisely by locating the symmetric XY fiducial object and removing any non-symmetric components. Imaging device (60), under the control of computer (110) then adjusts the z dimension location of focal plane (105) to focus upon the fiducial marking (not shown in FIG. 1, but shown in FIG. 2).”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal to include Taylor’s features of measuring a position in a fiducial coordinate system of the build unit, the output apparatus outputs the position information relating to the set position in the fiducial coordinate system. Doing so would improve the speed of imaging analysis and crystallization detection and produce an accurate three-dimensional structure of the target. (Taylor, [0007] and [0015]) Regarding Claim 17 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 14 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein the measurement apparatus measures a position of a part of the base member in a fiducial coordinate system of the build unit, and the output apparatus outputs the position of the part of the base member that is associated with the set position. Taylor from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the measurement apparatus measures a position of a part of the base member in a fiducial coordinate system of the build unit (see Fig. 1 and [0046]; Taylor: “First, microfluidic device (30) is securely placed on stage (20). Based on a fixed feature of the microfluidic device (30), for example, an edge of the base support of microfluidic device (30), computer (110) then causes x,y drive (25) to move stage (20) about to align microfluidic device (30) in a first x,y position with a first of a plurality of fiducial marking (30), wherein the fiducial markings are embedded within microfluidic device at a known z dimension distance from a chamber center point, comes into focus by imaging device (60) based on dead reckoning from the fixed feature.” See [0089]: “the fiducial markings include a channel wall or an edge of the microfluidic device 30.”) , and the output apparatus outputs the position of the part of the base member that is associated with the set position. (see [0046]; Taylor: “A user of the system then registers the precise coordinate of the fiducial with the imaging system. Two or more additional fiducial marks are then likewise mapped with the assistance of a user. In other embodiments, this process is automatic as the centroids of the fiducials can be calculated precisely by locating the symmetric XY fiducial object and removing any non-symmetric components. Imaging device (60), under the control of computer (110) then adjusts the z dimension location of focal plane (105) to focus upon the fiducial marking (not shown in FIG. 1, but shown in FIG. 2).”) The same motivation to combine Shibazaki, Crystal, and Taylor a set forth for Claim 15 equally applies to Claim 17 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibazaki in view of Crystal in view of Lappas et al. (US20180095450A1 -hereinafter Lappas) . Regarding Claim 16 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 15 above; however, it does not explicitly teach further comprising a support apparatus that supports the base member, the fiducial coordinate system including a support position coordinate system for indicating a position on a support surface of the support apparatus. Lappas from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches further comprising a support apparatus that supports the base member (see [0170]; Lappas: “The forming (e.g., printing) instructions of the 3D object may comprise one or more auxiliary supports. The use of the test model and test object comparison (e.g., comparison of their respective one or more markers) may allow estimating the deformation(s) associated with removal of the formed (e.g., printed) 3D object from the platform (e.g., build plate) by severing the supports.”) , the fiducial coordinate system including a support position coordinate system for indicating a position on a support surface of the support apparatus. (see [0158]; Lappas: “The 3D object can be formed with or without the generation or removal of auxiliary features (e.g., that is indicative of a presence or removal of the auxiliary support feature). Auxiliary features can be support features that prevent a 3D object from shifting, deforming and/or moving during the 3D forming (e.g., printing).”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal to include Lappas’s features of a support apparatus that supports the base member, the fiducial coordinate system including a support position coordinate system for indicating a position on a support surface of the support apparatus. Doing so would tracking of 3D object formation (e.g., 3D printing) that may be of assistance in reducing and/or controlling deformation that occur during formation of a (physical) 3D object. (Lappas, [0008]) 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 33-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibazaki in view of Crystal in view of Randhawa (US20180186082A1 -hereinafter Randhawa) . Regarding Claim 33 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 32 above; however, Shibazaki does not explicitly teach wherein the measurement apparatus measures the base member to obtain a first measured result in at least one of a period before the build object is build and a period during which the build object is built, and measures the build object to obtain a second measured result in at least one of a period during which the build object is build and a period after the build object is built. Randhawa from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the measurement apparatus measures the base member to obtain a first measured result in at least one of a period before the build object is built and a period during which the build object is built (see [0233]; Randhawa: “The detectors can collect one or more signals from the 3D object and/or the target surface (e.g., by using the returning energy beams).” See [0231]: “The controller may adjust the position of the optical elements to vary the cross-section of the transforming beam. The controller may adjust the position of the optical elements to vary a footprint of the transforming beam and/or its focus on the target surface. The controller may direct the one or more filters of the optical system to activate or de-activate. Activating or de-activating a filter may allow a specific type of energy beam (e.g., beam of a certain wavelength region) to radiate. The controller may adjust at least one characteristic of the irradiating energy (e.g., as disclosed herein). For example, the controller may adjust the power density and/or fluence of the energy beam. Adjustments by the controller may be static (e.g., not in real-time). Adjustments by the controller may be dynamic (e.g., in real-time). Static adjustments may be done before or after 3D printing. Dynamic adjustments may be done during at least a portion of the 3D printing (e.g., during transformation of the pre-transformed material). At times, static adjustments may be done before and/or after an optical detection. At times, dynamic adjustments may be done during optical detection.”) , measures the build object to obtain a second measured result in at least one of a period during which the build object is built and a period after the build object is built. (see [0233]; Randhawa: “The detectors (e.g., sensors) can be configured to measure one or more properties of the 3D object and/or the pre-transformed material (e.g., powder)”. See [0237]: “Measurements can be taken before, during and/or after processing (e.g., transforming) one or more (e.g., pre-transformed) materials.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal to include Randhawa’s features of measuring the base member to obtain a first measured result in at least one of a period before the build object is built and a period during which the build object is built, and measuring the build object to obtain a second measured result in at least one of a period during which the build object is built and a period after the build object is built. Doing so would provide an improved measurement sensitivity and decrease the time and cost associated with generating the three-dimensional part. (Randhawa, [0201] and [0354]) Regarding Claim 34 , the combination of Shibazaki, Crystal, and Randhawa teaches all the limitations of claim 33 above, Randhawa further teaches wherein the output apparatus associates and outputs the first measured result and the second measured result. (see [0036]; Randhawa: “the detector is configured to output a result, and at least one controller is configured to direct adjusting at least one characteristic of the energy source and/or energy beam considering the result.”. See [0303]: “The at least one sensor can be operatively coupled to a control system (e.g., computer control system).”) The same motivation to combine Shibazaki, Crystal, and Randhawa a set forth for Claim 33 equally applies to Claim 34 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 50-54 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibazaki in view of Crystal in view of Batchelder et al. (US 20170271843 A1 -hereinafter Batchelder) . Regarding Claim 50 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Crystal teaches …and that has been removed from the build unit to change the size of the build object. (see Abstract; Crystal: “The method includes moving a workpiece along a first feed path for printing on the workpiece with a printer and moving the workpiece along a second feed path for cutting the workpiece with a cutter.”) [The cutter reads on ‘the processing apparatus’ and the printer reads on ‘the build unit’] See [0279]: “Table 1 provides a center cut command in the design cut-only category.” See Table 1 and page [0266]: “Description: Change the size of the object.” See [0355]: “Calibration of the printing engine 2910 and/or the cutting engine 2920 may be used to calibrate the print head 2912 and the cut head 2922. The calibration may include printing fiducials on the paper and then detecting them using the optical sensor 2930 on the cutting head 2922. The positional information provided by the cutter's optical sensor 2930 may then be used to calibrate a cutter head positioning system, or it may be used to adjust the image provided to the print engine 2910.”) However, it does not explicitly teach wherein the processing apparatus is a removal processing apparatus that performs a removal processing operation that removes a portion of the build object that has been built by the build apparatus… Batchelder from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the processing apparatus is a removal processing apparatus that performs a removal processing operation that removes a portion of the build object that has been built by the build apparatus… (see [0069]; Batchelder: “As shown in FIGS. 5 and 6, this back-and-forth process may be repeated for each layer until the 3D part (referred to as 3D part 48) is completed. Afterwards, 3D part 48 may be removed from system 10 and undergo one or more post-processing steps, such as resin removal and/or post-curing steps.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Shibazaki and Crystal to include Batchelder’s features of wherein the processing apparatus is a removal processing apparatus that performs a removal processing operation that removes a portion of the build object that has been built by the build apparatus. Doing so would improve part quality and/or to preserve the operating life of laser assembly. (Batchelder, [0180]) Regarding Claim 52, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Shibazaki, Crystal, and Batchelder as discussed connection with claim 50. Regarding Claim 53, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Shibazaki, Crystal, and Batchelder as discussed connection with claim 50. Regarding Claim 54, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Shibazaki, Crystal, and Batchelder as discussed connection with claim 50 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 55-58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibazaki in view of Crystal in view of Hardee et al. (US20180194075A1 -hereinafter Hardee) . Regarding Claim 55 , the combination of Shibazaki and Crystal teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein the processing operation changes the size of the build object built by the build apparatus to be closer to an ideal size of the build object. Hardee from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the processing operation changes the size of the build object built by the build apparatus to be closer to an ideal size of the build object. (see [0073]; Hardee: “For example, rather than removing all of the material associated with the defect, the removal tool 1106 may in effect remold (or reshape) the appropriate portion(s) of the object 1100 by only removing material that does not correspond to the desired final size/shape of the object (e.g., as represented by the digital file), in a manner similar to that described above with respect to FIGS. 6-9.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Shibazaki and Crystal to include Hardee’s features of the processing operation changes the size of the build object built by the build apparatus to be closer to an ideal size of the build object. Doing so would detect and correct errors (or faults or defects) in the 3D printing process in order to, for example, reduce wasted time and material. (Hardee, [0003]) Regarding Claim 56, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Shibazaki, Crystal, and Hardee as discussed connection with claim 55. Regarding Claim 57, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Shibazaki, Crystal, and Hardee as discussed connection with claim 55. Regarding Claim 58, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Shibazaki, Crystal, and Hardee as discussed connection with claim 55 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim rejection(s) of the independent claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive because of the amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Korten (US12466130B2) discloses once removed from the build plate, the workpiece is then in most cases displaced to post-processing stages, such as cleaning and/or curing and/or surface finishing stages, in order to complete the manufacturing process of the workpiece. Mojdeh (US11511485B2) discloses removing the support structure from the 3D object. 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. /V.N.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2117 /ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 2 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 3 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 5 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 6 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 7 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 8 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 9 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 10 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 11 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 12 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 13 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 14 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 15 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 16 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 17 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 18 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 19 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 20 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 21 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 22 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 23 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 24 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 25 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 26 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 28 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 30 Art Unit: 2117 Application/Control Number: 17/601,275 Page 31 Art Unit: 2117
Prosecution Insights